June 2003 Federal Election Commission Volume 29, Number 6

Table of Contents

Court Cases

1 McConnell et al. v. FEC et. al.

1 Advisory Opinions

Compliance

7 Public Hearing on Enforcement

Matters

7 MUR 5270: Failure to Accurately

Report Cash-on-Hand

8 Federal Register

Legislation

8 Commission Sends Legislative

Recommendations to President

and Congress

Regulations

9 Extension of Comment Period for

NPRM on Public Financing of

Presidential Candidates and

Nominating Conventions

Audits

9 Final Audit Report on LaRouche’s

Committee for a New Bretton

Woods

Information

9 New IRS Political Organization

Filing and Disclosure Web Site

Publications

10 Directory of Federal and State

Disclosure and Election Offices

Available

Outreach

10 FEC Conference

11 Index

Compliance Court Cases Advisory

Opinions

AO 2003-3

Solicitation of Funds for

Nonfederal Candidates by

Federal Candidate/

Officeholder

Eric Cantor, a member of the

United States House of Representatives, may solicit or direct donations

to state or local candidates as long

as the funds solicited or directed are

within the limitations and prohibitions of the Federal Election Campaign Act (the Act). Specifically,

Representative Cantor may only

solicit or direct donations of up to

$2,000 per election from individuals

and non-multicandidate committees

and of no more than $5,000 per

election from multicandidate

committees and national, state and

local party committees. Any general

solicitation of funds by Representative Cantor that does not request

specific amounts must include

language informing potential donors

that he is only soliciting funds

within the aforementioned limitations and prohibitions, or there must

be posted at the event clear and

conspicuous written notice explaining this limitation.

(continued on page 4) (continued on page 2)

McConnell et al. v. FEC et. al.

On May 2, 2003, the U.S. District

Court for the District of Columbia

issued an opinion finding certain

provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA)

to be constitutional, finding other

provisions to be unconstitutional

and determining the remaining

challenged provisions to present

nonjusticiable questions. The

Commission, the Department of

Justice and other parties to the case

sought a stay. On May 19, 2003,

citing its “desire to prevent the

litigants from facing potentially

three different regulatory regimes in

a very short time span, and the

court’s recognition of the divisions

among the panel about the constitutionality of the challenged provisions of BCRA,” the court granted

the stay. As a result, as of the date

of this writing, the entire BCRA

remains in effect, as enacted,

pending resolution of the various

appeals filed to the Supreme Court.

Both the plaintiffs and the

defendants have filed such appeals.

As specified in the BCRA, the case

was first heard in the district court

by a three-judge panel and will
Federal Election Commission RECORD June 2003

2

Federal Election Commission

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

800/424-9530

202/694-1100

202/501-3413 (FEC Faxline)

202/219-3336 (TDD for the

 hearing impaired)

Ellen L. Weintraub, Chair

Bradley A. Smith, Vice Chairman

David M. Mason, Commissioner

Danny L. McDonald,

 Commissioner

Scott E. Thomas, Commissioner

Michael E. Toner, Commissioner

James A. Pehrkon, Staff Director

Lawrence H. Norton, General

 Counsel

Published by the Information

 Division

Greg J. Scott, Assistant Staff

 Director

Amy Kort, Editor

http://www.fec.gov

Background

State Senator Bill Boling, State

Delegate Bill Janis and Chesterfield

County School Board Member Beth

Davis are all running for election in

Virginia in 2003. In the course of

their campaigns, these nonfederal

candidates would like Representative Cantor to assist them by attending their campaign events, including

fundraisers, and soliciting financial

support on their behalf. These

nonfederal candidates would like

Representative Cantor to conduct

these activities both orally and in

writing. Virginia law permits

donations to state and local candidates in amounts and from sources

that are prohibited by the Act.

As amended by the Bipartisan

Campaign Reform Act of 2002

(BCRA), the Act regulates the

conduct of federal candidates and

officeholders, their agents and

entities directly or indirectly established, maintained financed or

controlled by them when they raise

or spend funds in connection with a

federal or nonfederal election. 2

U.S.C. §441i(e). The Commission’s

regulations provide that these

persons may solicit, receive, direct,

transfer, spend or disburse funds in

connection with any nonfederal

election only in amounts and from

sources that are consistent with state

law, and that do not exceed the

Act’s contribution limits or come

from prohibited sources under the

Act. 11 CFR 300.62. While the

BCRA did not define the terms “to

solicit” and “to direct,” Commission

regulations define them as “to ask.”

11CFR 300.2(m) and (n).

Application of the BCRA to

Proposals

Under the Act and Commission

regulations, Representative Cantor

may attend a state fundraiser where

federally impermissible funds are

raised, and he may solicit or direct

funds in connection with a state

election as long as his solicitation is

both consistent with state law and

within the limits and prohibitions of

the Act. Representative Cantor

should take the following steps to

ensure that his fundraising activity

remains within the Act’s limits and

prohibitions.

