Federal Election 

Commission 

Annual Report 1981 

Federal Election Commission 

1325 K Street, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20463 
Commissioners 

Frank P. Reiche, Chairman 

Danny Lee McDonald, Vice Chairman 

Joan D. Aikens 

Lee Ann Elliott 

Thomas E. Harris 

John Warren McGarry 

Ex Offico Commissioners 

Edmund L. Henshaw, Clerk of the House 

William F. Hildenbrand, Secretary of the Senate 

Statutory Officers 

B. Allen Clutter, Ill, Staff Director 

Charles N. Steele, General Counsel 

The Annual Report 1981 was written and published by the 

Commission's Office of Publications. 
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463 

June 1, 1982 

The President of the United States 

The u.s. Senate 

The u.s. House of Representatives 

Dear Sirs: 

We submit for your consideration the seventh 

annual report of the Federal Election Commission, 

as required by the Federal Election Campaign Act 

of 1971, as amended. The 1981 Annual Report 

describes the activities performed by the 

Commission in carrying out its duties under the 

Act. The Commission will submit its annual 

recommendations for legislative action in a 

separate report. 

Respectfully, 

Frank. 

~I?~ P. Reiche 

Chairman 
Table of Contents 

Page 

Introduction 1 

Chapter 1 3 

Completion of the Presidential Public 

Funding Program 

Primary Matching Funds 4 

Convention Financing 7 

General Election Financing 7 

Chapter 2 9 

Administration of the Election law 

Disclosing Information 9 

Clarifying the law 1 7 

Monitoring the Law 21 

Enforcing the Law 2 2 

Clearinghouse Activities 2 7 

Chapter 3 29 

legislation 

Draft Committees 2 9 

Commission Testimony 30 

Repeal of Honoraria Limit 30 

Chapter 4 31 

The Commission 

Commissioners 31 

Reorganization 32 

The Commission's Budget 32 

Merit Pay Program 33 

Labor/Management Relations 34 

Appendices 

1. Biographical Data on Commissioners 

and Statutory Officers 3 5 

2. FEC Organization Chart 39 

3. Public Funding Statistics 4 1 

4. Chronology of Events, 19B 1 43 

5. The FEC's Budget 4 7 

6. Statistics on Commission Operations 49 

7. FEC Federal Register Notices, 1981 53 

8. Computer Indexes 55 

9. Clearinghouse Studies 57 

10. FEC Information Services 59 
Introduction 

The Federal Election Commission emphasized two 

objectives in 1 981 : completing the Presidential 

public funding program and increasing the efficiency of its operations. This report describes the 

accomplishments and operational changes that enabled the Commission to meet these objectives. 

Chapter 1 examines the Commission's wrap-up of 

the 1980 Presidential public funding program; The 

chapter summarizes the Commission's final c!ertifications and audits and presents statistical information on the primary campaigns. Appendix 3 contains more detailed statistics on the entire public 

funding program. Chapter 2 reports on nonPresidential programs, and Chapter 3 discusses legislative activity pertinent to the Federal election 

laws. Note that this year's recommendations for 

legislative change . will be submitted in a separate 

report to the Congress and the President. Finally, 

Chapter 4 describes the Commission's internal operations, including new appointments, budget activity and developments in the labor/management contract negotiations. 
3 Chapter 1 

Completion of the 

Presidential Public Funding 

Program 

The Commission laid the groundwork for the 1980 

Presidential public financing program in 1978 and 

1979 when it revised regulations and developed 

new procedures to facilitate smooth administration 

of the program. In 1980, the Commission began to 

execute the program, certifying primary, convention 

and general election funds efficiently and initiating 

audits of recipients of public funds. 1 

In 1 981 , the Commission completed its administration of the program, focusing mainly on audits of 

committees that had received public funds. By the 

year's end, the Commission had publicly released all 

final audit reports on publicly funded candidates, 

which included determinations of how much money 

the committees had to return to the U.S. Treasury. 

I I I 

I I I 

I I I 

I I I 

1 For a discussion of the Commission's 1979 and 1980 

Presidential funding activity, see the Annual Reports for those 

years. 
4 

Two FEC reports, mandated by the public financing 

law, contained detailed information on public funding certifications and repayments for the primary 

and general elections. Appendix 3 contains much of 

the statistical information presented in the public 

funding reports, which the Commission submitted 

to the Senate and House of Representatives early in 

1982. 

This chapter describes the Commission's 1981 

public funding activity and includes financial statistics on primary campaigns, information on public 

fund repayments and a summary of litigation relating to Presidential elections. 

Primary Matching Funds 

Certifications 

During the early months of 1981, the Commission 

continued to receive submissions (requests) for 

matching funds and resubmissions of contributions 

previously rejected as unmatchable. From October 

1979, when it received the first matching fund requests, until March 1981, when almost all of the 

certifications were completed, the Commission 

processed 152 submissions and 27 resubmissions. 

By the end of 1 981 , the Commission had certified a 

total of $31,342,0582 in primary matching funds 

to the 10 candidates participating in the program. 

Audits and Repayments 

The Commission completed all audits of primary 

matching fund recipients with the public release of 

five final audit reports in 1981 . The first five reports had been issued in 1980. Audit findings revealed that some campaigns had difficulty conforming to the State spending limits3 and exceeded 

those limits by greater amounts than in the 1976 

Presidential primaries. The New Hampshire and 

Iowa expenditure limits presented the greatest 

problems because the State limits were considered 

to be low in comparison to the strategic importance 

of the races. On the other hand, 1980 publicly 

funded committees documented campaign expenses more thoroughly than had the 1976 Presidential committees. The Commission attributed this 

improvement to clearer regulations, a bookkeeping 

and accounting manual distributed early in the campaign and an extensive outreach program. (See 

page 12 of the 1980 Annual Report.) 

Final audit reports requested a total of 

$2,391,576 in repayments of primary matching 

funds to the U.S. Treasury. Over half of the repayments represented surplus campaign funds unspent 

by the campaigns. The remainder related to expenditures in excess of State limits and other "nonqualified campaign expenses."4 Nonqualified campaign 

expenses included inadequately documented expenditures and expenses related to the general election (rather than the primary elections). 

Financial Activity of the Campaigns 

In November 1981, the Commission completed and 

released a comprehensive study on 1980 Presidential primary financial activity. The report, 1979-80 

FEC Report on Financial Activity for Presidential 

Pre-Nomination Campaigns, was the final statistical 

study in a series issued periodically during 1980. 

Covering a two-year period from January 1979 

through Becember 1980, the report focused exclusively on money raised and spent by 1 6 Presidential 

candidates, all of whose financial activity exceeded 

2The Commission certified an additional $1 ,070 in February 1982, bringing the total of primary matching funds certified 

to $31,343,129. 

3The election law requires matching fund recipients to 

limit primary campaign expenditures in each State to 

$200,000 or $.16 x the Voting Age Population (plus a cost-ofliving adjustment), whichever is greater. The Commission has 

recommended that Congress remove the State spending limits. 

See the 1980 Annual Report, page 6. 

4The public funding law requires a candidate to make repayments when the campaign makes disbursements for nonqualified campaign expenses. Disbursements not related to the 

primary campaign and spending in excess of State limits or the 

national limit are considered nonqualified campaign expenses. 
5 

$100,000. Included in the report were the 10 can~ 

didates who received primary matching funds to 

help finance their campaigns. 

Based on figures from the report and a November 

15 Commission press release, Table I compares 

1976 and 1980 matching fund recipients with respect to their receipts and disbursements. In comparing the two election cycles, inflation and the difference in the number of candidates should be 

taken into consideration. 

Table I 

Presidential Campaigns Receiving Matching Funds: 

1976 and 1980 

1976 

Presidential 

Primary 

Campaigns 

1980 

Presidential 

Primary 

Campaigns 

Number of Candidates 15 10 

Adjusted Receipts** $ 67.9* $ 94.2 

Individual Contributions 

Nonparty Contributions 

Federal Matching Funds 

42.5 

.8 

24.3 

61.0 

1.4 

30.9 

Adjusted Disbursements** $ 66.9 $ 92.3 

Sources: 1979-80 FEC Report on Financial Activity for Presidential Pre-Nomination Campaigns (final report) and FEC press 

release of November 15, 1981. 

•Figures are in millions of dollars. 

··Adjusted receipts or adjusted disbursements are total reported receipts or disbursements minus transfers from or to affiliated committees, loan repayments, contribution refunds, and 

refunds or rebates received. 
6 

Table II presents an overview of the financial activity of the 1 0 candidates who received matching 

funds during the 1980 primaries. The matching 

fund figures represent total matching funds reported by the candidates' campaigns through December 31, 1980. The Commission certified additional funds in 1981 and 1982, which campaigns 

used to wind down operations and retire debts, 

bringing the total to $31.3 million. 

Table II 

Presidential Campaigns Receiving Matching Funds: 1980* 

Adjusted 

Receipts** 

Individual 

Contributions** * 

Nonparty 

Committee 

Contributions 

Matching 

Funds 

Adjusted 

Disbursements** 

Brown(D) 

Carter(D) 

Kennedy(Dl 

LaRouche(D) 

Anderson(Rl 

Baker(A) 

Bush(R) 

Crane(R) 

Dole(R) 

Reagan(R) 

$ 2.65 

18.55 

12.29 

2.14 

6.63 

7.14 

16.71 

5.24 

1.43 

21.39 

$ 1.71 

12.93 

7.75 

1.55 

3.91 

4.20 

10.87 

3.47 

.90 

13.76 

$ .04 

.46 

.23 

.008 

.02 

.13 

.13 

.002 

.045 

.285 

$ .89 

5.05 

3.86 

.53 

2.68 

2.64 

5.72 

1.75 

.45 

7.29 

$ 2.65 

18.52 

12.27 

2.15 

6.52 

7.07 

16.71 

5.22 

1.39 

19.82 

Total $ 94.17 $ 61.05 $ 1.35 $ 30.86 $ 92.32 

Sources: 1979-80 FEC Report on Financial Activity for Presidential Pre-Nomination Campaigns (final report) and FEC press release of 

November 15, 1981. 

*Figures are in million of dollars . 

..Adjusted receipts or adjusted disbursements are total reported receipts or disbursements minus transfers from or to affiliated 

committees, loan repayments, contribution refunds, and refunds or rebates received. 

• • *Individual contributions are total reported contributions minus itemized contribution refunds. Unitemized refunds are not in· 

eluded in the net calculation. See page 3 of the 1979-80 FEC Report on Financial Activity for Presidential Pre-Nomination Campaigns. 
7 

Convention Financing 

In 1980, the Democratic and Republican National 

Committees each received $4,416,000 in public 

funds, the maximum entitlement permitted under 

the election law. Final audit reports, released in 

April 1981, requested repayments of public funds 

to the U.S. Treasury from both committees. The 

Commission requested the return of surplus public 

funds unspent by the committees and a small 

amount of public money used for nonconventionrelated expenses. The repayments reduced the net 

amounts certified to $3,684,335 for the Democratic National Committee and $4,400,241 for the 

Republican l\lational Committee. See also Appendix 

3. 

General Election Financing 

During 1981, the Commission audited the campaigns of the three publicly funded Presidential 

nominees and released final audit reports on each 

campaign: the Carter/Mondale Re-election Committee, Inc., the Reagan Bush Committee and the National Unity Campaign for John Anderson. Each major party nominee received the maximum public 

funding - $29,440,000 - while John Anderson, 

as a new party candidate, received $4,242,304 in 

public funds. 5 

The audit reports requested the candidates to 

make repayments totaling $978,304. Most of the 

$87,232 in repayments requested of the Carter/ 

Mondale Committee was to reimburse the U.S. 

Treasury for interest earned on public money that 

the campaign had invested. The final audit report on 

the Anderson Committee asked for $639,950 in .repayments, most of which represented public funds 

determined by the Commission to be in excess of 

the candidate's entitlement. Finally, the Commission requested the Reagan Bush Committee to return $251,122 in .interest earned on invested public money. See Appendix 3 for more information on 

certifications and repayments of general election 

public funds. 

The Reagan Bush Committee asked the District of 

Columbia district court to block the Commission's 

public release of the final audit report and to require 

the Commission to disclose, under the Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA), internal documents related 

to the Reagan Bush audit. The committee argued 

that the Commission had no authority to make audit 

reports public. On November 1 7, the court ruled in 

the Commission's favor and refused to stop the release of the report. The court based its decision on 

the public's right to know how tax monies were being spent and on concern for openness and accountability· in the operation of Presidential cam5 For a discussion of the Commission's certifications for 

the 1980 general election, see page 16 of the 1980 Annual 

Report. 
8 

paigns. Judging that the Commission had not 

improperly withheld any documents from the committee, the court dismissed the FOIA action. Both 

the district court and an appeals court denied the 

Reagan Bush Committee's subsequent motion to 

temporarily prohibit the release of the report while 

the committee appealed the district court's order. 

The Commission released the final audit report on 

December 11 . 

· Another suit arising from the 1980 Presidential 

elections, FEC v. Americans for Change, was heard 

by the Supreme Court in October 1981. The case 

concerned a provision of the public funding law (26 

U.S.C. Section 9012(f)) which prohibits unauthorized committees from making expenditures of over 

$1 ,000 to further the election of publicly funded 

Presidential nominees. The Commission argued that 

the provision applied to the defendant committees' 

independent expenditures on behalf of Ronald 

Reagan. On January 19, 1982, the Supreme Court, 

in a 4 to 4 vote, left standing a decision by a threejudge D.C. district court. (Justice Sandra Day 

O'Connor did not take part in the decision.) The district court had ruled that the expenditure limits 

were unconstitutional. (For a more detailed summary of the district court ruling, see page 19 of the 

1980 Annual Report.) 
9 Chapter 2 

Administration of the 

Election Law 

, 

The Commission, in 1981, continued to fulfill its 

role as administrator of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 by providing information to the 

public, helping committees understand the law, 

monitoring potential violations, enforcing the law 

and, finally, serving as a Clearinghouse for election 

administration information. The Commission refined 

its operations with a view toward conserving resources and promoting efficiency. This chapter discusses those Commission activities that did not 

specifically relate to the administration of the Presidential public financing program. First summarizing 

1980 campaign finance statistics, the chapter goes 

on to describe new developments in the administration of the election law that occurred throughout 

1981. 

Disclosing Information 

Campaign Finance Statistics 

During 1981, the Commission compiled, refined 

and publicly released computerized reports and indexes on the campaign finance activity of the 

1979-80 election cycle. The statistics presented 

below summarize information contained in the 

Commission's studies. 

Congressional Campaigns. The Commission released interim summary data 1 in August 1981 

showing that a total of 2,265 Congressional candidates active in the 1980 elections collectively 

spent $242 million on their campaigns, whereas 

1,909 candidates spent $197 million for the 1978 

Congressional elections. During the 1979-80 election cycle, candidates who waged successful primary campaigns and then went on to be contenders 

in the general election spent most of the money. 

