FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D C 20463 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

In the Matter of 1 

LeSueur for Congress ’04, 

1

1 ADR 196, ADR 198, 

Eddie “Edie” Ingrum, Treasurer 1 ADR 200, and ADR 2 13 

and‘clinton B. LeSueur 1 

(MURs 5433,5435,5459 and 5596) 1 

STATEMENT OF REASONS 

On July 19,2005, the Federal Election Commission (“Commission”) declined to accept the 

recommendation of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Office to approve the consolidated negotiated 

agreement to resolve ADR 196 (MUR 54331, ADR 198 (MUR 5439, ADR 200 (MUR 5459) and 

ADR 213 (MUR 55961, and voted 4-2 to close the files on these matters. We declined to accept the 

negotiated agreement as the regulations do not present clear direction to the regulated community on 

the issue of computing pro-rata salary to a candidate. See 11 C.F.R. 6 1 13.1 (g)( l)(i)(I). 

The Complainant, Friends of Bennie Thompson, alleged in these matters that the Respondents , 

LeSueur for Congress ’04 and Eddie “Edie” Ingrum, Treasurer, made excessive salary payments to the 

candidate in February, March and August 2004, as well as a premature salary payment of $600 on 

January 6,2004. The complaints alleged the excessive salary payments totaled $3,974.50. The 

Complainant argues that, based on the candidate’s 2003 financial disclosure report filed with the U.S. 

House of Representatives reflecting earnings of $18,000 in 2003, Respondents would be restricted to 

paying Mr. LeSueur a salary of no more than $1,500 per month. The complaint states that the PrePrimary, April Quarterly, and October Quarterly reports filed by Respondents disclose payments of 

$3,200 to Mr. LeSueur in February, $1,872.50 in March, and $3,402 in August. 

In reply to the complaints, Respondents contend that the regulations allowed the Committee to 

pay a percentage of the candidate’s previous annual salary, in proportion to the number of months, or 

days, he was a candidate. Respondents argued that the Committee could pay the candidate an 

aggregate of $14,695.89, and that they did not exceed that amount. In addition, Respondents filed 

amended reports that disclosed salary payments to the candidate of$1,700 in February 2004, $1,332.50 

in March 2004, $1,500 in April 2004, $1,581.50 in May 2004, $1,290 in June 2004, $3,402 in August 

2004 and $1,5 19 in October 2004, for an aggregate salary of $12,125. Respondents’ reports also 

disclosed a refund in April 2004 to the Committee of the $600 for the premature salary payment made 

on January 6,2004. 
ADR 196, ADR 198, ADR 200 and ADR 213 

Statement of Reasons 

Page 2 of 2 

The regulations state: 

Salary payments by a candidate's principal campaign to a candidate shall be the lesser 

of: the minimum salary paid to a Federal officeholder holding the Federal office that the 

candidate seeks; or the earned income that the candidate received during the year prior 

to becoming a candidate. . . . Salary shall not be paid to a candidate before the filing 

deadline for access to the primary election ballot for the Federal office that the 

candidate seeks, as determined by State law, or in those states that do not conduct 

primaries, on January 1 of each even-numbered year. 

If the candidate wins the primary election, his or her principal campaign committee may / 

pay him or her a salary fi-om campaign hnds through the date of the general election, 

up to and including the date of any general election runoff. If the candidate loses the 

primary, withdraws fi-om the race, or otherwise ceases to be a candidate, no salary 

payments may be paid beyond the date he or she is no longer a candidate. . . .During 

the time period in which a principal campaign committee may pay a salary to a 

candidate under this paragraph, such payment must be computed on a pro-rata basis. 

11 C.F.R. 5 113.1 (g)( l)(i)(I) (emphasis added). 

As stated above, the regulations do not present clear direction to the regulated community on 

the issue of computing pro-rata salary to a candidate, in part, due to the definition of '' . . .apro-rata 

basis." Pro rata is defined as proportionately, or according to a certain rate or proportion, and pro rate 

is defined as to divide, or distribute proportionally. Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004). If the 

regulations intend to use the definition of pro rata, then the regulations could be interpreted such that 

Respondents did not violate the FECA because the candidate's aggregate salary over the course of his 

candidacy did not exceed the permissible amount. If on the other hand, the regulations are interpreted 

to mean that the maximum amount of salary must be prorated, it would suggest that Respondents 

would have been limited to $1,500 per month, and thus, there was a violation of the FECA. Because 

of this ambiguity in the regulations, we voted not to approve the consolidated agreement to resolve 

ADR 196, ADR 198, ADR 200 and ADR 213. 

August 18,2005 

STott E. Thomas, Chairman 6avTd M. Mason, Commissioner 

& e-,

- Bradley A<Sd, Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub,- Commissioner