Solicitation of Funds. When

Representative Cantor solicits funds

in connection with a state or local

election in a state that permits

donations that are not lawful under

the Act, he must expressly limit his

request so that it is clear that he is

asking only for funds that comply

with the Act’s limits and prohibitions. If he solicits funds at a

fundraising event where federally

impermissible funds are raised,

written notices indicating that he is

only soliciting federally permissible

funds may be posted; if used, these

notices must be clearly and conspicuously displayed. If such

notices are properly displayed,

Representative Cantor need not

include an oral disclaimer with a

Advisory Opinions

(continued from page 1) PACronyms, Other

PAC Publications

Available

The Commission annually

publishes PACronyms, an

alphabetical listing of acronyms,

abbreviations and common names

of political action committees

(PACs).

 For each PAC listed, the index

provides the full name of the

PAC, its city, state, FEC

identification number and, if not

identifiable from the full name,

its connected, sponsoring or

affiliated organization.

 The index is helpful in identifying PACs that are not readily

identified in their reports and

statements on file with the FEC.

 To order a free copy of

PACronyms, call the FEC’s

Disclosure Division at 800/424-

9530 (press 3) or 202/694-1120.

PACronyms also is available on

diskette for $1 and can be

accessed free at www.fec.gov/

pages/pacronym.htm.

Other PAC indexes, described

below, may be ordered from the

Disclosure Division. Prepayment

is required.

• An alphabetical list of all

registered PACs showing each

PAC’s identification number,

address, treasurer and

connected organization ($13.25).

• A list of registered PACs

 arranged by state providing the

 same information as above

 ($13.25).

• An alphabetical list of

organizations sponsoring PACs

 showing the PAC’s name and

identification number ($7.50).

The Disclosure Division can

also conduct database research to

locate federal political committees

when only part of the committee

name is known. Call the telephone

numbers above for assistance or

visit the Public Records Office in

Washington at 999 E St., NW.
June 2003 Federal Election Commission RECORD

3

general solicitation. If written

notices are not provided at the

event, he must make the following

public oral disclaimer: “I am only

asking for up to $2,000 from

individuals, and I am not asking for

corporate, labor or minors’ funds.”

If a public oral disclaimer is made, it

need only be made once, and is not

required to be made during one-onone discussions. As a general rule, a

federal candidate or officeholder

may not recite the disclaimer and

then encourage potential donors to

disregard the limitation.

Representative Cantor will not

violate the Act if, in a response to

his lawful solicitation, a person

makes a donation to a nonfederal

candidate in excess of the Act’s

limits or from a federally prohibited

source.

Attendance at Fundraising

Events. Representative Cantor may

attend a fundraising event where

federally impermissible funds are

raised as long as he does not solicit

funds outside the limits and prohibitions of the Act, and he may speak

at the fundraiser as long as he

adheres to the guidelines referenced

above. He may also merely attend a

fundraiser paid for with nonfederal

funds, as that, in and of itself, does

not represent a violation of the

BCRA and the Commission’s

regulations.

Communications Publicizing

Fundraisers. Representative

Cantor’s attendance at a nonfederal

fundraising event may be publicized

as long as the publicity does not

constitute a solicitation for donations outside of the Act’s limits and

prohibitions, and as long as he has

not approved, authorized, agreed or

consented to be featured or named

in the publicity. If he has approved

or agreed to use his name or likeness in the publicity and that

publicity constitutes a solicitation,

then there must be an express

statement in the publicity to limit

the solicitation to funds that comply

with the Act’s limits and prohibitions. Communications stating that

Representative Cantor is serving in

a position specifically related to

fundraising (e.g., serving on a “host

committee”), though not signed by

the Representative, constitute a

solicitation and must include an

express statement limiting the

solicitation to funds within the Act’s

limits and prohibitions.1

Fundraising and Agency. Representative Cantor may ask other

persons to raise funds in connection

with a nonfederal election, but when

those persons are doing so as his

agent, they must comply with

provisions of section 441i(e)(4) and

11 CFR 300.62 outlined above.2

Concurring Opinion

Vice-Chairman Smith and

Commissioners Mason and Toner

issued a concurring opinion on April

29, 2003.

Date Issued April 29, 2003;

Length: 9 pages.✦

—George Smaragdis

1 The Commission could not agree

whether the use of Representative

Cantor’s name in a position not

specifically related to fundraising, such

as “honorary chairperson,” on a

solicitation not signed by him is

prohibited by the Act.

2 Absent any other factors relevant to

establishing an agency relationship, a

request that a person raise funds in

connection with a nonfederal election

does not in and of itself create an

agency relationship.