1Source: FEC press release of August 10, 1981. The final 

statistical study on Congressional campaigns was released in 

March 1982, subsequent to the preparation of this report. See 

1979-80 FEC Report on Financial Activity of U.S. House and 

Senate Campaigns (final report) and FEC press release of March 

7, 1982. 
10 

Candidates who lost in the primaries spent less 

than a combined total of $50 million. Congressional 

candidates raised over $250 million during 1979-

80, in comparison with the $202 million raised during 1977-78. 

Table Ill provides information on the total financial activity of Congressional campaigns during the 

1979-80 election cycle. The figures, given in millions of dollars, include financial activity in primary, 

special, runoff and general elections. 

Table Ill 

Activity of 1980 Congressional Campaigns 

Candidates Raised Spent 

By Office 

House $ 144.5 $ 136.8 

Senate 107.4 105.4 

By Party Affiliation 

Democratic 128.7 123.8 

Republican 121.9 117.1 

Other 1.3 1.3 

By Candidate Status 

Incumbent 113.7 106.3 

Challenger 93.4 92.0 

Open Seat 44.8 43.9 

Total $ 251.9 $ 242.2 

Source: FEC press release of August 10, 1981. •, 

Nonparty Political Committees. Nonparty (noncandidate) committees contributed a total of $60.5 million to Congressional and Presidential candidates 

during the 1979-80 election cycle, according to interim summary figures released by the Commission 

in August 1 9 81 .

2 Senate and House candidates received a total of $55.3 million from nonparty committees for their 1980 campaigns, and Presidential 

campaigns (at least 20) received about $2 million. 

Nonparty committees also contributed $3.2 million 

for other purposes, such as retiring debts from 

former Congressional campaigns. 

The Commission's computer data showed that 

nonparty committees began the election cycle with 

almost $1 5 million. They raised an additional 

$137.8 million and spent $133.2 million between 

January 1979 and December 1980. Contributions 

to 1980 Congressional campaigns alone represented 42 percent of all nonparty committee spending. Contributions to all Federal candidates, including Presidential candidates, represented 45 percent 

of this spending. Most of the contributions were for 

1980 campaigns, although some were made in 

support of past or future elections. 

Nonparty committees spent approximately $ 1 4 

million, or 10.5 percent of their funds, on independent expenditures to promote or defeat certain candidates. (See the next section on independent 

spending.) 

The charts below show, on a percentage basis, 

how each type of nonparty committee divided its 

contributions between 1979-80 Democratic and 

Republican Congressional candidates. 

2Source: FEC press release of August 4, 1981. The final 

statistical study on nonparty activity was released in February 

1982, subsequent to the preparation of this report. See 1979-

80 FEC Report on Financial Activity of Party and Non-Party Political Committees (final report) and FEC press release of February 21, 1982. 
Nonparty Contributions to 

1980 Congressional Candidates 

65% 

35% 

$1.4million 

Cooperatives 

56% 

44% 

$0.7million 

Corporations 

Without Stock 

53% 47% 

$55.3million 

Total 

-Democrats 

.____.....IRepublicans 

68% 

32% 

$4.8million 

Non 

Connected 

$16.1 million 

Trade/ 

Membership/ 

Health 

11 

$19.2million 

Corporate 

93% 

$13.1 million 

Labor 

Independent Spending. Independent expenditures 

made during the 1979-80 election cycle by nonparty (noncandidate) committees, individuals and 

other groups topped $16 million, according to a 

study released by the Commission in November 

1981 .3 Thirty-three individuals spent a total of 

$1.2 million in independent expenditures; 105 nonparty committees spent approximately $14 million; 

and 80 groups organized solely to make independent expenditures spent $. 7 million. Under the election law, individuals or political committees may 

spend unlimited funds advocating the election or 

defeat of Federal candidates as long as these expenditures are made independently, i.e., without 

cooperation or consulation with the candidate or 

his/her campaign. (See 2 U.S.C. Section 431 (17).) 

Out of the $16 million total, $13.7 million was 

spent to influence the outcome of the 1980 Presidential elections. Independent spending in 1976 

showed a similar pattern: of the $2 million in total 

independent expenditures, $1.6 million was spent 

to influence the Presidential races. Independent expenditures made on behalf of Ronald Reagan accounted for 89 percent of the total spent to influence 1980 Presidential elections. Only one-fifth of 

the Presidential expenditures ($2.7 million) were 

made during the primary season; the remainder of 

the independent expenditures were made during the 

general election period. 

Independent expenditures for and against House 

candidates totaled $884,727. Spending to influence Senate races totaled $1 . 7 million, and most of 

it - $1.3 million - was for negative expenditures. 

By contrast, independent expenditures for and 

against Congressional candidates in the 1978 elections amounted to approximately $400,000, split 

almost evenly between House and Senate races. 

The Commission study showed that $2.2 million 

was spent advocating the defeat of 65 candidates. 

This negative spending represented only 14 percent 

3Sources: 1979-80 FEC Index of Independent ExpendiSource: FEC press release of August 4, 1981 . tures and FEC press release of November 29, 1981: 
12 

of total independent expenditures. However, negative spending amounted to 7 8 percent of the independent expenditures made in connection with Senate races. 

Tables IV and V list those political committees 

and individuals who made the largest independent 

expenditures during the 1979-80 election cycle. 

Table VI lists the candidates for or against whom 

the most money was spent. 

Table IV 

Committees Reporting Largest Independent 

Expenditures 

Political Committee Amount Spent 

1. Congressional Club $ 4,601,069 

2. National Conservative Political Action 

Committee 3,307,962 

3. Fund for a Conservative Majority 2,062.466 

4. Americans for an Effective Presidency 1,270,208 

5. Americans for Change 711,856 

6. NRA Political Victory Fund 441,891 

7. Christian Voice Moral Government 

Fund 406,199 

8. 1980 Republican Presidential Campaign Committee 314,740 

9. American Medical Political Action 

Committee 172,397 

10. Gun Owners of America Campaign 

Committee 119,891 

Sources: 1979-80 FEC Index of Independent Expenditures and 

FEC press release of November 29, 1981. 

Table V 

Individuals Reporting Largest Independent 

Expenditures 

Individual Amount Spent 

1. Cecil Haden $ 599,333 

2. Stewart Mott 110,179 

3. Norman Lear 108,301 

4. Richard DeVos 70,676 

5. Jay Van Andel 68.433 

6. Theo Law 66,230 

7. David Melville 35,159 

8. Henry Grover 29,076 

9. Michael Rosen 25,940 

10. Dwight Vedder 20,000 

Sources: 1979-80 FEC Index of Independent Expenditures and 

FEC press release of November 29, 1981 . 
13 

Table VI 

Candidates For or Against Whom Most Independent Expenditures Were Made 

Candidate Total 

Independent 

Expend"ltures 

Expenditures 

Advocating 

Election 

ExpenditUres 

Advocating 

Defeat 

Presidential 

Ronald Reagan(R) 

Edward Kennedy(D) 

Jimmy Carter{D) 

John Connally(R) 

John Anderson(l) 

$ 12,293,925 

558,350 

291,480 

288,032 

202,073 

$ 12,245,057 

77,189 

45,869 

288,032 

199,438 

$ 47,868 

491,161 

245,611 

0 

2,635 

Senate 

Frank Church(D-10) 

John Culver(D-IA) 

George McGovern(D-SD) 

Alan CranstoniD-CA) 

Birch Bayh(D-IN) 

Thomas Eagleton(D-MO) 

$ 340,963 

246,197 

255,597 

194,324 

181.750 

124,704 

$ 1,945 

59,584 

3,553 

2,285 

1,027 

22,910 

$ 339,018 

186,613 

222,044

192,039 

180,723 

101,794 

House 

Robert Edgar(D-PA) 

Jack FieldsiR-TX) 

Carey Peck!D-CA) 

Harold Sawyer(R-MI) 

Charles Grassley(R-IA) * 

Harold Volkmer(D-MO) 

W.J. "Billy" Tauzin(D-LA) 

$ 39,212 

38,376 

37,734 

28,131 

27,799 

26,917 

22,535 

$ 39,182 

38,376 

37,734 

14,219 

27,799 

26,917 

22,535 

$ 30 

0 

0 

13,912 

0 

0 

0 

Sources: 1979-80 FEC Index of Independent Expenditures and FEC pres11 release of November 29, 1981. •Although Senator Gressley was a 1980 Senate. candidate, he also had a 1980 House campaign committee registered with the 

Commission. The above independent expenditures were reported on behalf of the House campaign. 
14 

Corporate/Labor Communications. The election law 

allows corporations, labor organizations and membership groups to finance internal communications 

that expressly advocate the election or defeat of 

Federal candidates (partisan communications). The 

organization must report costs for partisan communications when they exceed $2,000 per election. Corporate, labor and membership groups reported spending $3.9 million during 1979-80 for 

internal, partisan communications, according to a 

study released by the Commission in October 

1981 • 4 Of the total reported, labor organizations 

spent close to $3 million, membership groups spent 

approximately $1 million, and the sole corporation 

reporting these expenditures spent less than 

$4,000. 

In the 1979-80 election cycle, a total of 62 

groups, including 57 labor organizations, four membership groups and one corporation, reported partisan communication costs. Eighty percent of the total reported was spent advocating the election of 

candidates; 20 percent was spent advocating their 

defeat. By contrast, communication costs reported 

in the 197 7-7 8 election cycle totaled approximately $313,000. In 1976, 71 groups, mostly labor organizations, reported spending $2.1 million. 

Table VII lists the 10 groups that reported spending the most money on communication costs during 

1979-80. Table VIII lists the 15 candidates for or 

against whom the most partisan communication 

costs were reported. 

Table VII 

Groups Reporting Highest Partisan 

Communication Costs 

Total 

Communication 

Organization Costs 

National Rifle Association $ 803,538 

American Federation of State, County & 

Municipal Employees 532,538 

AFL-CIO 441,064 

UAW 402,280 

United Steelworkers of America 209,512 

National Education Association 183,636 

Chamber of Commerce of the U.S. 158,650 

Ohio AFL-CIO 149,439 

Communication Workers of America 91,475 

International Union of Bricklayers & Allied 

Craftsmen 85,555 

Sources: 1979-80 FEC Index of Communication Costs and 

FEC press release of October 9, 1981 . 

4Sources: 1979-80 FEC Index of Communication Costs 

and FEC press release of October 5, 1981. 
15 

Table VIII 

Candidates For or Against Whom Highest Communication Costs Were Reported 

Candidate Total 

Communication 

Costs 

Costs 

Advocating 

Election 

Costs 

Advocating 

Defeat 

Presidential 

Jimmy Carter!Dl 

Edward Kennedy!Dl 

Ronald Reagan(R) 

John Anderson(l) 

Edmund Brown(D) 

Senatorial 

$ 1,636,394 

598,577 

318,914 

60,003 

23,284 

$ 1,510,925 

443,077 

64,784 

0 

23,284 

$ 125.469 

155,500 

254,130 

60,003 

0 

Birch Bayh(D-IN) 

John Glenn(D-OH) 

Donald Stewart(D-ALl 

Gaylord Nelson(D-WI) 

Charles Mathias(R-MDl 

$ 44,770 

39,093 

28,256 

27,989 

25,309 

$ 44,292 

38,551 

28,256 

15,094 

25,061 

$ 478 

542 

0 

12.895 

248 

House 

Les Aspin(D-WI) 

Robert Kastenmeier(D-WI) 

Edward Beard(D-Ril 

Frank Thompson(D-NJ) 

Royden DysoniD-MDl 

$ 20,642 

18,485 

16,484 

15,510 

12,323 

$ 20,642 

16,699 

15,804 

15,285 

4,154 

$ 0 

1,786 

680 

225 

8,169 

Sources: 1979-80 FEC Index of Communication Costs and FEC press release of October 9, 1981. 
16 

Final Statistical Studies. In November 1 981 , the 

Commission released a final cumulative report on 

primary activity of major Presidential candidates 

( 1979-80 FEC Report on Financial Activity of Presidential Pre-Nomination Campaigns). Work on 1979-

80 election statistics was to culminate in the release of two more final studies in the Reports on 

Financial Activity series. At year's end, the Commission anticipated release of the reports - one on 

party and nonparty activity and one on House and 

Senate campaigns - and their companion computer tapes early in 1982. 

Facilitating Disclosure 

In addition to releasing statistical data on the 1980 

elections, the Commission initiated several changes 

in 1981 to facilitate public access to campaign information. 

Press Activity. To help the media use the campaign 

finance information available at the Commission, 

and thereby ensure its wider dissemination throughout the country, the Commission issued a series of 

press releases on campaign finances which highlighted significant information. The releases were 

based on Commission reports and indexes issued 

throughout the year - multipaged computer printouts containing detailed information. The Commission's news releases condensed and analyzed the 

data, focusing on summary information that was of 

most interest to the press and anticipating media 

questions about campaign statistics. The statistical 

breakdowns and comparisons in the section above 

were taken from those releases. 

In order to cut distribution costs while continuing 

efforts to attain national disclosure of campaign finance information, the Commission instituted a major change in its mailing policy for press releases. 

Previously, the Commission had accommodated 

anyone who requested to be placed on the mailing 

list. Under the new policy, the Commission limited 

mailings to working press only but added to its media mailing list about 1 50 daily newspapers 

throughout the country - at least one in every 

State. The national coverage, plus the continued 

.,. 

distribution of press releases to Washington-based 

reporters, helped broaden public knowledge of Federal campaign finance activities. • 

Computer Programs. In another attempt to make information more accessible, the Commission rewrote 

and streamlined its standard computer programs. 

The revised programs allowed the user to select 

and sort specific data, pinpointing areas of interest, 

without having to run a lengthy computer printout 

containing pages of unwanted information. Besides 

facilitating access to computer data, the refined 

programs resulted in a savings of paper and computer processing time. 

Computer Tapes. In March 1981, the Commission 

released for public purchase computer tapes containing final information on the campaign finance 

activity of party and nonparty (noncandidate) committees during the 1977-78 election cycle. The 
17 

tapes contained the same information, extracted 

from the Commission's disclosure base, as that 

used to produce the final 1977-78 Reports on Financial Activity series. 

Microfilmed Material. In 1981, the Commission microfilmed all agenda items discussed in open Comtnission meet1ngs from 1975 tflrough 1980 and developed a computerized subject index to help locate 

the documents. The microfilmed ftles and accompanying computer index facilitated both public and 

staff access to Commission agenda items. lndivid­

. uals could research documents independently and 

effi_~iently. Jurther, by archiving old documents on 

mic!ofJim~.. the Commission was able to conserve 

storage space. 

Additionally, the Commission made available for 

"ublic review and purchase a microfilm cartridge of 

:;:al:;-1.::.a.:;ud~it~re;:.tp:;::o:.:.;rt=:::s...:i~ss::.!u:.::e~d~b;:.!e:.:;.tw~ee::::n.!....!1~9:.!.7~5:...:t!~Q~d!....1.:1!!9~8~0!.._._..

