407 West Jefferson, Boise, Idaho 83702 

June 13, 2022 

Sent Via Email 

Federal Election Commission 

Audit Division 

Rebecca Yarbrough 

1050 First Street, NE 

Washington, DC 20002 

Re: Campaign Comment and Response to Interim Audit Report 

Jim Risch for U.S. Senate 

FEC No. C00440362 

Dear Ms. Yarbrough, 

Please accept this correspondence as the Jim Risch for U.S. Senate Committee’s 

comments and response to the Interim Audit Report dated May 9, 2022. 

First off, let me state that while an audit process is never something a campaign wants 

to endure, the audit staff was very professional and responsive during the whole process. 

Having never been audited or fined before, the campaign was unsure of what to expect. The 

audit team accommodated our questions and possessed the proper foundation to provide 

quick and substantive answers. As you may also be aware, the audit staff, Ms. Sheraline 

Thomas in particular, complimented the campaign on its openness and timely organized 

responses to all the Commission’s requests. This being mostly a paper audit, I know the 

process was not easy for anyone involved. 

It cannot be overstated that Senator Risch and myself as his Chief of Staff and 

Treasurer take this matter, and all matters related to campaign finance compliance, very 

seriously. From the outset, we assured the Commission that our records were open to them 

and we endeavored to provide more than what was requested to represent a whole picture to 

assist in the review process. We directed our two part-time semi-volunteer staff members to 

be at the Commission’s disposal to answer any questions and to promptly provide any follow 

up documents requested. 

As you can see from the Interim Report, the Campaign handled $2,969,089 in receipts 

and processed $1,825,393 in disbursements, all totaling $4,794,482 worth of activity. While 

this amount of financial activity is not a staggering amount compared to most federal 

campaigns, it was a lot of work for our two-person part-time team who also manages the 

Senator’s Leadership PAC. I feel it is important to note that the audit covered a very active 

time frame as the period reviewed was right in the middle of the campaign’s busy 2020 

reelection bid. The audit notes three findings but we believe overall that while there are areas 

in need of improvement, the Campaign did not substantially fail in its efforts to provide an 

Page 1 of 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

open and clear picture of its financial activity, indeed the audit only revealed a 2.2% margin 

of error in the misstatement of financial activity of the campaign.1 As a result of the audit, 

the Campaign has already implemented changes in its processes and procedures to redouble 

implementation of best efforts which should ensure there are no future reporting inaccuracies. 

As for a specific response to each category of the findings and recommendations, the 

Campaign provides the following comments: 

Finding One: Misstatement of Financial Activity 

The Interim Report states that a reconciliation of the Committee’s accounts revealed 

that the 2019 beginning and ending cash on hand was understated by $68,101 and $56,935 

respectively. The audit determined that these were a result of “prior period adjustments as 

well as non-material misstatements” during 2019. Despite being non-material, the 

Committee reviewed these discrepancies and has made the necessary adjustments to its 

bookkeeping and reporting records. 

The Interim Report goes on to provide a summary table of the Committee’s 2020 

activity. As with the 2019 data, the Committee thoroughly reviewed the 2020 data. This 

data consisted of several spreadsheets provided by the Commission for the January 6, 2022 

Exit Conference, specifically spreadsheets detailing by date and name all errors discovered.2 

A review of the data from the Commission shows $21,950 of contributions not reported 

and $11,167 of disbursements not reported. 

A. Contributions not Reported. 

In reviewing the data, the Committee was able to determine that of the $21,950 not 

reported, $20,150 of these contributions were all tied to a single monthly spreadsheet that 

was not uploaded into the Committee’s reporting software. The upload at issue consisted of 

the July 2020 data from the Committee’s online fundraising program. Each month, the credit 

card donation data is received by the Committee from a vendor in the form of an electronic 

database file, that file is then uploaded into the Committee’s reporting program. While the 

system has worked flawlessly for over several years, for some reason the upload in July of 

2020 did not make it into the system to be reported. 

The Committee does not offer this comment as an excuse, but rather an explanation 

that reveals 90% of the unreported data related to a single incident, not repeated failures. 

The Committee has implemented a new policy where all uploaded data is double checked to 

ensure it is properly reflected in the reporting system. 

B. Disbursements not Reported. 

Similar to the contribution issue noted above, $10,000 of the $11,167 in unreported 

distributions can be attributed to a single transaction, a transaction that the Committee was 

unaware was even considered a “distribution” and thus did not report. The transaction in 

question relates to the campaign’s television buyer, a third-party vendor known as FP1. This 

vendor was buying TV airtime to place advertisements the campaign had already produced. 

1 $109,548 is 2.2% of $4,794,481. 

2 There are some minor reductions between the summary numbers from the Exit Conference spreadsheets and the summary 

numbers in the Interim Report. The Interim Report does not include or reference updated spreadsheets, so the Committee is 

unaware of which line items were removed. 