AO 2003-4

Corporation’s Matching

Charitable Contribution

Plan

Freeport-McMoRan Copper and

Gold, Inc., (Freeport) and its

political action committee the

Freeport-McMoRan Copper and

Gold, Inc., Citizenship Committee

(the PAC) may match, dollar for

dollar, individual contributor’s

contributions to the PAC with

donations to any charity identified

by the contributor. Under this plan,

contributors would not receive any

tax benefits or other tangible

compensation for their contributions

and, thus, no exchange of corporate

money for voluntary contributions

would occur.

The Federal Election Campaign

Act (the Act) prohibits a corporation

from making contributions or

expenditures in connection with any

federal election. 2 U.S.C. §441b(a).

However, the Act excludes from the

definition of “contribution or

expenditure” costs that the corporation pays for the establishment and

administration of and solicitation of

contributions to the corporation’s

PAC. 2 U.S.C. §441b(b)(2)(C).

Commission regulations further

clarify that the corporation may not

use this process as a means of

exchanging treasury funds for

voluntary contributions and that a

contributor may not be paid for his

or her contributions through a

bonus, expense account or other

form of direct or indirect compensation. 11 CFR 114.5(b). In past

advisory opinions, the Commission

has allowed corporations to match

contributions made to the

corporation’s PAC with donations to

charity. In these advisory opinions,

the Commission viewed a

corporation’s matching of voluntary

political contributions with charitable donations as solicitation

expenses related to fundraising for

the corporate PAC. AOs 1990-6,

1989-9, 1989-7, 1988-48, 1987-18

and 1986-44. Also, in AOs 1994-7,

1994-6 and 1994-3, the Commission

approved the use of matching

charitable contribution plans for

employees who are only solicitable

under the twice yearly procedures.

Given that under Freeport’s

proposed charitable matching plan

(continued on page 4)
Federal Election Commission RECORD June 2003

4

no individual contributor to the PAC

would receive a financial, tax or

other tangible benefit from either

the corporation or the recipient

charities, no exchange of corporate

treasury funds for voluntary contributions would occur.1

 Thus, the

charitable matching plan is permissible under the Act and Commission

regulations.

Length: 3 pages; Date Issued:

April 25, 2003.✦

—Amy Kort

1 Freeport will give each contributor to

the PAC written notice that he or she

cannot receive any tangible benefit

from the charity in exchange for the

matching contribution, and Freeport

will also advise the charity of this

requirement in writing at the time it

makes its matching donation.

Alternative Disposition of

Advisory Opinion Request

AOR 2003-9

On April 25, 2003, the requester

withdrew his request for this

advisory opinion. The request had

asked whether a candidate’s interest

payments on a 1998 campaign loan

would be treated as an “expenditure

from personal funds” for the 2004

election cycle under the Millionaires’ Amendment.✦

—Amy Kort

Advisory Opinion Requests

AOR 2003-13

Trade association PAC’s solicitation of trade association “MembersIn-Training” (American Academy of

Ophthalmology Political Committee, April 15, 2003)

AOR 2003-14

SSF’s distribution of apron pins

to contributors as tokens of appreAdvisory Opinions

(continued from page 3)

ciation; treatment of pins worn by

recipients as solicitations by SSF

(The Home Depot, Inc., April 21,

2003)

AOR 2003-15

Treatment of donations to and

disbursements from Member of

Congress’s legal expense fund as

“contributions” or “expenditures”

(U.S. Representative Denise Majette

and the Committee to Re-Elect

Congresswoman Denise Majette,

April 16, 2003)

AOR 2003-16

Business arrangement where

national bank issues credit cards

with national party committee logo

in exchange for party’s mailing list;

credit card holder’s rebates or

rewards directed to party committee

(Providian National Bank, May 6,

2003)✦

Court Cases

(continued from page 1)

BCRA on the FEC’s

Web Site

 The Commission has added a

new section to its web site

(www.fec.gov) devoted to the

Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act

of 2002 (BCRA).

The page provides links to:

• The Federal Election Campaign

 Act, as amended by the BCRA;

• Summaries of major BCRA-

 related changes to the federal

 campaign finance law;

• Summaries of current litigation

 involving challenges to the new

 law;

• Federal Register notices

announcing new and revised

Commission regulations that

 implement the BCRA;

• BCRA-related advisory

 opinions; and

• Information on educational

 outreach offered by the

Commission, including

upcoming Roundtable sessions

 and the Commission’s

2003 conference schedule.

 The section also allows

individuals to view the

Commission’s calendar for

rulemakings, including dates for

the Notices of Proposed

Rulemaking, public hearings,

final rules and effective dates for

regulations concerning:

• Soft money;

• Electioneering Communications;

• Contribution Limitations and

 Prohibitions;

• Coordinated and Independent

 Expenditures;

• The Millionaires’ Amendment;

• Consolidated Reporting rules;

 and

• Other provisions of the BCRA.

 The BCRA section of the web

site will be continuously updated.