Tbe cartridge also contained a comprehensive index 

with cross references to candidates and States 

n!IJ!l.i!.9_in the reports. 

Consolidated Index. In another effort to help the 

public access 'in~ormationt -tl1~. Gqmmi~~.i.<>..!:t_develoP..f~q !l_~ardjndex that consolidated information onC..Q.r:nmi~iQfi.JIJivisory opinions, completed compJI:-" 

an~~--~!l~~~Jmatters under review or MURs) and 

s:ompleted audits. The Commission designed the Index, available in the Public Records Office, to meet 

the increased public demand for records and files 

pertaining to a certain person or organization. 

Access to Public Records. In order to encourage 

. public disclosure of campaign finance records, the 

Commission made a concerted effort in 1981 to 

make the Public Records Office accessible to as 

many persons as possible, including Hispanics and 

the physically handicapped. In this regard, the Commission made available the following: a staff member fluent in Spanish; staff to assist handicapped 

persons in locating, using and copying Commission 

documents; magnifying devices to review printed 

material; and cassettes of campaign finance information. 

Clarifying the Law 

Work in Progress on Regulations 

In 1981 , the Commission pursued work on updating its regulations. Its objective was to revise problem areas in the regulations, to remove burdensome 

requirements and, generally, to make revisions that 

more accurately reflected the realities of political 

committee operations. The Commission believed 

that the suggested changes would be a step toward 

clarification, rather than overregulation. 

Listed below are the major areas of regulatory 

change the Commission worked on during 1981 . 

None of the regulations were submitted for Congressional approval because, at the year's end, the 

Commission had not voted on final proposed revisions. 

...,;;Corporate/Labor Communications (Sections 114. 3 

~nd 114.4). The impetus for the proposed changes 

tn the area of nonpartisan public communications 

by corporations and labor organizations stemmed 

from a 1980 advisory opinion (AO 1980-20). In 

that opinion, the Commission approved a proposal 

by Rexnord, Inc. to pay for a voter registration ad in 

a general circulation newspaper. Rexnord's name 

was included in the ad. The Commissioners, upon 

approving the opinion, directed the General Counsel's office to draft new regulations permitting such 

corporate/labor communications, with appropriate 

restrictions to ensure that the activity was nonparti-

. san and aimed at the general public, rather than a 

specific group. 

A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, published in 

the Federal Register, 5 also listed other possible revisions involving nonpartisan corporate/labor communications to the general public. It included, for 

example, revisions that would permit corporations 

and labor organizations to prepare and distribute 

voting records of Members of Congress and voter 

guides that set forth the positions of candidates on 

5See 46 Fed. Reg. 44964 and 45784, September 8 and 

16, 1 9 81 , respectively. 
18 

various issues. On October 26, the Commission 

held a public hearing on the proposed revisions, at 

which nine witnesses presented testimony. 

Collecting Agents/Joint Fundraising (Sections 

102.6 .and 102.7}. On September 30, 1981, the 

Commission published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (46 Fed. Reg. 48074), suggesting revisions 

to Section 102.6 and proposing a new Section 

102.7. The rulemaking notice sought to establish 

procedures for collecting agents and for joint fundraising, amplifying guidelines that had been previously set out in several advisory opinions. (Collecting agents, under the proposed rules, are 

organizations that receive and transmit contributions to separate segregated funds. Joint fundraising, under the proposed rules, refers to electionrelated fundraising conducted by two or more 

candidates, independent multicandidate committees 

and party committees.) 

Independent Expenditures. On December 9, 1981, 

the Commission published a Notice seeking public 

comment on a rulemaking petition (46 Fed. Reg. 

60273) submitted by the Committee for American 

Principles. The Committee asked that the definition 

of independent expenditure be revised so that it 

would not include an expenditure made in opposition to a candidate when the person making the expenditure had contact with the campaign of the targeted candidate's opponent. 

Other Areas of Change. The Commission also 

drafted preliminary changes to regulations on 

recordkeeping, reporting, advertising and candidate 

use of property jointly owned with a spouse. At the 

end of 1981 , the Commission anticipated publishing rulemaking notices in these areas in 1982. 

Advisory Opinions 

The Commission issued 51 advisory opinions. in 

1981 in its continuing effort to clarify the law. Advisory opinions are issued to persons who raise 

questions about the application of the law or Commission regulations to a specific transaction that 

the requesting person proposes to undertake or 

continue. Any person who requests an advisory 

opinion and acts in accordance with the opinion is 

not subject to any sanctions under the law. An advisory opinion may also be relied upon by any person involved in a specific transaction " ... indistinguishable in all its material aspects .. .from the 

activity or transaction discussed in the advisory 

opinion." 2 U.S.C. Section 437f(c). ' 

Many of the 1981 opinions dealt with the use of 

excess campaign funds, a typical issue in a nonelection year, and with questions relating to 

corporate/labor activity, which have historically 

predominated in a nonelection year. Briefly described below are several 1 981 advisory opinions 

selected 1

lor summary because they clarified areas 

never before addressed in advisory opinions or because they presented a new approach to previously 

considered.. issues. 

Reapportionment Committee. In AO 1981-35, the 

Commission determined that a committee formed to 

influence reapportionment decisions made by a 

State legislature did not fall within the purview of 

the Federal election laY(. The Commission reasoned 

that the reapportionment process was a constitutionally mandated State activity separate and distinct from the election process by which individuals 

are selected for Federal office. 

Corporate/Labor Purchases for Public Affairs Program. AO 1981-37 dealt with whether corporations and labor organizations could purchase tickets 

and advertisements in connection with a public affairs broadcast series moderated by a Congressman 

and produced by a corporation. The Commission 

decided that the corporate/labor expenditures were 

not prohibited under the election law since the major purpose of the program was not to influence the 

Congressman's election. The opinion superseded 

previous advisory opinions, 6 which held that 

6AOs 1975-8, 1975-13, 1975-~0 and 1975-108. 
19 

0~ 11GNW 

speeches made by a candidate before a substantial 

number of his/her constituency would be considered an activity advancing his/her candidacy. (The 

public affairs program was broadcast in a city partially situated within the Congressman's district.) 

The opinion also qualified AO 1977-31, which held 

that a corporation's employment of a candidate as 

an announcer constituted a prohibited contribution 

to his campaign. 

Investments Containing Prohibited Funds. The Commission considered two advisory opinion requests 

that asked whether contributions to a separate segregated fund7 could be jointly invested with funds 

not permissible under election law. In AO 1981-20, 

the Commission decided that a Federal separate 

segregated fund (containing permissible contributions) and a related State separate segregated fund 

(containing corporate and other prohibited contributions) could not jointly invest their funds in a single 

treasury bill. The Commission concluded that the 

joint investment would have resulted in a prohibited 

contribution from the State fund to the Federal fund 

because the State fund would have been conferring 

a financial benefit on the Federal fund. The Federal 

fund, on its own, could not have met the treasury 

bill's minimum purchase price. 

In AO 1981-19, however, the Commission permitted a separate segregated fund to invest in. a 

money market fund using its own political account 

(containing permissible contributions) and its administrative account (containing prohibited corporate 

treasury funds). The decision was based on the fact 

that any financial benefits resulting from the joint 

investment would be conferred on the administrative account and not on the political account, since 

the latter already had sufficient funds to make the 

investment on its own, while the administrative account could only meet the minimum purchase requirement by adding its funds to those of the political account. The opinion was conditioned on the 

separate segregated fund's following procedures 

that IJVOUid avoid any commingling of the two accounts when the investment was withdrawn. 

Unions' Payment for Payroll Deduction Plan. In AO 

1981-39, the Commission considered an arrangement whereby labor unions would reimburse a corporation for the administrative costs of operating a 

payroll deduction plan for the unions' separate segregated funds. {Under the election law, when collecting contributions to their separate segregated 

funds, unions with members employed in a corporation may use whatever solicitation plan the corporation uses. They must, however, reimburse the corporation for the use of the plan.) The Commission 

allowed the unions and corporation to reflect, in a 

collective bargaining agreement, the estimated 

costs of administering the unions' payroll deduction 

plans. 

Testing-the-Waters Activities. In AO 1981- 32, the 

Commission concluded that 14 activities proposed 

by former Florida Governor Reubin Askew could be 

excepted, at least for the present, from the definition of "contribution" or "expenditure" under 

Commission regulations and could be financed as 

testing-the-wa.ters activities. The proposed activities, which ranged from employing political consultants and pollsters to speaking to groups on public 

issues, would constitute testing-the-waters activities as long as they did not entail public political ad7Separate segregated funds are political committees established and sponsored by corporations, labor organizations 

and incorporated membership organizations. 
20 

vertising or represent the establishment of a campaign organization. However, if circumstances 

indicated that Governor Askew had moved beyond 

the process of deciding whether or not to become a 

candidate and into the process of planning his campaign, he would become a candidate. Under those 

circumstances, the proposed activities would constitute expenditures under the election law, rather 

than testing-the-waters activities. 

Corporate Distribution of Position Paper. In response to a request by the Chamber of Commerce 

(a nonprofit corporation), the Commission decided 

in AO 1980-128 (issued in 1981 l that the organization could prepare a position paper on issues and 

distribute it to "pro-business" Congressional candidates without making a prohibited corporate contribution. The paper, which presented the Chamber's 

recommendations on how to remedy inflation, did 

not call for the election or defeat of candidates and 

did not constitute a contribution ("thing of value") 

to the candidates because it was not primarily designed for use in their campaigns. 

Donations by Savings and Loan Association. In AO 

1981-33, the Commission determined that a Federal savings and loan association's donations of table favors and raffle prizes to local political clubs 

would result in prohibited in-kind contributions. The 

association's proposed payments for ads in the 

clubs' journals were also rejected by the Commission on the same grounds. Although the donations 

and payments were to have been used primarily for 

local, rather than Federal, political activity, the 

transactions would still have been impermissible because the election law specifically prohibits a Federally chartered corporation (such as the savings and 

loan association) from making contributions in connection with any election ~·local, State or Federal. 

Exchange of Mailing Lists. The Commission approved a candidate committee's proposed exchange 

of contributor lists of corresponding value with 

other political committees, individuals, organizations and corporations. In AO 1981-46, the Commission decided the exchange of names of equal 

value would not result in a contribution to the candidate committee; nor would the value of the 

names be considered a contribution or have to be 

reported. 

Legislative Fund Transferred to a Separate SegregCJted Fund. The National Association of Retired 

Federal Employees (NARFEI requested an opinion 

on the proposed transfer of funds from its AntiMerger Fund (a legislative fund established to oppose the merger of the social security and Federal 

retirement systems) to NARFE's separate segregated fund. In its response to NARFE's request, AO 

1981-34, the Commission said NARFE could 

transfer the funds because the Anti-Merger Fund 

had never been commingled with NARFE's general 

treasury funds (which are prohibited for use in Federal elections) and because the persons who contributed to the Fund were members of NARFE, eligible to be solicited for contributions to a separate 

segregated fund. However, the Commission asked 

NARFE first to remedy the deficient notice it had 

used when it originally solicited contributions to the 

Anti-Merger Fund by adhering to specific guidelines 

set out in the opinion. The original solicition had 

failed to provide notice that funds would be used 

for "political purposes" (i.e., for support of Federal 

candidates), as required by law. 

Toil Free Line and Publications 

In addition to continuing its toll free information 

line, the Commission provided additional clarification of the law by publishing a Campaign Guide for 

Party Committees. The Party Guide explained the 

election law's requirements as they applied to State 

and local party committees. The new guide marked 

a departure in the Commission's Campaign Guide 

series because it included an appendix on how to fill 

out forms. Sample forms were completed and cross 

referenced to explanations in the text. During 

1981, the Commission prepared for 1982 publication a Campaign Guide for Corporations and Labor 

Organizations, which also included a section on the 

preparation of forms. 
21 

Monitoring the law 

Reports Review Procedures 

In 1981, the Commission completed the first year 

of operation under new reports review procedures. 

Recognizing the impossibility of reviewing all reports filed, the Commission nevertheless had 

wanted to increase the number of reports it reviewed. To this end, the Commission es~ablished 

specific criteria for screening political committees' 

reports. The new procedures enabled the Commission to review at least 95 percent of all reports 

filed, in contrast to past years, when the Commission checked only 40 percent of reports. 

Termination Procedures 

In August of 1981 , the Commission approved new 

guidelines for administrative termination of political 

committees. Under the new guidelines, the Commission would conduct a review of all registered 

committees each nonelection year to determine 

their eligibility for administrative termination by the 

Commission. The Commission would terminate 

those committees whose previous financial activity 

was minimal. After receiving an administrative termination notice from the Commission, committees 

would have 30 days to object to being terminated. 

The Commission began applying the guidelines in 

1981 and, by the end of the year, had sent out 

approximately 720 administrative termination notices to committees. 

The Commission expected a substantial savings 

as a result of these new procedures. Administrative 

terminations would eliminate the cost of sending 

nonfiler mailgrams to committees with minimal financial activity that had failed to file reports. Moreover, the termination of inactive committees would 

reduce staff time and resources spent on distributing informational materials and on coding, entering 

and reviewing data filed by those committees. 

Audits 

During 1981 , the Commission implemented new 

audit selection criteria, which had been developed 

in 1980 in response to the 1979 amendments to 

the election law. These amendments had required 

the Commission to prepare new procedures for determining which committees should be audited in 

order to ensure substantial compliance with. the 

law. Application of the new audit selection policy 

resulted in the Commission's approval of only 25 

audits of unauthorized committees; no authorized 

committees were approved for audit. 

The Commission also implemented new procedures for processing final audit reports of nonPresidential committees. Previously, all audit re· 

ports had to be reviewed by the Office of General 

Counsel before being referred to the Commissioners 

for approval. Under the new, more efficient procedures, the Audit Division transmitted reports with 

no unresolved legal questions directly to the Commissioners - cutting the processing time by several 

weeks. 

During 1 981 , the Commission increasingly made 

use of audit resources in its investigation of complaints. Because of their specialized knowledge and 

experience, auditors could assit in the verification 

of committee accounting and bookkeeping records. 
22 

Enforcing the Law 

Processing Complaints 

During 1980, the Commission had devoted substantial time to processing compliance matters affecting campaigns involved in the 1980 elections. 

In 1981 , when resources were freed from expedititlg election-related complaints, the Commission 

concentrated on clearing up a backlog of cases that 

had accumulated. As a result, the Commission resolved a large number of compliance cases (called 

matters under review or MURs) in 1981 . 

In addition, the Commission adopted new procedures that permitted the General Counsel to grant 

or deny requests for extending deadlines in enforcement proceedings. Previously, the Commissioners 

had approved all such requests, a time-consuming 

process. 

To expedite internal research on compliance 

cases and thus reduce costs, the Commission developed the first phase of a computerized indexing 

system for extracting information on closed MURs. 