Page 2 of 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As the election drew near, the vendor had to move quickly to buy airtime as needed. Typically, 

decisions were required to be implemented within a few hours’ time. The TV ad buys are paid 

to the station in advance through wire transfers. The Campaign has to first wire funds to the 

buyer who then wires them to the station. As a result, five days prior to the election our TV 

buyer requested $1,243.13 to make a TV last minute buy. The Committee decided to provide 

the buyer with $10,000 in anticipation of other buys that might be made over the five days 

prior to the election. Since this money was not being used for anything and was just being 

held in reserve, the Committee considered it a deposit, not a reportable distribution. 

Moreover, to publically report almost $10,000 in ad expenditures that were not made would 

have created the illusion to our opponents and the public that the campaign was expending 

more than it actually did. In the days immediately preceding an election, it is not uncommon 

for opposing campaigns to monitor television buys and respond to each other’s purchases. 

Again, the Committee provides this information not as an excuse but to illustrate that 90% of 

the disbursement money not reported was related to a single transaction, and explain how 

the Committee viewed the transaction at the time. 

The Committee now understands the Commission views this as a reportable 

disbursement and will assume any similar circumstances, albeit unlikely, are reported. 

Finding Two: Receipt of Contributions in Excess of the Limit 

The Interim Report cites $74,400.00 in excessive receipts from 25 individuals.3 The 

audit concluded that these errors were due to the campaign not “forwarding presumptive 

redesignation or reattribution letters to it contributors or issuing refunds of the excessive 

portions of contributions in a timely manner.” The majority of the transactions cited fall into 

the “presumptive” category and only four were “true” excessive contributions, all of which 

have now been refunded as recommended by the Commission in the Interim Report. In 

addition, presumptive letters have been sent to each individual identified by the Commission 

(See Exhibit A for copies). 

Incidentally, there were two contributions identified by the Commission as excessive 

which were already discovered by the campaign within days of their receipt and immediately 

refunded, thus no violation occurred; evidence of those two transactions and the checks 

representing the timely refunds accompanies this correspondence as Exhibit B. 

Finding Three: Failure to File 48 Hour Notices 

The Interim Report cites 31 circumstances that it believes fell within the 48-hour notice 

and were not timely reported. 25 of the 31 are related to the primary election; an election 

which was uncontested. Of these 25 instances, 22 were determined to be non-compliant due 

to the fact the Commission determined that “on April 1, 2020 the Idaho Governor effectively 

changed the date of the May 19, 2020 Congressional primary” (see Page 10 of Interim 

Report). For the following reasons, the campaign respectfully disagrees with the Commission’s 

conclusion that the election date was changed, and/or at the minimum, cites these factors as 

justification which leads to the conclusion that the campaign utilized best efforts in a confusing 

and unclear circumstance. 

The rising COVID-19 situation in Idaho had caused some speculation about the logistics 

of Idaho’s May 19, 2020 primary election. As a result on March 30, 2020 the Idaho Governor 

and the Idaho Secretary of state, issued a press release stating “There will be no change in 

Idaho’s primary election date of May 19” (See attached Exhibit C). The press release went on 

3 The data references came from the spreadsheets provided in relation to the Exit Conference in January. 

Page 3 of 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

to state that “Governor Little will issue a proclamation addressing the election in the coming 

days.” The April 1, 2020 Proclamation, attached as Exhibit D, canceled in-person voting and 

stated several adjustments to the absentee voting election process but never outright 

changed the May 19, 2020 election date, in fact, the Proclamation referred to the election day 

several times as occurring on May 19, 2020. This Proclamation, especially combined with the 

preceding clear and unequivocal press release could lead to the logical conclusion that the 

reporting dates related to the election had also not changed. The campaign went on with its 

business as planned and filed the appropriate 48-hour Reports and its pre-primary report 

based off of a May 19, 2020 election date. 

Reporting requirements were satisfied. Then on May 26, 2020, the campaign received 

its first communication from the Commission referencing the new primary election date. This 

communication is attached as Exhibit E. The Commission stated that based on the Governor’s 

actions on April 1, 2020, the Commission believed the election date had been moved. In an 

attempt to comply with a confusing situation, the campaign began immediately filing 48-hour 

Reports. The campaign also filed a second pre-primary report as instructed by the 

Commission. 

The Governor stated he did not move the election, the Commission interpreted his 

actions and concluded that he did move the election however, the Commission did not notify 

the campaign of its interpretation until May 26, 2020. The campaign believes it did the best 

it could do under these conflicting and confusing facts. 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, the campaign has complied with every recommendation stated in the 

Interim Report and has implemented procedures to reduce the possibility of future 

inaccuracies. A form 99 has been compiled and will be filed contemporaneously with this 

response. As has been the case from the outset of this audit, the campaign stands ready 

willing and able to answer any further questions, provide any further documents and amend 

any reports as requested. Should you have any questions regarding this response, please 

feel free to contact us. Sheraline Thomas has all of our contact information, including 

Very truly yours, 

Sincerely, 

R. John Insinger 

Jim Risch for U.S. Senate 

Campaign Treasurer 

Cc: Sheraline Thomas via email 

Paid for by Jim Risch for U.S. Senate Committee – www.SeantorRisch.com 

Page 4 of 4