Visit www.fec.gov and click on

the BCRA icon.

receive an expedited appellate

review by the Supreme Court. The

charts that follow summarize the

district court’s ruling on various

provisions. However, as noted

above, all provisions of the BCRA

remain in effect under the terms of

the stay.

See the May 2002 Record, page

3, and the June 2002 Record, page

4. The district court’s May 2

decision and May 19 stay order are

available on the FEC’s web site at

www.fec.gov—click on the BCRA

icon.

U.S. District Court for the

District of Columbia, Civ. No. 02-

0582 (CKK, KLH, RKL).✦

—Amy Kort
June 2003 Federal Election Commission RECORD

5

BCRA Provision Constitutional Unconstitutional

2 U.S.C. §441i(a)

Prohibition of national party committees

raising and spending nonfederal funds

All aspects of the 441i(a) prohibition

other than the ban on the use of

nonfederal funds to pay for public

communications that promote, attack,

support or oppose a clearly identified

federal candidate (see 2 U.S.C.

§431(20)(A)(iii)).

The ban on the use of nonfederal funds

to pay for public communications that

promote, attack, support or oppose a

clearly identified federal candidate (see

2 U.S.C. §431(20)(A)(iii)).

2 U.S.C. §§431(20) and 441i(b)

Definition of “federal election activity”

(FEA) and restrictions on state and local

party committee spending for FEA

The part of the FEA definition

pertaining to communications that

promote, attack, support or oppose a

clearly identified federal candidate and

the ban on the use of nonfederal funds

to pay for this type of FEA (see 2

U.S.C. §431(20)(A)(iii)).

The definition of the following as

FEA: certain voter registration activity,

certain voter identification, get-outthe-vote or generic campaign activity

and salary for employees who spend

more than 25 percent of their

compensated time on activities in

connection with a federal election (see

2 U.S.C. §§431(20)(A)(i), (ii) and

(iv)); the ban on the use of nonfederal

funds to pay for such expenses.

District Court Ruling on Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act

2 U.S.C. §441i(d)

Restrictions on national, state and local

party committee solicitations for or

donations to tax-exempt 501(c) and 527

organizations

All provisions found unconstitutional.

2 U.S.C. §441i(e)

Restrictions on federal candidates

soliciting, receiving, directing,

transferring or spending nonfederal

funds

All provisions found constitutional.

2 U.S.C. §441i(f)

Restrictions on state officeholders and

candidates using nonfederal funds for

public communications that refer to a

clearly identified federal candidate and

promote, attack, support or oppose a

candidate for this office

All provisions found constitutional.

* The court did not rule on the constitutionality of the following provisions, finding them to be nonjusticiable: 2 U.S.C. §434,

reporting requirements for certain independent expenditures; portions of 2 U.S.C. §441a, regarding the definition of coordinated

communications; provisions of 2 U.S.C. §§431 and 441a, regarding the Millionaires’ Amendment; provisions of 2 U.S.C. §315,

regarding limitations on the lowest unit charge for candidate ads referring to other candidates; and provisions of 2 U.S.C.

§441a, regarding the raising and indexing of the contribution limits.

(continued on page 6)
Federal Election Commission RECORD June 2003

6

BCRA Provision Constitutional Unconstitutional

2 U.S.C. §441a(a)(7)(C)

Electioneering communications that are

coordinated with a candidate or party

committee are contributions to that

candidate or party committee

Provision found constitutional.

2 U.S.C. §441b(b)(2)

Prohibition on electioneering

communications by corporations and

labor unions

Constitutional using modified

alternative definition of electioneering

communication: “any broadcast, cable,

or satellite communication which

promotes or supports a candidate for

that office (regardless of whether the

communication expressly advocates a

vote for or against a candidate).”

District Court Ruling on Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, cont.

2 U.S.C. §441b(c)(2) and (6)

Prohibition on nonprofit organizations

making electioneering communications

Unconstitutional only as it applies to

MCFL groups.

2 U.S.C. §441a(d)(4)

Restrictions on party committees

making both independent and

coordinated expenditures with respect

to a candidate

Unconstitutional using other definitions

of electioneering communication.

2 U.S.C. §§441a(a)(7)(B) and 441b(b)(2)

Definition of coordinated

communications

Both provisions found constitutional.

2 U.S.C. §441d

Disclaimer provisions for public

communications

All provisions found constitutional.

2 U.S.C. §441k

Ban on contributions by minors

All provisions found unconstitutional.

47 U.S.C. §315

Disclosure of broadcasting records

All provisions found unconstitutional.

2 U.S.C. §434(f)(3)

Definition of “electioneering

communication”

2 U.S.C. §434(f)(3)(A)(ii), as modified

by the court, defining “electioneering

communication” as “any broadcast,

cable, or satellite communication which

promotes or supports a candidate for

that office (regardless of whether the

communication expressly advocates a

vote for or against a candidate).” All

reporting requirements for

electioneering communications, except

the provision that requires disclosure of

contracts to disburse funds for

communications that have not yet aired.