By permitting FEC staff to quickly locate previous 

MURs dealing with similar violations, the MUR index not only cut research time but also ensured 

consistent legal analysis in MUR decisions. Moving 

into the second phase of this project in September 

1 981 , the Commission contracted for a more detailed MUR index, expanded to include more information under a larger number of topic headings. 

The contract covered only the backlog of MURs; 

once completed, however, Commission staff would 

continue to update the index as cases closed. The 

Commission planned to make the more detailed index available to the public as well as to FEC staff. 

Summary of Litigation 

Three Supreme Court cases distinguished the Coma;W?sjon's 1981 litigation from previous years. The 

suits were the first cases the Commission argued 

before the Supreme Court since the landmark 1976 

case, Buckley v. Valeo. The year's litigation was 

also marked by a number of cases concerning the 

election law's restrictions on corporate/labor activity. Major cases are summarized below. (See Chapter 1 for a summary of the Supreme Court's decision in FEC v. Americans for Change.) 

Challenges to Commission's Dismissal of Complaints. During 1981, the courts upheld the Commission's action in dismissing four complaints. The 

suits helped clarify the standard of review for Commission dismissal of compliance actions under Section 437g(a)(8) of the election law. 

The Supreme Court upheld the Commission's dismissal of a complaint in the consolidated cases, 

FEC v. Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee 

(DSCCJ and National Republican Sentorial Committee (NRSCJ v. DSCC. In its complaint, DSCC had 

challenged as unlawful the spending arrangements 

set up by NRSC and certain State Republican Party 

committees. The State committees had, in written 

agreements, transferred to NRSC their spending authority for "special" coordinated party expenditures 

(2 U.S.C. Section 441 a(d)(3)) on behalf of 1978 

Senate candidates. In dismissing the complaint, the 

Commission maintained that Congress bad not intended to prohibit the type of intraparty arrange-
23 

ments used by the Republican Party committees. 

On November 10, 1981, the Supreme Court affirmed the Commission's interpretation, judging 

that it was reasonable and consistent with a provision in the law that authorizes unlimited transfers of 

funds among committees of the same party. Moreover, the Court accepted the Commission's use of 

the General Counsel's report as the basis for its decision in the complaint. 

In two 1 981 cases, praintiffs argued that the 

Commission acted contrary to law in dismissing 

complaints alleging that separate segregated funds 

had used coercion when soliciting contributions. Archie Brown v. FEC concerned a complaint alleging 

that Mr. Brown's local union had attempted to coerce him to contribute to the union's separate segregated fund by denying him membership because 

he refused to contribute. The district court upheld 

the Commission's conclusion that there was no evidence of coercion but there was clear evidence that 

the union had denied Mr. Brown membership because his union dues were unpaid. In appealing the 

district court decision, Mr. Brown contended that 

the General Counsel's report on his complaint, presented to the Commission, afforded "an inadequate 

basis for informed judicial review." On November 

2 7, 1981, the appeals court affirmed the lower 

court decision in an unpublished memorandum stating that the General Counsel's report constituted 

sufficient grounds to dismiss a complaint and upholding the Commission's action in the matter. 

In International Association of Machinists and 

Aerospace Workers (lAM) v. FEC, plaintiffs had 

filed a complaint alleging that 11 corporations had 

systematically violated 2 U.S.C. Section 

441 b(b)(3)8 by soliciting contributions to their separate segregated funds from "unprotected" administrative personnel under "inherently coercive conditions." Recognizing the deference to be accorded 

to the Commission's determination, the distri.ct 

court affirmed the Commission's dismissal of the 

complaint on December 16, 1980. The court concluded that the challenged solicitation practices 

were not prohibited under election law and that the 

complaint presented no direct evidence of wrongdoing. In October 1981, the court of appeals en 

bane unanimously upheld the Commission's dismissal of the complaint. 

A second part of the case concerned lAM's motion to certify constitutional challenges to Section 

441 b(b)(3) to the appeals court. The district court 

granted the motion in June 1981, and the constitutional questions were subsequently argued before 

the court of appeals en bane. At the end of 1981, 

the court had not yet issued a decision. 

Mr. Richard Kay, claiming the Commission had 

acted contrary to law in dismissing a complaint, 

filed suit in Kay v. FEC. His complaint had alleged 

that a full-page chart published in a newspaper, The 

Plain Dealer, before the 1980 Ohio Presidential primary was a political advertisement by the publishing company and therefore constituted a prohibited 

corporate contribution. The chart carried photographs of three Presidential candidates and summarized their positions on campaign issues. Rejecting 

his complaint, the Commission said the law had not 

been violated because the chart fell under an election law provision that exempts news stories from 

the definitions of contribution and expenditure. On 

April 21, 1981, the district court found that: "The 

Commission's action, based on the General Counsel's recommendation ... was plainly consistent with 

the law." In December 1981, the appeals court upheld the lower court decision. 

Enforcement of Commission Orders and Subpoenas. In s~veral cases pursued in 1981, the 

Commission asked the courts to enforce orders and 

subpoenas it had issued in investigations of complaints. Between December 1980 and January 

1981, the Commission filed four separate suits in 

district courts seeking enforcement of its subpoenas to three "draft Kennedy" political committees, which had been active in promoting Senator 

8Under this provision of the election law, solicitations are 

considered noncoercive if they inform solicitees of 1 l the political purpose for which contributions will be used and 21 of their 

right to refuse to contribute without reprisal. 
24 

Edward Kennedy's Presidential candidacy during 

1979, and to the Machinists Non-Partisan Political 

League (MI\JPLl, a separate segregated fund that 

had supported the formation of "draft Kennedy" 

groups in 1979. The suits resulted from the groups' 

failure to comply with subpoenas issued by the 

Commission as part of an investigation. 

The Commission had received a complaint alleging that nine political committees were affiliated 

and therefore subject to a single $5,000 limit on 

the contributions they accepted from a multicandidate committee. The complaint further alleged that 

the draft committees had received, and MNPL had 

given them, contributions in excess of the $5,000 

limit. After finding reason to believe the draft committees and MNPL had violated the election law, the 

Commission issued subpoenas to the groups, as 

part of its investigation of the draft committees' alleged affiliation. 

Continued refusual by the four defendants to 

comply with the subpoenas prompted the Commission to seek enforcement in the district courts. 

Judging that the subpoenas met judicial guidelines 

for enforceability and were within the agency's authority, the district courts ordered their enforcement. One of the defendant draft committees complied with a Wisconsin district court enforcement 

order. The second draft committee, appealing a 

Florida district court's order, had not complied with 

the Commission's subpoena at the end of 1981 because the appeals court had granted the committee's application for a stay of the enforcement order. 

The situation was different in the case of the 

third draft committee, Citizens for Democratic Alternatives in 1980, and MI\IPL, the separate segregated fund of the International Association of Machinists. The D.C. district and appeals courts denied 

the stay applications requested by the two groups; 

the Supreme Court also denied a further application 

made by MNPL. The appellants then produced all 

documents requested by the Commission. 

However, after hearing the cases, FEC v. Citizens 

for Democratic Alternatives and FEC v. MNPL, the 

D.C. appeals court issued its opinions on May 19, 

1981 . Finding that the Commission ''lacked subject 

matter jurisdiction over the draft activities,'' the appeals court vacated the district court's orders enforcing the subpoenas. The appeals court limited its 

decision to the provisions of the election law prior 

to the 1979 amendments and stated that the contribution limits did not apply to the groups whose 

activities did not support an existing "candidate." 

The court did note, however, that the 1979 amendments appeared to require that "draft committees" 

comply with the law's reporting requirements. 

In its decision, the appeals court departed from 

the standard for judicial review of agency subpoenas and established a new "extra-careful scrutiny" standard for enforcement of Commission subpoenas. The court reasoned that such a standard 

was warranted since "the activities which the FEC 

normally investigates differ in terms of their constitutional significance" from those of concern to 

other Federal agencies. On June 9, 1981, the Commission decided to seek review of the appeals 

court's decisions by petitioning the Supreme Court 

for a writ of certiorari. The Court declined to hear 

the case on October 13, 1981. 

In another subpoena enforcement case, the Supreme Court, on July 2, 1981, dismissed an appeal 

brought by T. Bertram Lance in the case FEC v. 

Lance. An appeals court had affirmed an earlier district court decision, which had ordered the enforcement of a subpoena issued to Mr. Lance in the 

course of a Commission investigation into Mr. 

Lance's 1974 gubernatorial campaign. The district 

court reasoned that the subpoena was well within 

the Commission's "broad and inclusive" statutory 

authority to investigate violations. The Commission, 

in its investigation, was trying to determine 

whether Mr. Lance had received bank loans outside 

the ordinary course of business, in violation of the 

law's prohibition on contributions from national 

banks in connection with an election to any political 

office (2 U.S.C. Section 441 b). 

Affirming the lower court's enforcement of the. 

supboena, the appeals court rejected Mr. Lance's 

claim that the Commission was barred from dealing 

with campaign activities that occurred before the 
25 

enactment of the Federal Election Campaign Act in 

1975. The court upheld the Commission's argument that the prohibition on bank contributions had 

been in effect since the passage of the Tillman Act 

in 1907. 

Reader's Digest Association, Inc. (RDA) filed suit 

asking a district court to bar the Commission's investigation of a complaint alleging that the publisher's distribution of a video tape to major news 

outlets constituted a prohibited corporate contribution. The tape provided a computer reenactment of 

Senator Edward Kennedy's automobile accident at 

Chappaquiddick. RDA had produced the tape in 

connection with an article on the accident appearing in The Reader's Digest. The Commission had 

asked RDA to answer several questions concerning 

the video tapes and the uses RDA had made of 

them. In the suit, Rl)A v. FEC, RDA asserted that 

the video tapes fell within the news story exemption and were beyond the scope of Commission regulation. The district court, on March 19, 1981, approved the Commission's investigation, stating that 

the Commission was lawfully authorized to pursue 

its investigation "for the limited purpose of determining whether the press exemption is applicable." 

The court noted that the Commission had limited 

the scope of its investigation to the distribution of 

the tapes, thereby suggesting to the court that the 

Commission viewed the publication of the article as 

protected by the exemption. 

In a similar suit, Phillips Publishing, Inc. v. FEC, 

Phillips sought to bar an investigation of a publication, The Pink Sheet on the Left. The Commission 

had issued subpoenas to staff of the company as 

part of an investigation into a complaint alleging 

that the company had distributed a promotional 

mailing for The Pink Sheet advocating the defeat of 

Senator Kennedy. The complainant believed this 

was a prohibited corporate expenditure. On July 

16, 1981, the district court denied the Commission's petition for enforcement of the subpoenas. 

The court judged the Commission had sufficient information to determine whether the mailing met the 

criteria for the news story exemption. 

Challenge to Contribution Limits. The Supreme 

Court, on June 26, 1981, upheld the constitutionality of the $5,000 limit placed on contributions to 

a political committee. That election law provision, 

Section 441 a(a)( 1)(C), was challenged in California 

Medical Association (CMA) v. FEC, in which CMA 

claimed that the contribution limit infringed on its 

First Amendment right~. The Court decided that the 

provision did not violate CMA's rights because it 

was an appropriate means by which Congress equid 

seek to protect the integrity of the contribution restrictions upheld in Buckley v. Valeo. CMA also 

claimed that the provision violated its Fifth Amendment right to equal protection by allowing corporations and labor organizations to give unlimited support to their separate segregated funds (by paying 

for establishment, administration and solicitation 

expenses), while limiting to $5,000 a year the contributions an unincorporated association, like CMA, 

could make to the committee it established. Noting 
26 

that the election law placed fewer restrictions on an 

unincorporated association than on a corporation, 

the Court stated that the differing restrictions reflected Congressional judgment that the entities 

"require different forms of regulation in order to 

protect the integrity of the political process." 

Solicitations by Trade Associations. A case argued 

before the Supreme Court on January 19, 1982, 

Bread PAC v. FEC, concerned the constitutionality 

of election law restrictions on solicitations by incorporated trade associations. The plaintiffs two 

trade associations and their separate segregated 

funds - appealed to the Supreme Court to hear the 

case after an en bane appeals court panel upheld 

the restriction. Plaintiffs had claimed that the provision infringed on their First Amendment rights by 

requiring them to obtain prior approval of a member 

corporation to solicit the corporation's stockholders 

and personnel. The appeals court, however, found 

that the provision adequately balanced First Amendment freedoms against the compelling government 

interest in preventing corruption or the appearance 

of corruption in Federal elections. 

Rejecting plaintiffs' claim that the provision discriminated against trade associations, the appeals 

court noted that incorporated trade associations are 

granted more avenues for solicitation than are other 

corporations. Plaintiffs also unsuccessfully argued 

that the law's failure to define "solicitation" and 

"trade association" abridged their First and Fifth 

Amendment rights. The court ruled that the term 

"solicitation" had a widely accepted meaning, uniformly upheld in rules and statutes using the term. 

Similarly, the court found that the Commission had 

adhered to the "plain and ordinary meaning of trade 

association" as defined by Commission regulations. 

On March 8, 1982, the Supreme Court reversed 

and remanded the case to the district court on procedural grounds, holding that plaintiffs were not entitled to invoke the expedited procedures of 2 

U.S.C. Section 437h. Thus, because the Court determined that plaintiffs were not eligible to bring 

suit under this provision, the Court did not reach 

the merits of the case. There may be further proceedings on the case in the district court. 

Definition of Member. At issue in two consolidated 

suits !FEC v. NRWC and NRWC v. FECI concerning 

solicitations by incorporated membership organizations was the definition of "member."9 Under 2 

U.S.C. Section 441 (b)(4)(C), an incorporated membership organization may solicit its members but 

not the general public - for contribu~ions to its 

separate segregated fund. 1o The Commission filed 

suit against the National Right to Work Committee 

(NRWC) for violating this provision, claiming that, 

since NRWC's bylaws and articles of incorporation 

stated that it had no members, the organization had 

unlawfully solicited nonmembers. Contending that 

the persons solicited were members, NRWC filed a 

countersuit claiming the solicitation provision was 

unconstitutionally vague and infringed on First 

Amendment rights. 

The district court ruled in the Commission's favor 

and defined "members" as those "persons who 

have interest and rights in an organization similar to 

those of a shareholder in a corporation and a union 

member in a labor organization." The court noted 

that no class of persons solicited by NRWC had 

been given any such participation rights in NRWC. 

On September 4, 1 9 81 , a three-judge panel of 

the appeals court reversed the district court decision, holding that the lower court's definition of 

"member" was "so narrow that it infringes on associational rights." The appeals court ruled that 

NRWC was free to solicit as members anyone who 

9Commission regulations define the term to mean "all persons who are currently satifying the requirements for 

membership.... A person is not considered a member ... if the 

only requirement for membership is a contribution to a separate 

segregated fund." 11 CFR 114.1(e). 