2 U.S.C. §434(f)(3)(A)(i), which defines

“electioneering communications” as a

broadcast, cable or satellite

communication that refers to a clearly

identified federal candidate and is within

a certain proximity to an election.

Reporting provision which requires that

electioneering communications be

disclosed once a person executes a

contract to disburse funds for the

communication. See 2 U.S.C.

§434(f)(5).
June 2003 Federal Election Commission RECORD

7

MUR 5270

Failure to Accurately Report

Disbursements and Cash-onHand

The Commission has entered into

a conciliation agreement with the

American Federation of State,

County and Municipal EmployeesPublic Employees Organization to

Promote Legislative Equality

(AFSCME PEOPLE) and its

treasurer William Lucy concerning

Commission to Hold Public

Hearing on Enforcement

Procedures

The Commission will hold a

public hearing on June 11, 2003, to

discuss its current enforcement

practices and procedures.

The hearing will take place from

10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the

Federal Election Commission, 999

E Street, NW, Washington, DC.

This hearing is part of a review

the Commission is conducting of its

enforcement procedures, and the

Commission will use comments

received from the public to determine whether internal directives or

practices should be adjusted and/or

whether a rulemaking in this area is

advised. The Commission would

especially like commenters to

address the issues that face counsel

who practice before the Commission, complainants and respondents

who directly interact with the FEC,

witnesses, other third parties and the

general public. The Commission

seeks general comments on how its

enforcement procedures have been

helpful or unhelpful in working

through enforcement cases, and

specific examples of practices and

procedures used by other civil law

enforcement agencies when acting

in a prosecutorial capacity. The

Commission is also interested in any

studies, surveys, research or other

empirical data that might support

changes in its enforcement procedures.

On May 1, 2003, the Commission

published in the Federal Register a

Notice of Public Hearing and

Request for Comment regarding its

enforcement procedures (68 FR

23311). The Commission specifically requested public comments on

its current procedures for:

• Designating additional respondents

in a complaint;

Compliance • Advising witnesses about the

confidentiality requirements of the

Act (2 U.S.C. §437g(a)(12);

• Considering motions from complainants’ and respondents’

attorneys;

• Providing depositions and documents to respondents;

• Granting respondents extensions of

time to respond to the probable

cause brief;

• Allowing respondents in a Matter

Under Review (MUR) to appear

before the Commission;

• Releasing documents from enforcement matters in proximity to

an election;

• Releasing its directives and penalty

guidelines;

• Bringing MURs to a timely

conclusion;

• Prioritizing cases;

• Dividing responsibility for enforcement of the Act with the

Department of Justice; and

• Dealing with situations where the

six Commissioners vote 3-3 at the

“reason-to-believe” stage of an

investigation.

Comments and requests to testify

at the hearing were required to have

been received by the Commission

no later than May 30, 2003. The full

text of the Notice of Public Hearing

and Request for Comment is

available on the FEC web site at

http://www.fec.gov/press/

20030501hearing/

fr68n084p23311.pdf.✦

—Amy Kort

the committee’s failure to report

transfers of funds from its federal

account to its nonfederal accounts.

AFSCME PEOPLE and Mr. Lucy

admitted to reporting violations that

spanned six years and involved

more than $10 million, and agreed

to pay a $60,000 civil penalty.

Background

Under the Federal Election

Campaign Act (the Act) and Commission regulations, political

committee treasurers are required to

file reports of receipts and disbursements and to disclose the

committee’s cash-on-hand at the

beginning of each reporting period.

2 U.S.C. §§434(a) and 434(b)(1).

Unauthorized committees, such as

separate segregated funds and

FEC Accepts Credit

Cards

 The Federal Election

Commission now accepts

American Express, Diners Club

and Discover Cards in addition to

Visa and MasterCard. While most

FEC materials are available free

of charge, some campaign finance

reports and statements, statistical

compilations, indexes and

directories require payment.

Walk-in visitors and those

placing requests by telephone

may use any of the above-listed

credit cards, cash or checks.

Individuals and organizations

may also place funds on deposit

with the office to purchase these

items. Since pre-payment is

required, using credit cards or

funds placed on deposit can speed

the processing and delivery of

orders. For further information,

contact the Public Records Office

at 800/424-9530 (press 3) or 202/

694-1120.

(continued on page 8)
Federal Election Commission RECORD June 2003

8

political action committees, must

report all disbursements for the

reporting period and the calendar

year, and must also itemize certain

disbursements and provide the

purpose of the disbursement. 2

U.S.C. §434(b)(6)(A) and 11 CFR

104.3(b)(4)(i).

AFSCME PEOPLE

AFSCME PEOPLE is the separate segregated fund of the American Federation of State, County and

Municipal Employees, and it had

elected to file its FEC reports on a

monthly schedule. From 1995

through September 2000, AFSCME

PEOPLE failed to report in excess

of $10 million in disbursements that

the committee made in the form of

transfers from its federal account to

its nonfederal accounts. The failure

to report these disbursements also

caused the committee to make

corresponding overstatements of its

beginning and ending cash-on-hand

in reports filed during this period.