10The election law also allows an incorporated membership 

orgnaization to solicit its executive and administrative personnel 

and their families. 
27 

had responded to a questionnaire and had contributed money to the corporation. On November 13, 

1981, the en bane court denied, in a 5 to 5 vote, 

the Commission's petition to rehear the case; six 

votes would have been required for a rehearing. 

Late in 1 981, the Commission voted to ask the Supreme Court to hear the case. 

Public Disclosure vs. First Amendment Rights. In 

FEC v. Hall-Tyner Election Campaign Committee, 

the district court ruled that the election law's disclosure and recordkeeping requirements would 

abridge the First Amendment rights of Communist 

Party supporters. The Commission brought suit 

against the Hall-Tyner Committee, the principal 

campaign committee of the 1976 Communist Party 

Presidential nominees, 1 1 because the committee 

had refused to reveal the names and addresses of 

424 contributors, as required by law. Furthermore, 

the committee had failed to keep required recordkeeping information on contributors. 

In its September 2 2, 1981 ruling, the district 

court noted that, although the Supreme Court, in its 

Buckley v. Valeo decision, had not created a blanket disclosure exemption for minor parties, the Supreme Court did conclude that minor parties might 

be able to demonstrate that they should not have to 

comply with disclosure provisions by showing that 

the provisions would have a chilling effect on contributors' rights of free association. 

On examining the evidence presented by the 

committee, the district court found that "the record 

plainly reflects an extensive history of governmental harassment and public hostility directed at the 

Party and its members and supporters." The court 

decided that the infringement of First Amendment 

rights could not justify governmental interests 

serv~d by the law's disclosure and recordkeeping 

requirements. The Commission appealed the decision late in 1981. 

Clearinghouse Activities 

During 1981, the Commission's National Clearinghouse on Election Administration continued to fulfill 

i~s mission by collecting and disseminating informatlo~ on the Federa~ electoral process, by furnishing 

ass1stance to elect1on officials and by publishing the 

results of Clearinghouse research on the administration ?f Federal elections. 12 The Clearinghouse also 

prov1ded data for Commission testimony before 

Congress on the impact of media projections on 

voter turnout. 

Advisory Panel 

In February 1981, the Clearinghouse held the annual meeting of its Advisory Panel. The 22- member panel, composed of State and local election officials, discussed problems encountered in 

administering the 1980 Federal elections. Attention 

focused on snags in the absentee voting process 

and the possible adverse effects of early media projections on voter turnout. The panel also reviewed 

the Clearinghouse workshop program and the possible development and application of standards for 

voting devices used in the United States. 

Workshops 

The Clearinghouse developed a series of singletopic workshops, which were derived from those 

offered at the Regional Conferences on Election Administration conducted in 1979 and 1980. These 

individual workshops, presented in sets of two or 

three, were held in 1 0 States in 1981: Alabama, 

Connecticut (where representatives from the New 

England Town Clerks Association met), Florida, 

Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey, 

Ohio and Pennsylvania. 

Voting Standards Study 

Clearinghouse research activity focused primarily on 

a study to determine the feasibility and cost of developing standards for the various voting devices 

11 1n 1976, Gus Hall and Jarvis Tyner were the Presidential 

and Vice Presidential candidates of the Communist Party, 

U.S.A. 12Appendix 9 describes Clearinghouse publications. 
28 

used in the United States - a study mandated by 

Congress in 1979. In cooperation with the National 

Bureau of Standards (NBS), the Clearinghouse discussed a workplan for the study with its Advisory 

Panel. This was followed by a meeting with State 

and local election officials in order to define the major problem areas and priorities among equipment 

types and components. Finally, the Clearinghouse 

and NBS staff visted four of the major equipment 

vendors and two State election offices that had 

made attempts to develop their own equipment approval standards. The study was expected to continue through 1982. 
29 Chapter 3 

Legislation 

This chapter describes Commission activity concerning proposed changes to the Federal Election 

Campaign Act and summarizes one change enacted 

in 1981, the repeal of the honoraria limit. In a separate report, the Commission will submit its annual 

legislative recommendations to the President and 

Congress. 

Draft Committees 

On August 28, 1981, the Commission sent a letter 

to Congress recommending immediate h:igislative 

action on amendments to the election law that 

would clarify the Federal Election Campaign Act's 

coverage of the activities of ''draft'' committees organized to support or influence the nomination of 

undeclared Federal candidates. The proposed 

amendments were prompted by a decision of the 

appeals court (District of Columbia) in FEC v. Machinists Non-Partisan Political League and FEC v. 

Citizens for Democratic Alternatives in 1980. The 

appeals court held that the Act, as amended in 

1979, regulated only the reporting requirements of 

draft committees. See Chapter 2 for a summary of 

this case. · 

Noting that the appeals court ruling would allow 

"any group organized to gain grass roots support 

for an undeclared candidate"to operate "completely outside the strictures of the Federal Election 

Campaign Act," the Commission recommended 

that: 

• The definitions of "contribution" and "expenditure" be modified to include funds contributed or spent "for the purpose of influencing a clearly identified individual rather than 

candidate to seek nomination for election or 

election to Federal office.... " Sections 

431 (8)(A)(i) and (9)(A)(i). 

• Corporate and labor organizations be specifically restricted from supporting undeclared 

candidates. Section 441 b(b). 

• The statute specifically state that contributions to draft committees are subject to the 

$1 ,000 contribution limit. Section 441 a(a)( 1). 
30 

The Commission also filed a petition for a writ of 

certiorari with the Supreme Court seeking reversal 

of the appeals court decision. That request was denied in October 1981. 

Commission Testimony 

On November 20, 1981, Chairman John Warren 

McGarry testified before the Senate Committee on 

Rules and Administration on proposals to amend 

the Federal Election Campaign Act. He was accompanied by Commissioner Joan D. Aikens. In his testimony, Chairman McGarry said that IIdisclosure 

and other campaign finance requirements would be 

of little value if not meaningfully enforced. Absence 

of effective enforcement was the one reason why 

prior disclosure laws were largely" ignored.'' Chairman McGarry added that, as a result of the FEC's 

administration of the law, "the details of political 

campaigns have been disclosed to the public to a 

greater extent than ever before." 

The Chairman noted that a number of legislative 

changes included in S. 1851 and S. 1899, introduced respectively by Senator Charles Mathias (RMD), Committee Chairman, and by Senator Arlen 

Specter (R-PA), had been suggested by the Commission in previous annual reports. Chairman 

McGarry pointed out, however, that while the Commission has and will continue to recommend 

changes in the law, it is "bound to enforce the law 

as it is written" until legislative changes are made. 

Repeal of Honoraria Limit 

On October 1, 1981, Congress modified the Federal election law by repealing Section 441 i(a)(2), a 

provision that had placed an overall $25,000 annual limit on honoraria that a Federal officeholder or 

employee could accept for speeches, appearances 

and articles (Pub. L. 97- 51). The $2,000 limit on 

individual honorarium payments, however, continued to apply. The repeal originated as an amendment to House Joint Resolution 325, an interim 

funding measure that provided continuing appropriations into fiscal year 1982 for Federal programs 

without permanent funding. 
31 Chapter 4 

The Commission 

0 

Commissioners1 

Commissioner John Warren McGarry served as 

Commission Chairman in 1 981 and Commisioner 

Frank P. Reiche was Vice Chairman. Both were 

elected in 1980 and served one-year terms as officers. 

The election of new officers for 1982, scheduled 

for December 17, 1981 , was delayed because, 

that same day, President Reagan named three Commissioners to serve recess appointments. (Congress 

was in recess at the time of the appointments.) The 

Commission postponed the election of officers until 

January 1982, after the new Commissioners had 

been sworn in. 

Commissioner Joan D. Aikens, whose term expired in 1981 , was reappointed to serve the re· 

maining two years of former Commissioner Max L. 

1Biographical sketches of the Commissioners appear in 

Appendix 1. 
32 

Friedersdorf's term. (Mr. Friedersdorf, who resigned 

in December 1980, was succeeded by former Commissioner Vernon W. Thomson. Named in a recess 

appointment by President Carter, Mr. Thomson held 

Mr. Friedersdorf's seat for one year.) President 

Reagan also nominated Lee Ann Elliott, a Republican, and Danny Lee McDonald, a Democrat, to 

serve six-year terms as Commissioners. 

Reorganization 

Under the direction of a new Staff Director, appointed in August 1980, the Commission underwent a partial reorganization. It placed all its internal service functions under the Deputy Staff 

Director for Management, a newly created position. 

Previously, Administration, Data Systems Development, and Planning and Management had reported 

separately to the Staff Director. The changes allowed the Deputy Staff Director to oversee and coordinate these related operations. 

As part of the reorganization, early in 1981 the 

Commission appointed a Director of Personnel and 

Labor Relations, reporting directly to the Staff Director. Previously, the Personnel Office had operated· under the Administration Division. The new 

structure facilitated more efficient decisionmaking 

in these two program areas, for which the Staff Director is directly responsible to the Commission. 

Finally, the Commission redefined the Congressional liaison function, previously handled by the 

General Counsel's Office, and appointed a Director 

of Congressional, Legislative and Intergovernmental 

Affairs. By strengthening the position, the Commission hoped to maintain a more effective relationship 

with Congress and Executive Branch agencies. The 

Commission placed the new position directly under 

the Staff Director. 

The Commission's Budget 

Fiscal Year 1981 2 

The Commission never received a permanent appropriation for fiscal year 1981 but operated throughout the year under a continuing resolution of 

$9.283 million. At the end of the fiscal year, the 

Commission received a supplemental appropriation 

of $379,000 to cover the October 1980 pay raise. 

That brought the Commission's total fiscal year 

funding to $9.662 million. Because of the funding 

uncertainties, in February 1981 the Commission 

adopted a management plan for the fiscal year of 

$9,410,856. The management plan emphasized 

two priorities: the completion of the Presidential 

public funding program and the implementation of 

program changes stemming from the 1979 amendments to the election law. However, because of 

limited resources, the Commission had to cut back 

some of its programs. For example, it limited data 

entry of detailed information on contributions to 

those contributions of $500 and over (rather than 

over $200). As another example, the Commission 

discontinued its nation-wide program of campaign 

finance seminars. 

By means of a computerized Management Information System (MIS), the Commission evaluated its 

adherence to 1981 management plan targets. At 

the end of the fiscal year, total program costs ran 1 

percent under originally anticipated costs, with staff 

costs running 4 percent under the plan and other 

direct costs exceeding the plan by 5 percent. The 

Commission purposely kept its staff costs low by 

maintaining a partial hiring freeze even after the 

President's freeze was lifted in April 1981. 

At the same time, throughout the agency, efforts 

were made to conserve resources and increase productivity. For example, fewer staff resources were 

used to enter detailed information from more reports (Pass Ill entry) than in previous years, with 

the result that productivity increased by 22 per2See also Appendix 5. 
33 

cent. The improved efficiency resulted, in part, from 

more effective procedures for recording each clerk's 

hourly and daily entry rates and error rates. Also 

contributing to reduced data entry costs was the 

transfer of the data entry function from the Reports 

Analysis Division to the Data Systems Development 

Division in fiscal year 1981. Reports analysts no 

longer helped in the initial entry of data, leaving the 

function to data entry personnel and permitting the 

analysts to concentrate on review of reports. 

This change also contributed to higher productivity (up by 68 percent) in the reports review program. Other factors at work were internal management improvements, new review procedures and 

the adoption of audit selection criteria mandated by 

the 1979 amendments to the law (and described 

on page 30 of the 1980 Annual Report). 

As an other example of improved efficiency, the 

Commission processed more defensive litigation 

than planned - 18 suits in contrast to the anticipated 14 while simultaneously decreasing staff 

resources by 14 percent in this area. Several of the 

cases had been ongoing for two or three years, 

which partly accounted for the lower costs since research and arguments for briefs had been developed in previous fiscal years. Equally important, 

however, a more seasoned legal staff processed 

cases more efficiently. 

Anticipating further budget cuts in fiscal year 

1982, the Commission continued to look for new 

ways to reduce costs. For example, it purchased a 

machine to make paper copies from microfilm because the original vendor stopped providing the 

service and alternative contractors were substantially more expensive. The Commission estimated 

that the new machine would save thousands of dollars in fiscal year 1 982, its first full year of operation. 

Fiscal Year 1982 

During April 1 981, the Commission testified on the 

fiscal year 1982 budget request before the Senate 

Appropriations Committee, the Senate Committee 

on Rules and Administration, the House Committee 

on Administration and the House Appropriations 

Committee. Commission Chairman John Warren 

McGarry requested an $11 . 1 million appropriation, 

advising the committees that there were many cost 

increases over which the Commission had no control. He stated, "Our rent has increased by over 50 

percent, our copying and microfilm costs have risen 

substantially and our employees receive pay raises 

each October. The Commission can do nothing to 

avoid or reduce these cost increases." 

Vice Chairman Frank P. Reiche, as Chairman of 

the Commission's Budget Task Force, testified that 

during the past two fiscal years the Commission 

had been forced to cut basic programs in order to 

pay for unexpected increases in the cost of supplies 

and Congressionally mandated expenditures. 

Merit Pay Program 

In 1981, the Commission instituted a. merit pay 

program, as required by the Civil Service Reform 

Act of 1978. The program allowed the Commission 

to acknowledge the efforts of senior management 

staff who performed beyond normally expected 

standards of efficiency and productivity. Approximately 33 Commission supervisors and management officials received merit pay raises commensurate with their individual performances, rather than 

receiving the standard government within-grade increases. To implement the program, the Commission developed performance standards for each 

merit pay position, which described critical job elements and established competency levels. Participating employees received an evaluation of their 

service based on the standards. The results of the 

appraisal directly determined the amount of the participants' pay raises. While last-minute, 

government-wide changes required by the Office of 

Personnel Management reduced the amount of the 

merit pay pool, the Commission met its statutory 

requirements for the year by effecting all merit pay 

increases by the end of 1981, retroactive to the 

first pay period after October 1 . 
34 

Labor/Management Relations 

The Commission's first collective bargaining agreement negotiated with Chapter 204 of the National 

Treasury Employees Union came up for renewal in 

June 1981 . As a result, the Commission spent 

most of the first half of the year preparing to renegotiate the original contract. After an exchange of 

proposals in May, negotiating teams for both parties began actual bargaining on June 8, 1981. Af-

: ter some six months of bargaining, the parties 

:reached tentative agreement on a majority of issues 

and, at the close of 1981, were arranging for thirdparty mediation assistance to resolve the remaining 

contract articles. 
35 Appendix 1 

Biographical Data on 

Commissioners and 

Statutory Officers 

Commissioners 

John Warren McGarry, Chairman 

April 30, 19831 

Mr. McGarry, a native of Massachusetts, graduated 

cum laude from Holy Cross College in 1952. He 

subsequently did graduate work at Boston University and obtained a Juris Doctor degree from 

Georgetown law Center in 1959. From 19 59 

through 1962, Mr. McGarry was assistant attorney 

general of Massachusetts. In that capacity he 

served as both trial counsel and appellate advocate. 