Legislation

Commission Sends

Legislative

Recommendations to

President and Congress

On May 8, 2003, the Commission

submitted seven recommendations

to Congress and President Bush for

legislative action in the area of

campaign finance law. The Commission substantially reduced the

number of recommendations this

year, submitting only high priority

Compliance

(continued from page 7)

Federal Register

Federal Register notices are

available from the FEC’s Public

Records Office, on the FEC web

site at http://www.fec.gov/

register.htm and from the FEC

faxline, 202/501-3413.

Notice 2003-9

Notice of Public Hearing and

Request for Public Comment on

Enforcement Procedures (68 FR

23311, May 1, 2003)

Notice 2003-10

Extension of Public Comment

Period for Public Financing of

Presidential Candidates and

Nominating Conventions (68 FR

26237, May 15, 2003)

In October 2000, AFSCME

PEOPLE and Mr. Lucy voluntarily

notified the Commission of the

reporting errors and expressed the

committees’ desire to file amended

reports reflecting the correct figures.

AFSCME PEOPLE also sent two

representatives to an FEC training

conference on reporting shortly after

discovering the reporting errors. On

March 28, 2001, the respondents

filed amendments to AFSCME

PEOPLE’s reports in order to

accurately reflect the disbursements

from its federal account and the

corresponding cash-on-hand figures

for those reporting periods. The

Commission took into account

AFSCME PEOPLE and Mr. Lucy’s

self-reporting of the violations and

voluntary corrective measures when

it considered an appropriate civil

penalty in this matter.

In their conciliation agreement

with the Commission, the respondents admitted to violations of 2

U.S.C. §§434(b)(1) and

434(b)(4)(H) and agreed to pay a

$60,000 civil penalty. They also

agreed to cease and desist from

violating the Act’s reporting requirements at section 434 and to

properly disclose all future transfers

from the committee’s federal

accounts to its nonfederal

accounts.✦

—Amy Kort

recommendations with broad

Commission support. The proposals

involve a variety of issues:

• Making permanent the

Commission’s Administrative Fine

program for late and nonfiled

reports;

• Allowing the Commission to

restrict the political activities of its

employees;

• Increasing and indexing for

inflation all registration and

reporting thresholds;

• Requiring Senate committees to

file electronically if they have, or

have reason to expect to have,

aggregate contributions or expenditures in excess of $50,000 in a

calendar year;

• Allowing filers to use the date of

receipt by an overnight delivery,

priority or express mail service as

the date a report is “filed,” in the

same way that filers may currently

use a registered or certified mail

postmark;

• Indexing for inflation

multicandidate political committees’ contribution limits and

adjusting the amount that these

committees can contribute to

national party committees, in order

to harmonize these limits with the

limits applicable to nonmulticandidate committees;

• Implementing a plan to avert the

impending shortfall in the Presidential public funding program.

The full text of the recommendations is available on the FEC web

site at http://www.fec.gov/pdf/

legrec2003.pdf.✦

—Amy Kort
June 2003 Federal Election Commission RECORD

9

Information

New IRS Political

Organization Filing and

Disclosure Web Site

On July 1, 2003, the Internal

Revenue Service will introduce the

new Political Organization Filing

and Disclosure web site at

www.irs.gov/polorgs (IRS Keyword: political orgs). This new web

site was developed to reflect the

changes required by Public Law

107-276 (November 2002) and will

replace the old Political Organizations electronic filing and search

site.

Political committees filing with

the FEC are not required to file IRS

Form 8871, Political Organization

Notice of Section 527 Status, and

Form 8872, Political Organization

Report of Contributions and Expenditures. However, in anticipation of

the launch of the new web site, the

IRS is including this article in the

FEC Record to:

• Remind readers representing

organizations that do have an IRS

Form 8871 or 8872 filing requirement (such as nonfederal PACs) to

make sure they have a user name

and electronic password; and

• Recommend that software developers check the draft XML

schemas posted on the IRS web

site to ensure their software will

conform to the requirements of the

web site.

Passwords

Political organizations that have

to file Form 8871 are required to do

so electronically. In addition,

beginning on July 1, 2003, those

political organizations that have to

file Form 8872 with the IRS and

have, or expect to have, more than

$50,000 in contributions or expenditures will be required to do so

electronically.

In order to electronically file on

the new web site, a political organization must have the user name and

password issued to the organization

after filing its initial Form 8871. A

political organization can replace a

forgotten or misplaced user name

and password by sending a letter

requesting a new user name and

password to:

IRS

Attn: Request for 8872 Password

Mail Stop 6273

Ogden, UT 84201

It may take several weeks for a

new user name and password to

arrive, as they will be mailed to the

organization.

Campaign Guides

Available

 For each type of committee, a

Campaign Guide explains, in

clear English, the complex

regulations regarding the activity

of political committees. It shows

readers, for example, how to fill

out FEC reports and illustrates

how the law applies to practical

situations.

 The FEC publishes four

Campaign Guides, each for a

different type of committee, and

we are happy to mail your

committee as many copies as you

need, free of charge. We

encourage you to view them on

our web site (go to www.fec.gov,

then click on “Campaign Finance

Law Resources” and then scroll

down to “Publications”).

 If you would like to place an

order for paper copies of the

Campaign Guides, please call

800-424-9530, press 1, then 3.

Regulations

Extension of Comment

Period for NPRM on Public

Financing of Presidential

Candidates and Nominating

Conventions

The Commission extended until

May 23, 2003, the comment period

for its Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking on the public financing

of Presidential candidates and

nominating conventions. The

Commission also postponed the date

for a possible public hearing on the

matter until June 6. The hearing is

scheduled to be held only if sufficient requests to testify are received

by the close of the comment period.

See the May 2003 Record, page 1.✦

—Amy Kort

Audits

Final Audit Report on

LaRouche’s Committee for a

New Bretton Woods

On May 1, 2003, the Commission

made a determination that the

LaRouche Committee for a New

Bretton Woods (the Committee)

must repay $236,692 to the U.S.

Treasury for public funds it used

during the 2000 primary elections.

The largest portion of the repayment, $163,272, represents primary

matching payments that the Committee received in excess of its

entitlement. Another $70,139

represents apparent non-qualified

campaign expenses that the Committee incurred by overpaying

vendors for campaign work. The

remaining $3,281 represents staledated checks. The Commission

made its determination after conducting an audit of the Committee,

as required under the Presidential

Election Campaign Fund Act and

the Presidential Primary Matching

Payment Account Act. 26 U.S.C.

§§9007(a), 9008(g) and 9038(a).✦

—Amy Kort

(continued on page 10)
Federal Election Commission RECORD June 2003

10

Conference for Trade

Associations, Membership

and Labor Organizations

and their PACs

The FEC will hold a conference

for trade associations, membership

and labor organizations and their

PACs June 16-17 in Washington,

DC. Commissioners and experienced FEC staff will conduct a

series of workshops to address how

the campaign finance law affects

these associations and organizations.

Seminars and workshops will also

discuss how the BCRA affects trade

associations, member and labor

organizations and their PACs. In

addition, a representative from the

IRS will be available to answer

election-related tax questions.

The registration fee for the

conference is $385, which covers

the cost of the conference, materials

and meals. The registration form

must be received by May 23—a ten

dollar late fee will be assessed for

late registrations. Because demand

for this conference is exceptionally

high, the FEC can only accept

conference registrations from two

attendees representing any given

association or organization.

The conference will be held at the

Loews L’Enfant Plaza Hotel, 480

L’Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington,

DC. A room rate of $189 per night

is available to conference attendees

who make room reservations on or

before May 23.

Complete conference registration

information is available online.

Conference registrations will be

accepted on a first-come, firstserved basis. Attendance is limited,

and FEC conferences are selling out

quickly this year, so please register

early. For registration information:

• Call Sylvester Management

Corporation at 800/246-7277;

Outreach

Political organizations should

submit a request now in order to

have the user name and password

available for their next filing.

XML Schemas

Political organizations will have

the ability to upload XML data files

containing the information required

to be reported on Form 8871 and

Form 8872 via the new web site.

Political organizations that choose

this option for electronic filing will

still need to use the user name and

password.

The draft schemas for the XML

files that may be uploaded to

complete the forms are now available at www.irs.gov/polorgs (IRS

Keyword: political orgs). Software

developers should use these

schemas to ensure their software

will conform to the requirements of

the Political Organization Filing and

Disclosure web site. This capability

is scheduled to be available beginning July 1, 2003.

Information

(continued from page 9)

Back Issues of the

Record Available on

the Internet

This issue of the Record and all

other issues of the Record starting

with January 1996 are available

through the Internet as PDF files.

Visit the FEC’s World Wide Web

site at http://www.fec.gov and

click on “What’s New” for this

issue. Click “Campaign Finance

Law Resources” to see back issues. Future Record issues will be

posted on the web as well. You

will need Adobe® Acrobat®

Reader software to view the publication. The FEC’s web site has

a link that will take you to Adobe’s

web site, where you can download

the latest version of the software

for free.