Following his tenure in office, he combined private 

law practice with service as chief counsel for the 

Special Committee to Investigate Campaign Expenditures of the U.S. House of Representatives. 

This committee was created by special resolution 

every election year through 1972 in order to oversee House elections. From 1973 until his appointment to the Commission on October 25, 1978, Mr. 

McGarry served as special counsel on elections to 

the Committee on House Administration of the U.S. 

Congress. 

Frank P. Reiche, Vice Chairman 

April 30, 1985 

Before his appointment to the Commission in July 

1979, Mr. Reiche served as chairman of the first 

New Jersey Election law Enforcement Commission 

for six years. Prior to that, Mr. Reiche served in a 

variety of Republican party positions, including 

eight years as a Republican county committeeman. 

An attorney specializing in tax law, Mr. Reiche 

graduated from Columbia University law School in 

1959 and received a Master of laws degree in taxation from New York University in 1966. Prior to 

that, he received his A.B. from Williams College in 

1951 and a Masters Degree in Foreign Affairs from 

George Washington University in 1959. He also 

served as a member of New Jersey Governor William T. Cahill's blue ribbon Tax Policy Committee 

1Term expiration date. 
36 

from 1970 to 1972. Mr. Reiche was a partner in 

the Princeton law firm of Smith, Stratton, Wise and 

Heher from 1964 until his appointment to the Commission. In January 1982, he was elected as Chairman of the Commission for a one-year term. 

Joan D. Aikens 

April 30, 1983 

Mrs. Aikens served as Commission Chairman between May 1978 and May 1979. She was formerly vice president of Lew Hodges/ 

Communications, a public relations firm located in 

Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. From 1972 until 1974, 

she was president of the Pennsylvania Council of 

Republican Women and served on the board of directors of the National Federation of Republican 

Women. A native of Delaware County, Pennsylvania, Mrs. Aikens has been active in a variety of volunteer organizations. She received her B.A. and 

honorary Doctor of Laws degree from Ursinus College, Collegeville, Pennsylvania. 

Commissioner Aikens' original appointment to the 

Federal Election Commission in 197 5 was for a 

one-year term. She was reappointed for five years 

when the FEC was reconstituted and, when that 

term expired in April 1981, continued to serve until 

receiving a recess appointment from President 

Reagan. On December 1 7, 1981, the President 

named Mrs. Aikens to complete the term of former 

Commissioner Max Friedersdorf, who resigned in 

December 1980. (During 1981, Commissioner 

Vernon Thomson, serving as an interim appointee, 

had held Mr. Friedersdorf's seat.) · 

Thomas E. Harris 

April 30, 1985 

Mr. Harris was Commission Chairman between May 

1977 and May 1978. Before serving on the Commission, he was associate general counsel to the 

AFL-CIO in Washington, D.C., from 1955 to 1975. 

He had held the same position with the CIO from 

1948 until it merged with the AFL in 1955. Prior to 

that, he was an attorney in private practice and 

with various government agencies. A native of Little Rock and a 1932 graduate of the University of 

Arkansas, Mr. Harris is a 1935 graduate of Columbia University Law School, where he was on the 

Law Review and was a Kent Scholar. After graduation, he clerked one year for Supreme Court Justice 

Harlan F. Stone. 

Mr. Harris was originally appointed to the Commission for a four-year term and upon reconstitution 

received a three-year appointment. In 1979, President Carter reappointed him and, on June 19, 

1979, the U.S. Senate reconfirmed Mr. Harris for a 

six-year term. 

Varnon W. Thomson 

Interim Appointment 

A former member of Congress from Wisconsin 

(1961- 75), Mr. Thomson was one of the original 

Commissioners of the FEC, serving between 1975 

and 1979. He was Chairman of the Commission 

between 1976 and 1977. Before his election to 

Congress in 1960, Mr. Thomson served as Governor of Wisconsin (1957-59). He was a member of 

the Wisconsin State Assembly for 16 years, serving 

three consecutive terms as Speaker. In addition, he 

served three terms as attorney general of Wisconsin 

and was elected assistant district attorney of Richland County and city attorney and Mayor of Richland Center. He holds a B.A. from the University of 

Wisconsin and received his law degree from the 

University of Wisconsin Law School. 

Mr. Thomson received an interim appointment 

from President Carter in January 1 981 to fill the 

seat of former Commissioner Max Friedersdorf, 

who resigned in December 1980. Mr. Thomson 

continued to serve as Commissioner until December 

1981, when President Reagan named Mrs. Joan 

Aikens to complete Mr. Friedersdorf's term. 
37 

Robert 0. Tiernan 

April 30, 1981 

Mr. Tiernan was Commission Chairman between 

May 1979 and May 1980. He served as a Democratic Member of Congress from Rhode Island for 

eight years and, prior to that, as a State legislator 

for seven years. He was born in Providence, Rhode 

Island, and graduated form Providence College and 

Catholic University Law School. Mr. Tiernan has 

been admitted to practice in all Federal courts, the 

State of Rhode Island and the District of Columbia. 

He has held various national and State party positions. Originally appointed for two years, he received a five-year term upon reconstitution of the 

Commission. In August 1980, the American Bar 

Association appointed Mr. Tiernan to serve a oneyear term as a member of its advisory commission 

to the Special Committee on Election Law and 

Voter Participation. 

Mr. Tiernan continued to serve as Commissioner 

until December 1981, when President Reagan 

named new Commissioners in recess appointments. 

Lee Ann Elliott 

April 30, 1987 

Before her appointment to the Commission in December 1981, Mrs. Elliott served as vice president 

of Bishop, Byrant & Associates, Inc., of Washington, D.C. From 1970 to 1979, Mrs. Elliott was associate executive director of the American Medical 

Political Action Committee, having served as assistant director from 1961 to 1970. Mrs. Elliott also 

served on the board of directors of the American 

Association of Political Consultants and of the Chicago Area Public Affairs Group, of which she is a 

past president. She was a member of the Public Affairs Committee of the Chamber of Commerce of 

the United States. In 1979, she received the Award 

for Excellence in Serving Corporate Public Affairs 

from the National Association of Manufacturers. 

Mrs. Elliott, a native of St. Louis, Missouri, holds a 

B.A. from the University of Illinois and completed 

the Medical Association Management Executives 

Program at Northwestern University. 

Danny Lee McDonald 

April 30, 1987 

Before his appointment to the Commission in December 1981, Mr. McDonald served as general administrator of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. In this position, assumed in 1979, he was 

responsible for the management of 10 regulatory 

divisions. He was secretary of the Tulsa County 

Election Board from 1974 to 1979 and served as 

chief clerk of the board in 1973. He has also served 

as a member of the Advisory Panel to the FEC's National Clearinghouse on Election Administration. A 

native of Sand Springs, Oklahoma, Mr. McDonald 

holds a B.A. from Oklahoma State University and 

attended the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. He was elected for a 

one-year term as Vice Chairman of the Commission 

on January 7, 1982. 
38 

Ex Officio Commissioners 

Edmund L. Henshaw, Jr. 

Mr. Henshaw, an Ex Officio Member of the Commission, was elected Clerk of the House of Representatives on December 1 7, 1975. Prior to that, he 

served as executive director of the Democratic National Congressional Campaign Committee from 

1972 to 1975, and as research director of the 

Democratic National Congressional Campaign Committee from 1955 to 1972. He received a B.S. degree from the University of Maryland in 1954 and 

attended George Washington University Law 

School from 1955 to 1956. 

Douglas Patton, attorney, continued to serve as 

Special Deputy to the Clerk of the House at the 

Commission. 

William F. Hildenbrand 

Mr. Hildenbrand, an Ex Officio Member of the Commission, was elected Secretary of the Senate in 

January 1981, after serving as Secretary for the 

Minority since 1974. A native of Pottstown, Pennsylvania, Mr. Hildenbrand began his government 

service in 1957 as assistant to Congressman Harry 

G. Haskell, Jr. From 1959 to 1960, he served as 

Congressional liaison officer for the former Department of Health, Education and Welfare. He then became legislative assistant to Senator J. Caleb 

Boggs of Delaware. From 1969 to 1974, he served 

as administrative assistant to Senator Hugh Scott 

of Pennsylvania, the former Senate Republican Minority Leader. 

Thomas J. Josefiak, attorney, serves as Special 

Deputy to the Secretary of the Senate at the Commission. 

Statutory Officers 

B. Allen Clutter, Ill, Staff Director 

Before joining the Commission, Mr. Clutter was the 

executive director of the Minnesota Ethical Practices Board and also served as faculty member of 

the Hamline University Law School. Prior to this, 

Mr. Clutter was an assistant professor at the U.S. 

Air Force Academy and served with the Air Force 

administrative units in Thailand and California. He 

also worked with the World Press Institute of Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota. A native of 

Oskaloosa, Iowa, he received a graduate degree in 

geography from Eastern Michigan University and attended business administration courses at the University of Colorado. Mr. Clutter was listed among 

the Outstanding Young Men in America in 1978. 

Charles N. Steele, General Counsel 

Mr. Steele became General Counsel in December 

1979, after serving as acting General Counsel during November 1979. Before this, he was Associate 

General Counsel for Enforcement and Litigation 

from April 1977 through October 1979. Mr. 

Steele received an A.B. from Harvard College in 

1960 and an LL.B. from Harvard Law School in 

1965. Prior to joining the Commission in January 

1976, Mr. Steele was a staff attorney with the appellate court branch of the National Labor Relations 

Board. 
Appendix 2 

FEC Organization Chart 

The Commissioners* 

John Warren McGarry, Chairman 

Frank P. Reiche, Vice Chairman** 

Joan D. Aikens, Commissioner 

Thomas E. Harris, Commissioner 

Vernon W. Thomson, Commissioner*** 

Robert 0. Tiernan, Commissioner**** 

William F. Hildenbrand, Ex Officio/Senate 

Edmund L. Henshaw, Jr., Ex Officio/House 

I 

General Counsel Staff Director 

Deputy Staff 

Director for • 

Management 

Personnel and 

Advisory Audit 

Information 

Public 

Disclosure 

Reports 

Analysis 

- Labor /Manage- - Administration 

Data Systems 

Development 

Planning and 

Management 

Opinions ment Relations

!-

Enforcement - -

Litigation 

Regulations -

- Commission 

Secretary 

Congressional 

- and lntergovernmental Affairs 

39 

*President Reagan, on December 17, 1981, named three Commissioners in recess appointments: Joan D. Aikens, Lee Ann Elliott and Danny Lee McDonald. 

··Commissioner Reiche was elected to a one-year term as Commission Chairman on January 7, 1982. Commissioner McDonald 

was elected to a one-year term as· Vice Chairman. 

•••commissioner Thomson, an interim appointee, served as Commissioner from January 5, 1981, until the Presidential recess appointments in December. · 

••••commissioner Tiernan's term expired on April 30, 1981. However, he continued to serve until December 1981, when the 

President signed the new Commission appointments. 
41 Appendix 3 

Public Funding Statistics 

Primary Matching Fund Program 

Candidate 

I 

Date 

Eligibirrty 

Established 

Amount 

Requested 

Amount 

Certified 

Percentage 

of Request 

Matched 

i 

Total 

Qualified 

Campaign 

Expenses 

Incurred* 

Total 

Repayment 

Requested 

Anderson 

Baker 

Brown 

Bush 

Carter 

Crane 

Dole 

Kennedy 

LaRouche 

Reagan 

2/4/80 

11/1/79 

1/21/80 

1/2/80 

11/20/79 

1/18/80 

1/15/80 

1/3/80 

12/18/79 

1/14/80 i 

$ 2,895,484 

2,699,662 

996,153 

6,373,497 

5,490,096 

2,140,551 

467,117 

4,447,033 

592,982 

8,254,771 

$ 2,680,347 

2,635,043 

892,249 

5,716,247 

5,117,854 

1,899,632 

446,226 

4,134,816 

526,253 

7,294,462 

92.6% 

97.6% 

89.6% 

89.7% 

93.2%

88.8% 

95.5% 

93.0% 

88.8% 

88.4% 

$ 5,873,493 

3,403,640 

2,179,774 

13,509,973 

13,770,529 

5,464,503 

1,254,170 

10,851,356 

2,134,998 

14,319,539 

$ 404,024 

104,075 

18,051 

39,691 

104,301 

0 

3,369 

238,168 

111,698 

1,368,199 

Total $ 34,357,246 $ 31,343,129 91.2%{Av.} $ 72,761.975 $ 2,391,576 

·Reported as of February 1982. 

Convention Funding 

Convention Committee Date 

Agreement 

Submitted 

Date 

Payments 

Certified 

Amount 

Certified 

Total 

Convention 

Expenses 

ITotal 

Repayments 

Requested 

Arrangements Committee of the 1980 

Republican National Convention 

6/1/79 6/28/79 

2/20/80 

$ 750,000 

3,666,000 

$ 4,416,000 

$ 4,400,241 $ 15,759 

1980 Democratic National Convention 

Committee, Inc. 

8/6/79 8/16/79 

1/14/80 

2/13/80 

$ 300,000 

3,669,000 

447,000 

$ 4,416,000 

$ 3,684,335 $ 731.665 

Total 

! 

$ 8,832,000 $ 8,084,576 $ 747,424
42 

General Election Funding 

PresldentlaiNice Presidential 

Nominees 

Date 

Agreement 

Submitted 

Date 

Payments 

Certified 

Amount 

Certified · 

Total Qualified 

Campaign 

Expenses 

Incurred" 

Total 

Repayments 

Raqueited 

Ronald Reagan 

George Bush 

7/18/80 7/24/80 $ 29.440,000 $ 29.419.492 $ 251,122 

Jimmy Carter 

Walter Mondale 

John Anderson 

Patrick Lucey 

8/18/80 

8/29/80 

10/18/80 

8/21/80 

11/13/80 

1/8/81 

$ 29.440,000 

$ 4,164,906 

77,398 

$ 4,242,304 

$ 29,341,935 

$ 16,664,879 

$ 87,232 

$ 639,950 

Total $ 63,122,304 $ 75.426,306 $ 978,304 

*Reported as of February 1982. 
43 Appendix 4 

Chronology of Events, 

1981 

January 

1 - Commissioners John Warren McGarry 

and Frank P. Reiche begin their terms, respectively, as Commission Chairman and 

Vice Chairman. 

2 - Commissioner Vernon W. Thomson receives interim appointment as Commissioner. 

8 - Commission certifies $4,242,304 in 

Federal funds for the general election 

campaign of new party Presidential nominee John Anderson and his running mate, 

Patrick Lucey. 

1 3 - Commission releases updated figures on 

1979-80 financial activity of nonparty, 

noncandidate committees. 

16 - Commission releases updated figures on 

the growth of nonparty, noncandidate 

committees. 

- Commission releases updated figures on 

1979-80 financial activity of House and 

Senate candidates. 

29 - Commission adopts procedures for certifying final matching fund payments to 

Presidential primary candidates. 

31 - 1980 year-end report. due. 

February 

1 - Commission announces availability of 

card index that consolidates information 

on Commission advisory opinions, completed compliance cases and completed 

audits. 

- Commission issues updated edition of its 

Campaign Finance and Federal Elections 

Bibliography. 

23-24 - Advisory Panel of the Commission's 

Clearinghouse on Election Administration 

meets in Washington. 

26 - Commission approves new guidelines on 

filing complaints and adopts procedures 

for extending deadlines in enforcement 

proceedings. 
44 

March 

1 - William F. Hildenbrand, newly elected 

Secretary of the Senate, assumes posi· 

tion as Ex-Officio Member of the Com· 

mission and designates Thomas J. Jose· 

fiak as his Special Deputy to the 

Commission. 

- Commission publishes revised edition of 

the Campaign Guide for Party Commit· 

tees. 

- Commission makes available computer 

tapes containing final information on 

1977-78 campaign finances of party and 

nonparty (noncandidate} committees. 

- Commission makes available microfilm 

cartridge containing audit reports issued 

between 197 5 and 1980. 

- Commission issues updated edition of its 

cumulative Index to Advisory Opinions. 

2 - D.C. Court of Appeals dismisses Commit· 

tee for Jimmy Carter v. FEC since the 

parties reached settlement concerning 

1976 primary matching funds. 

11 - D.C. District Court denies plaintiffs' mo· 

tion to find the Commission in contempt 

of court for pursuing an investigation in 

Felice Gelman and Citizens for LaRouche 

v. FEC. 

15 - D.C. District Court dismisses with prejudice George Finn v. FEC. 

1 9 - District Court for the Southern District of 

New York denies a preliminary injunction 

sought by Reader's Digest Association, 

Inc. to bar a Commission investigation. 

24 - Michigan holds special primary election in 

its Fourth Congressional District. 

29 - Commission appoints Director of Congressional, Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs within the Staff Director's 

office. 

- Commission releases updated figures on 

1979-80 financial activity of House and 

Senate candidates and nonparty, noncandidate committees. 

April 

7 - Maryland holds special primary election 

in its Fifth Congressional District. 

10 - District Court for the District of Maine 

dismisses John Anderson v. FEC in response to plaintiffs' motion. 

19 - Commission appoints new Deputy Staff 

Director for Management. 

21 - D.C. District Court upholds Commission 

action in a complaint in Richard Kay v. 

FEC. 

- Michigan holds special general election in 

its Fourth Congressional District. 

24 - D.C. District Court requires defendant to 

comply with a conciliation agreement in 

FEC v. Daniel Minchew. 

May 

7 - Commission Chairman John Warren 

McGarry testifies before the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration on 

the impact of media projections on voter 

turnout. 

19 - D.C. Court of Appeals rules, in FEC v. 

Machinists and FEC v. Citizens for Democratic Alternatives, that "draft committees" are not subject to the election 

law's contribution limits but must comply 

with reporting requirements. 

- Maryland holds special general election in 

its Fifth Congressional District. 

June 

1 Commission submits to the President and 

Congress its Annual Report for 1980. 

2 - Ohio holds special primary election in its 

Fourth Congressional District. 

23 - Mississippi holds special election in its 

Fourth Congressional District. 

25 - Ohio holds special general election in its 

Fourth Congressional District. 

26 - Supreme Court upholds $5,000 limit on 

contributions to politic!';~l committees in 

California Medical Association v. FEC. 
45 

July 

2 - Supreme Court dismisses an appeal 

brought by T. Bertram Lance to stop enforcement of an FEC subpoena. 

7 - Mississippi holds special runoff election 

in its Fourth Congressional District. 

16 - D.C. District Court denies the Commission's petition for enforcement of subpoenas in FEC v. Phillips Publishing, Inc. 

17 - Commission releases updated figures on 

the growth of nonparty, noncandidate 

committees. 

21 - Pennsylvania holds special election in its 

Third Congressional District. 

31 - Semiannual report due. 

August 

1 - Commission releases updated edition of 

its cumulative Index to Advisory Opinions. 

4 - Commission releases updated figures on 

1979-80 financial activity of nonparty, 

noncandidate committees. 

10 - Commission releases updated figures on 

1979-80 financial activity of House and 

Senate candidates. 

1 7 - Commission approves new guidelines for 

administrative termination of registered 

political committees. 

27 - Commission votes to submit to the Office 

of Management and Budget a 

$10,545,642 request for fiscal year 

1983. 

28 - Commission recommends legislative 

amendment that would clarify FEC jurisdiction over "draft committee" activities. 

September , 

4 - D.C Court of Appeals rules on the definition of "member" in consolidated cases 

brought by the FEC and the National 

Right to Work Committee. 

22 - District Court for the Southern District of 

New York rules that the Communist 

Party, U.S.A. does not have to comply 

with the election law's disclosure requirements in FEC v. Hall-Tyner Election Campaign Committee. 

23 - D.C. District Court upholds Commission 

determination in a complaint challenged 

in Jon Epstein v. FEC. 

October 

1 - Congress repeals the $25,000 annual 

limit on honoraria. 

- Commission issues updated edition of 

Campaign Finance and Federal Elections 

Bibliography. 

5 - Commission releases the 1979-80 FEC 

Index of Communication Costs. 

13 - Supreme Court denies Commissiqn petition for a writ of certiorari in two suits 

brought by the Commission against 

"draft committees." 

26 - Commission holds public hearing on possible revisions to its regulations on nonpartisan communications made by corporations and labor organizations to the 

public. 

30 - District Court for the Southern District of 

New York dismisses Reader's Digest Association, Inc. v. FEC. 
46 

November 

1 0 - Supreme Court upholds Commission determination in a complaint concerning 

party spending limits in consolidated 

cases brought by the FEC and the National Republican Senatorial Committee 

against the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. 

1 5 Commission releases 1979-80 FEC Report on Financial Activity for Presidential 

Pre-Nomination Campaigns. 

20 -.D.C. Court of Appeals affirms the Commission's dismissal of a complaint challenged in Archie Brown v. FEC. 

23 - Chairman John Warren McGarry testifies 

before the Senate Committee on Rules 

and Administration on proposals to 

amend the Federal Election Campaign 

Act. 

- Connecticut holds special major party 

nominating conventions in its First Congressional District. 

29 - Commission releases 19 79-80 FEC Index of Independent Expenditures. 

December 

1 - D.C. Court of Appeals upholds Commission dismissal of a complaint in Richard 

Kayv. FEC. 

- Commission issues updated edition of its 

cumulative Index to Advisory Opinions. 

8 - D.C. Court of Appeals dismisses constitutional challenges to contribution limits 

in National Conservative Political Action 

Committee and Rhonda Stahlman v. FEC. 

10 - D.C. Court of Appeals denies injunction 

sought by the Reagan Bush committee to 

stop the Commission's release of an audit report. 

1 5 - Connecticut holds special primary election in its First Congressional District. 

17 - In interim appointments, President 

Reagan names Joan D. Aikens, Lee Ann 

Elliott and Danny Lee McDonald as Commissioners. 

2.1 - D.C. District Court resolves Kennedy for 

President Committee's claims against the 

FEC. 
47 Appendix 5 

The FEC's Budget1 

The table and graph below compare budget allocations, by function and division, for fiscal years 

1980 and 1981. In fiscal year 1980, the Commission received appropriations totaling $8.946 million, including an annual appropriation of $8.646 

million and a supplemental appropriation of 

$300,000 to cover the October 1979 cost-ofliving increase. In fiscal year 1981, the Commission's funding totaled $9.662 million. The Commission operated during the entire fiscal year under a 

continuing resolution of $9.283 million and received a supplemental appropriation of $379,000 

to compensate for the October 1980 cost-of-living 

increase. The table below compares functional cateFEC Budget 

Functional Allocation 

FY 80 FY 81 

Personnel Compensation, 

Including Benefits 

Travel 

Transportation and Motor 

Pool 

Commercial Space 

Equipment Rental 

Printing 

Contracts 

Administrative Expenses 

Supplies 

Library Materials 

Telephone, Telegraph 

Postage 

Space Rental 

Equipment Purchases 

Training 

GSA, Services, Other 

$ 6,462,187 

219,333

10,250 

11,917 

206,120 

349,248 

738,486 

62,820 

123,411 

23,172 

168,618 

101,453 

364,308 

41,435 

12.459 

44,523 

$ 6,983,704 

94,462 

10,036 

13,710 

175,534 

314,964 

910,513 

55,281 

129,253 

40.464 

166,819 

81,999 

366,806 

233,816 

38,881 

38,001 

Total $ 8,939,740* $ 9,654,243 .. 

"Unexpended funds were returned to the U.S. Treasury. 

1This appendix differs from the budget appendices in past 

annual reports in that it does not present figures for future fiscal years. 
48 

gories of expenditures for fiscal years 1980 and 

1 981 . The graph below compares the budget allocations among Commission divisions for fiscal years 

1980 and 1 981 . 

Percent of 

Total Budget 

25 Divisional Allocation 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

Commissioners Staff Office of Adminis- Audit Clearing- Data Information Public Reports 

Director General !ration* house Systems Disclosure Analysis 

Counsel Development ..FY'BO 

c:::J FY'B1 

·Administration budget includes rent, supplies, reproduction services, etc. for the entire Commission. 
49 Appendix 6 

Statistics on Commission 

Operations 

Summary of Disclosure Files 

Total Filers 

Existing 

In 1981 

Filers 

Terminated 

as of 

12/31/81 

Filers 

Waived 

as of 

12/31/81 

President a I 

Candidates 

Committees 

140 

192 

120 

30 

1 

0 

Senate 

Candidates 

Committees 

476 

546 

271 

97 

2 

0 

House 

Candidates 

Committees 

1,894 

2,099 

1'150 

446 

4 

0 

Party 431 131 0 

National Level Committees 53 9 0 

State Level Committees 189 44 0 

Local Level Committees 315 76 0 

Convention Committees 5 2 0 

Delegates 23 10 0 

Nonparty 3,034 133 0 

Labor Committees 340 22 0 

Corporate Committees 1,363 36 0 

Membership, Trade & Other 

Committees 1,331 75 0 

Communication Cost Filers 63 N/A N/A 

Independent Expenditures 

by Persons Other Than 

Political Committees 193 N/A N/A 

Continuing

Filers 

as of 

12/31/81 

Number of 

Reports and 

Statements 

In 1981 

Gross Receipts 

in 1981 

Gross 

Expenditures 

in 1981 

535 $ 6,132,440 $ 12,414,390 

19 

162 

1.012 $ 40,183,550 $ 24,362,080 

203 

449 

4,261 $39,421,617 - .-53,349 

740 

1,653 

562 1,166 $205,656,414 $ 1 58,808,192 

44 

145 

239 

3 

13 25 $ 6,248 $ 7,482

2,901 9,788 $ 81,914,050 $ 54,796,292 

318 

1,327 

1,256 

N/A 87 N/A $ 37,332 

N/A 210 N/A $ 133.270 
50 

Divisional Statistics* 

Reports Analysis Division 

Documents receiving Pass I** coding 48,233 

Documents receiving Pass Ill** coding 16,814 

Reports reviewed 32,782 

Requests for additional information 

Names of candidate committees published 

3,338 

for failure to file reports 

Compliance matters referred to the Office 

1,041 

of General Counsel or Audit Division 79 

Data Systems Development Division 

Documents receiving Pass I* * entry 

Documents receiving Pass Ill** entry 

Transactions receiving Pass Ill entry 

48,233 

16,978 

292,565 

Audits Completed by Audit Division, 

1975-1981 

Presidential 43 

Presidential Joint Fundraising 5 

Senate 11 

House 97 

Party (National) 34 

Party (Other) 75 

Nonparty 42 

Total 307 

·In contrast to previous annual reports, figures represent 

fiscal year, rather than calendar year, totals. 

• • Computer coding and entry of campaign finance information occurs in two phases. In the first phase, Pass I, summary 

information, including microfilm location, total receipts and total 

disbursements, is coded and entered into the computer within 

48 hours of the Commission's receipt of the report. During the 

second phase, Pass Ill, itemized information is coded and entered. 

Public Records Office 

Campaign finance reports made available 

to the public (total pages) 

Visitors served 

Responses to requests for campaign 

finance reports 

Total people served 

Responses to other requests for 

information 

Total income (transmitted to U.S. 

Treasurer) 

Cumulative total pages of documents 

available for review 

611,832 

6,691 

5,539 

12,230 

10,590 

$ 40,944 

3,700,000 

Information Services Division 

Telephone inquiries 42,888 

General information letters 288 

Requests for FEC materials 8,395 

Visitors 145 

Informational mailings 

Public appearances by Commissioners 

and FEC staff 

17 

38 

Press releases 111 

Telephone inquiries from press 6,508 

Visitors to press office 873 

Freedom of Information Act requests 107 

Number of publications 

Assistance to Secretaries of State (State 

election offices) 

20 

Notices of failure to file with State 

election offices 

1,272 

579 

Clearinghouse on Election 

Administration 

Telephone inquiries 2,541 

Information letters 1,355 

Visitors 67 

Workshops 15 
51 

Office of General Counsel* 

Fiscal Year 1981 

Advisory Opinions 

Requests pending at beginning of 

FY 81 16 

Requests received in FY 81 76 

Issued, closed or withdrawn in FY 81 78** 

Pending at end of FY 81 14 

Compliance Cases**" 

Pending at beginning of FY 81 175 

Opened during FY 81 112 

Closed during FY 81 191 

Pending at close of FY 81 96 

Litigation 

Pending at beginning of FY 81 34 

Opened during FY 81 27 

Closed during FY 81 26 

Pending at close of FY 81 35 

Number of cases won 20 

Number of cases lost 2 

Voluntary dismissals 3 

Dismissed as moot 1 

Law Library 

Telephone inquiries 

Vistors served 

1,821 

682 

*In contrast to previous annual reports, figures represent 

fiscal year, rather than calendar year, totals. 

··sa opinions were issued; 10 opinion requests were withdrawn or closed without issuance of an opinion. 

···compliance cases, referred to as MURs (matters under 

review), stem from possible violations of the election law which 

come to the Commission's attention either through formal complaints filed with the Commission or as a result of the Commission's own internal monitoring procedures. The Federal Election 

Campaign Act requires that investigations remain confidential 

until the Commission makes a final determination and the case 

is closed. At that point, the case file (including the complaint, 

the findings of the General Counsel's Office and the Commission's action) is made i!Vailable to the public. 
53 Appendix 7 

FEC Federal Register 

Notices, 1981 

Notice* Title Federal 

Register 

Publication 

Date 

Citation

1981-1 Clearinghouse on 

Election Administration; Clearinghouse 

Advisory Panel 

Meeting 

1/27/81 46 Fed. Reg. 

8723 

1981-2 Filing Dates for 

Michigan Special 

Primary and General 

Elections 

2/24/81 46 Fed. Reg. 