Additional Information

More information is available via

the:

• IRS web site: www.irs.gov;

• Political Organization Filing and

Disclosure Web site (includes

information on filing requirements): www.irs.gov/polorgs (IRS

Keyword: political orgs); and

• IRS toll free number: 1-877-829-

5500. Staff at this number answer

questions about tax law filing

requirements for political organizations and are available from 8:00

a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Eastern time,

Monday through Friday.✦

—Submitted by the IRS

Publications

Directory of Federal and

State Disclosure and Election

Offices Available

The 2003 edition of the Combined Federal/State Disclosure and

Election Directory is available. This

annual publication provides a listing

of the federal and state agencies

responsible for the disclosure of

campaign finances, lobbying,

personal finances, public financing,

candidates on ballots, election

results, spending on state initiatives

and other financial filings. The

contact information for each agency

includes e-mail and Internet addresses.

The Directory is available in

paper copy, diskette and on the

Commission’s web site,

www.fec.gov (via the “Elections

and Voting” section). The online

version provides hyperlinks to

directly access the web pages of the

federal and state agencies listed, and

is periodically updated throughout

the year.

Free paper copies may be obtained by calling the Public Records

Office at 800/424-1120 (press 3) or

202/694-1120.✦

—Amy Kort
June 2003 Federal Election Commission RECORD

11

Conference Schedule

for 2003

Conference for Trade

Associations, Membership and

Labor Organizations and their

PACs

June 16-17, 2003

Washington, DC

Regional Conference for House

and Senate Campaigns,

Political Party Committees and

Corporate/Labor/Trade PACs

September 9-10, 2003

Chicago, IL

Regional Conference for House

and Senate Campaigns,

Political Party Committees and

Corporate/Labor/Trade PACs

October 28-29, 2003

San Diego, CA

The first number in each citation

refers to the “number” (month) of

the 2003 Record issue in which the

article appeared. The second

number, following the colon,

indicates the page number in that

issue. For example, “1:4” means

that the article is in the January

issue on page 4.

Advisory Opinions

2002-12: Disaffiliation of corporations and their PACs, 2:8

2002-14: National party

committee’s lease of mailing list

and sale of advertising space and

trademark license, 3:5

Index

Contribution limitations and prohibitions; delay of effective date

and correction, 2:6

Coordinated and independent

expenditures, final rules, 1:10

Disclaimers, fraudulent solicitation,

civil penalties and personal use of

campaign funds, final rules, 1:8

Leadership PACs, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 2:4

Millionaires’ Amendment, interim

final rules, 2:2

Public financing of Presidential

candidates and nominating

conventions, Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, 5:1; extension of

public comment period and

postponement of hearing date, 6:9

Reports

April reporting reminder, 4:1

Draft forms and e-filing formats

available for public comment, 1:2

New forms available, 3:1

Reports due in 2003, 1:3

Statements of Candidacy and

Statements of Organization for

authorized committees require

new information, 3:2

Texas special election reporting, 4:4

• Visit the FEC web site at http://

www.fec.gov/pages/

infosvc.htm#Conferences; or

• Send an e-mail to

toni@sylvestermanagement.com.✦

—Amy Kort

Need FEC Material

in a Hurry?

Use FEC Faxline to obtain FEC

material fast. It operates 24 hours

a day, 7 days a week. Hundreds

of FEC documents—reporting

forms, brochures, FEC regulations—can be faxed almost immediately.

Use a touch tone phone to dial

202/501-3413 and follow the instructions. To order a complete

menu of Faxline documents, enter

document number 411 at the

prompt.

2002-15: Affiliation of trade associations, 4:8

2003-1: Nonconnected committee’s

allocation of administrative

expenses, 4:9

2003-2: Socialist Workers Party

disclosure exemption, 5:1

2003-3: Solicitation of funds for

nonfederal candidates by federal

candidates and officeholders, 6:1

2003-4: Corporation’s matching

charitable contribution plan, 6:3

Compliance

Cases resolved under Alternative

Dispute Resolution program,

2:11; 3:3; 5:10

Committees fined under Administrative Fine program, 1:25; 2:13;

3:4; 5:7

MUR 5187: Corporate reimbursements of contributions, 1:22

MUR 5208: Facilitation of contributions by national bank, 2:1

MUR 5270: Failure to accurately

report disbursements and cash-onhand, 6:7

Public hearing on enforcement

procedures, 6:7

Court Cases

_____ v. FEC

– Cunningham, 1:19

– Greenwood for Congress, 4:4

– Hawaii Right to Life, Inc., 1:20

– Lovely, 3:4

– Luis M. Correa, 5:5

– McConnell et al., 6:1

FEC v. _____

– Beaumont, 1:20

– California Democratic Party, 5:5

– Fulani, 2:8

– Freedom’s Heritage Forum, 2:8;

5:5

– Toledano, 1:20

Regulations

Administrative fines, final rules, 4:1

BCRA reporting, final rules, 1:14

BCRA technical amendments, 2:6

Biennial limit, clarification, 2:1

Brokerage loans and lines of credit,

effective date, 2:4

Contribution limits increase, 1:6
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300

Presorted Standard

Postage and Fees Paid

Federal Election Commission

Permit Number G-31

Printed on recycled paper

Federal Election Commission RECORD June 2003