13810 

1981-3 Filing Dates for 

Maryland Special 

General Elections 

3/11/81 46 Fed. Reg. 

16131 

1981-4 Filing Dates for 

Michigan Special 

Primary and General 

Elections (Amended 

Notice) 

3/11181 46 Fed. Reg. 

16131 

1981-5 Filing dates for 

Mississippi Special 

and Runoff Elec· 

tions 

4/15/81 46 Fed. Reg. 

22039 

1981-6 Filing dates for Ohio 

Special Primary and 

General Elections 

5/4/81 46 Fed. Reg. 

24993 

1981-7 Filing Dates for 

Pennsylvania Special 

Election 

5/29/81 46 Fed. Reg. 

28942 

Notice* Title Federal 

Register 

Publication 

Date 

Citation 

1981-8 

1981-9 

1981-10 

1981-11 

1981-12 

11 CFR Part 114, 

Communications by 

Corporations and 

Labor Organizations 

(Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking and 

Corrections to Notice) 

11 CFR Part 102, 

Transfers, Collecting 

Agents and Joint 

Fundraising (Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking) 

11 CFR Part 114, 

Communications by 

Corporations and 

Labor Organizations 

(Announcement of 

Public Hearing on 

October 26, 1981) 

Filing Dates for 

Connecticut Special 

Elections 

Rulemaking Petition: 

Notice of Availability (re: revising FEC 

Regulations on 

independent expenditures) 

9/8/81 

9/30/81 

9/30/81 

10/2/81 

12/9/81 

46 Fed. Reg. 

44964 and 

45784 

46 Fed. Reg. 

48074 

46 Fed. Reg. 

47800 

46 Fed. Reg. 

48759 

46 Fed. Reg. 

60273 

*This appendix does not include Federal Register notices 

of Commission meetings published under the Government in 

the Sunshine Act. 
55 Appendix 8 

Computer Indexes 

By means of the Commission's immediate-access 

computer system, the Public Records Office makes 

available printouts of the following major disclosure 

indexes: 

A Index: Names and Addresses of Candidates 

Sorted by type of office sought (President, U.S. 

Senator, U.S. Representative) and alphabetically by 

last name or by State/Congressional district. 

B Index: Names and Addresses of Committees 

Includes name of connected organization, name of 

treasurer, committee ID number, notation if it is 

"qualified" as a multicandidate committee, and filing frequency. This index can be sorted alphabetically by committee name, by committee ID number, 

and by type (Presidential, Senate, House, party1 

nonparty). 

C Index: Disclosure Documents Filed by Political 

Committees 

Includes, for each committee, its name, ID number, 

list of each document filed (name of report, period 

receipts, period disbursements, coverage dates, 

number of pages and microfilm location), total 

gross receipts and disbursements, and number of 

pages. 

D Index: Index of Political Committee 

Contributions to and Expenditures for Candidates 

Includes, for each committee, its name, ID number, 

name of connected organization, notation if it is 

"qualified" as a multicandidate committee, and a 

listing of all Federal candidates supported, together 

with total aggregate contributions to or expenditures on behalf of each candidate (1977-78, 1979-

80 or 1981-82). In the case of party committees, 

coordinated party expenditures (2 U.S.C. Section 

441 a(d)) are listed in place of independent expenditures. 
56 

E Index: Index of Candidates and Supporting 

Committees 

Includes for each candidate the following: 

1. Candidate name, district/State, party affiliation 

and candidate ID number. 

2. Listing of all documents filed by the candidate 

(type, coverage dates, period receipts, period 

disbursements, number of pages, microfilm location). 

3. Listing of all documents filed by the principal 

campaign committee (see C Index for explanation). 

4. Listing of all documents filed by other authorized committees of the candidate. 

5. Listing of all committees (other than those authorized by the candidate) forwarding contributions to the candidate, the principal campaign comrT!Ittee, or an authorized committee, 

and the aggregate total of such contributions 

given to date. This listing also identifies committees making expenditures on behalf of the 

candidate; or party committees making coordinated party expenditures (2 U.S.C. Section 

441 a(d)), including the aggregate total spent 

to date. 

6. Listing of all persons or unauthorized singlecandidate committees filing reports indicating 

they made independent expenditures on behalf 

of the candidate. 

7. Listing of all persons or committees filing unauthorized delegate reports. 

8. Listing of all corporations or labor organizations filing reports of communication costs on 

behalf of the candidate. 

9. Listing of all unauthorized single-candidate 

committees registering support for or against a 

candidate. The listing also identifies the committee's receipts and disbursements for thereport period covered. 

G Index: Index of Itemized Transactions for Each 

Candidate and Political Committee 

Identifies the amount of itemized receipt and disbursement transactions, the report on which the 

transactions were disclosed and the microfilm location of the transactions. Five categories are represented: 

1. Individual transactions, including individual 

contributions and loan activity. 

2. Selected loan and loan repayment transactions, including loans from banks. 

3. Unregistered political organization transactions, that is, contributions to candidates from 

organizations that are not registered under the 

election law. 

4. Corporate refund/rebate transactions with 

itemized receipts showing refunds of deposits. 

5. Transactions among registered candidates/ 

committees, including contributions, loans and 

transfers. 

H Index: Index of Presidential Candidates af¥1 

Supporting Committees 

Similar to the E Index, but lists party and nonparty 

contributions as reported by the candidate's authorized committees. 

Y Index: Special Inquiry 

In addition to the above major indexes, the special 

capability of theY Index contains approximately 30 

separate programs that may be used to locate, retrieve or display individual items or categories of information. An example is the Text search capability. The user enters a word or phrase, and the 

computer searches and lists all political committee 

titles that include the word or phrase. Another example is the Treasurer's Name search capability. By 

indicating the last name of a person, the computer 

searches and lists all political committee treasurers 

with the same last name. 

Other Indexes 

In addition to the above indexes, available upon request, the Commission produces other types of 

computer indexes on a periodic basis (e.g., an index 

of communication costs). These periodic indexes 

are available in the Public Records Office for inspection and copying. 
57 Appendix 9 

Clearinghouse Studies 

Listed below are Clearinghouse research projects. 

The publications - available at cost to the public -

include both ongoing studies and the final products 

of completed research. 

Periodic Reports 

Because ofbudget constraints, the Commission discontinued publication of the following studies after 

October 1981. 

Election Law Updates, a quarterly series cumulative 

through the calendar year, summarized all election 

code changes in each of the 50 States. The series 

was designed to provide up-to- date election code 

information to State legislators, court officials and 

election administrators. The series ended with the 

1981 third-quarter edition. 

Election Case Law reports, a quarterly series cumulative through the calendar year, summarized election cases in the State and Federal courts. The reports provided updates of judicial developments 

pertinent to elections. The series ended with the 

1981 third-quarter edition. 

Campaign Finance Law summarized campaign finance laws in each of the States as well as at the 

Federal level. The report also provided a convenient 

chart summary of State and Federal requirements. 

The series ended with the 1981 edition. 

Reports Completed in 1981 

Voting Systems Users 81 is a compendium of all 

local jurisdictions in the United States, their voting 

age and registered voter populations, and the type 

of voting system they employ. 

Voting Systems Vendors 81 is a directory of all major voting equipment vendors in the United States 

with detailed technical specifications on each of 

their products. 
58 

Studies Underway in 1981 

Voter Information and Education Programs 1 suggests inexpensive but effective ways for election 

officials to convey essential registration and election information to the public. 

Voter Information and Education Programs 2 suggests various methods for election officials to develop good voter education programs in the schools 

in cooperation with the educational community. 

Previously Completed Reports 

The following publications, listed in previous annual 

reports, remain available. 

Statewide Registration Systems 1 & 2 is a report 

on computerized statewide voter registration systems. Volume I examines problems involved in implementing a statewide system and offers suggestions for overcoming them. Volume II describes in 

detail the forms, procedures, outputs and variations 

on the basic statewide computerized system. 

Contested Elections and Recounts is a three- volume analysis of the laws and procedures governing 

contested e.lections and recounts for Federal offices. Volume I examines those issues and functions within the Federal government's purview and 

makes recommendations for improving the handling 

of contested elections at the Federal level. Volume 

II examines State issues and options and makes 

recommendations for improving the State handling 

of such cases. Volume Ill summarizes laws related 

to contested elections in each of the States and at 

the Federal level. 

Ballot Access is a four-volume report on how candidates gain access to the ballot for Federal office in 

each of the States. Volume I identifies central administrative issues and problems and makes recommendations for improving the process. Volume II 

describes the administrative process in each State. 

Volume Ill details State legal memoranda and makes 

recommendations for improving the legal process. 

Volume IV briefly summarizes ballot access requirements for Federal office in each State. 

Mail Registration Systems discusses problems involved in implementing a mail registration system. 

In addition to a general description of how mail registration systems operate, the report offers practical 

suggestions for overcoming difficulties. 

Bilingual Election Services is a three- volume report 

on providing election services in languages other 

than English. Volume I summarizes such services 

since 1975. Volume II provides a glossary of common election terms in English along with their Spanish and dialectal equivalents. Volume II is a manual 

for local election officials. It offers practical advice 

on ways to identify the language problems in a jurisdiction and provide bilingual registration and balloting services. 

Election Administration is a four-volume set introducing program planning, management and financial control concepts into local election administration. Volume I provides an overview of election 

functions and tasks and introduces the notion of a 

management cycle. Volume II focuses on planning, 

provides detailed task/activity checklists and flow 

diagrams, and demonstrates how tasks can be assigned. Volume Ill introduces a chart of accounts' 

and demonstrates how budgets can be prepared 

and costs monitored by applying the chart to each 

election function. Volume IV is a set of legal memoranda summarizing State code processes with regard to administrative and budgeting responsibilities. 
59 Appendix 10 

FEC Information Services 

General Assistance 

Candidates, committees and the public may obtain 

information and materials (including ·publications 

listed below) from the FEC's Office of Public Communications. Contact the Commission in Washington, D.C., at 523-4068 or call toll free, 800/424-

9530. . 

Advisory Opinions 

For questions relating to the application of the law 

to a specific, factual situation, any person may request an advisory opinion in writing. Requests for 

opinions and the opinions themselves are made 

public. A requesting person who in good faith acts 

in accordance with the advisory opinion will not be 

subject to any penalties with regard to the activity 

in question. 2 U.S.C. Section 437f(c)(2). 

Publications 

• Federal Election Campaign Act 

• FEC Regulations · 

• Registration Forms 

• Reporting Forms 

• Record, a monthly newsletter 

• Annual Report 

• Campaign Guide for Congressional Candidates 

and Committees 

• Campaign Guide for Party Committees 

• House and Senate Bookkeeping Manual 

• Guideline for Presentation in Good Order 

• The FEC and the Federal Campaign Finance 

Law, a brochure for the general public. 
60 

Public Records Office 

This office makes available to the public the documents listed below. Documents may be inspected 

at the Commission and copies purchased ( 1 0 cents· 

per page for copies from microfilm and 5 cents per 

page for copies from paper files). 

• Reports and statements filed by Federal candidates and committees (1972-present)1 

• FEC Reports on Financial Activity and Disclosure Series (published indexes that consolidate 

and summarize data taken from financial disclosure reports) 

• Daily updated computer printouts of various 

FEC indexes, as available 

• Index of Multicandidate Political Committees 

• Index of All Registered Political Committees 

• Index of All Federal Candidates 

• Index of Political Committees and Their Sponsors 

• Index of Sponsors and Their Political Committees 

• Index to Advisory Opinions 

• Campaign Finance and Federal Election Bibliography 

• MURs (closed compliance actions and index) 

• Audits (GAO 1972-74, FEC 1975-present) 

• Court cases 

• Financial Control and Compliance Manual for 

Presidential Candidates Receiving Public Financing (applies to Presidential primary candidates only) 

• Information on contributions submitted by 

Presidential candidates to establish eligibility 

for primary matching funds. 

• Presidential matching fund certifications 

• Presidential and Vice Presidential personal financial disclosure statements filed under the 

Ethics in Government Act 

• General information (newspaper articles, 

studies on campaign finance by other organizations, informational handouts) 

• Commission information (Commission memoranda, Commission meeting agendas and 

agenda items, minutes of meetings, directives, 

bulletins, certifications of closed meetings, 

general distribution memoranda) 

Clearinghouse 

The National Clearinghouse on Election Administration provides information to the public on the electoral process and publishes studies on election administration. For a list of publications, see Appendix 

9. 

Commission Library 

The Commission law library, part of the Office of 

General Counsel, is open to the public. The collection includes basic legal research tools plus materials dealing with political campaign finance, corporate and labor political activity and campaign 

finance reform. The library staff prepares an Index 

to Advisory Opinions and a Campaign Firyance and 

Federal Election Bibliography, both available from 

the Public Records Office (see above). 

In addition to a general reference section that includes the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, the 

Commission's library contains the resources outlined below. 

Book Collection. The book collection contains 

election- related monographs and legal treatises 

with an emphasis on Federal civil procedures and 

administrative law and also includes legal research 

sets such as American Jurisprudence 2d and American Law Reports 2d, 3d and 4th. 

Periodical Collection. The collection includes Congressional Quarterly Weekly Re~orts, National Journal Reports, Harvard Law Review and the Congressional Record. 1Anyone using such documents is reminded, however, of 

the election law's requirement that any information copied from 

reports and statements may not be sold or used for any commercial purpose, other than using the name and address of any 

political committee to solicit contributions from such a committee. 2 U.S.C. Section 438(a)(4). 
61 

Journal Article File. The journal article file contains 

photocopies of pertinent law review articles and Library of Congress Congressional Research Service 

reports. 

Looseleaf Service. The two most important looseleaf services housed in the library are: 1) United 

States Law Week, which is published by the Bureau 

of National Affairs (BNA) and includes recent Supreme Court and lower court decisions and 2) the 

Federal Election Campaign Finance Guide, published 

by Commerce Clearing House (CCH). The library 

also subscribes to the Standard Federal Tax Reporter (CCH), Fair Employment Practice Service 

(BNAl and Corporation Law Guide (CCH). 

Code Section. This section contains major code materials required by the legal staff, including the 

United States Code; United States Code Annotated; 

United States Code Service; United States Congressional and Administrative News; Code of Federal 

Regulations; and Daily Federal Register. 

Reporter Section. The collection of law reporters includes the U.S. Supreme Court Reports (Official, 

West and Lawyers' Edition copies); Federal Reporter 2d; Supreme Court Digest (Lawyers' Edition); 

Federal Rules Decisions; Federal Supplement, U.S. 

App. D.C.; and the slip opinions of the U.S. Court 

of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. 

Federal Election Commission Document Center. 

This section includes administrative material generated by the Commission and legislative material 

bearing on the establishment and operation of the 

Commission. For example, the section includes legislative histories of the Federal Election Campaign 

Act and amendments, transcripts of Commission 

hearings on regulations, and Federal Register notices. 

« u. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1982 373-059/984