•

December1984

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

Washington DC 20463 Volume 10,Number 

r

CONGRESS ENSURES VOTING ACCESS

FOR ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED

On September 28, 1984, the President approved the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly

and Handicapped Act. Pub. L. 98-435., The Act

stipulates that registration and polling places for

federal elections must be accessible to handicapped and elderly individuals. For the next five

election cycles, the states will report to the FEC -

on difficulties faced and actions taken to enhance

accessibility. The FEC will then compile the state

information and forward a summary report to

Congress.

rules, see page 2 of the August 1984 Recor

They were published in the Federal Re ister 

August 22, 1984. (49 Fed. Reg. 33206 Copies a

available from the Commission's Public Recor

Office.

AO 1984-46: Funds Transferred from 1984 State

Campaign to 1982 Federal

Campaign for Debt Retirement

Mr. Rod Johnston may transfer funds from 

1984 campaign for state office (the state comm

tee) to. his unsuccessful campaign for fede

office in 1982 (the federal committee) to he

continu

TABLE OF CONTENTS

•

ACCESS TO FEC INFORMATION

On October 19, 1984, the Commission prescribed regulations governing the fees for reproduction of materials made available to the public

by the FEC's Public Records Office or through the

Freedom of Information Act (FOlA). II CFR

Parts 4 and 5. (For a summary of these regulations, see page 1 of the July 1984 Record.) The

revised regulations update current fee schedules,

change the billing procedure for microfilm and

computer tape requests, and clarify that the FEC

does not charge for staff time devoted to dupli-

.cating information made available under the

FOIA. The final rules were published in the

Federal Re ister on July 31, 1984. (49 Fed. Reg.

30458 Copies are available from the Commission's Public Records Office.

HANDICAPPED PERSONS' ACCESS TO

FEC PROGRAMS

On November 2, 1984, the agency prescribed

regulations which will implement and enforce

section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as

amended. II CFR Part 6. The rules prohibit

discrimination on the basis of handicap in FEC

programs and activities. (For a sum mary of these

I

I

I

1

3

4

4

4

5

6

6-8

LEGISLATION

Congress Ensures Voting Access

REGULATIONS

Access to FEC Information

Handicapped Persons' Access to FEC

Programs

ADVISORY OPINIONS

COURT CASES

Democratic CongreSSional Campaign CommIttee v. EC

McDonald v. FEC

Rose v. FEC (Second Suit)

COMPLIANCE

Summary of MURS

STATISTICS

PAC Contributions Up

Activity of 1984 Congressional Races

Campaign Finance Charts
Docemter 1984 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION \hlume 10, Numte

retire the federal committee's remammg debts.

Since the state committee and the federal committee are considered affiliated committees by

virtue of Mr. Johnston's control over both of

them, unlimited funds may be transferred between the two committees. The Act and Commission Regulations impose, however, certain requirements on both committees, depending on the

amount of funds transferred between them.

Specifically, if Mr. Johnston transfers more than

$1,000 from the state committee to the federal

committee during the year, the state committee

must register and report as a "political committee" under the Act. 2 U.S.C. S43I(4)(A); 11 CFR

100.5 and 102.6(a). The state committee may file

only one report, using it as both the initial and

terminating report. On the report, the state committee, newly registered as a political committee,

must disclose the amount to be transferred as

cash on hand, itemizing these funds, where appropriate, on the basis of ''last in, first on hand."

2 U.S.C. S434(b). The state committee must exclude any impermissible contributions from the

funds transferred to the federal committee. Similarly, the state committee must exclude from the

transfer any contributions Which, when added to

contributions already made by the same donor to

the federal committee, would cause the donor to

exceed contribution limits. 2 U.S.C: S441a(a)(I)

and (2). On the same report, the state committee

must also disclose the transfer of these funds to

its affiliated federal committee. The federal

committee, in turn, reports the transfers as a

"miscellaneous receipt" from the state committee.

The Commission expressed no opinion on the application of state laws to the proposed transfer

because the Act does not supercede state provisions governing disposition of state campaign

funds. Nor did the Commission address relevant

state and federal tax rules because they are not

within its jurisdiction. (Date issued: October 12,

1984; Length' 4 pages)

AO 1984-47: Former Congressman's Personal

Use of Excess Funds From 1982

and 1984 Primary Campaigns

Mr. Peter A. Peyser, a former member of Congress, may make personal use of excess campaign

funds remaining from unsuccessful primary campaigns he waged in 1982 and 1984. Although 

1979 amendments to the election law proh

candidates from converting excess funds to p

sonal use, the amendments do not apply to ind

duals, such as Mr. Peyser, who were member

Congress on January 8, 1980. 2 U.S.C. S439a.

The Commission did not address related tax iss

since they are not within its jurisdiction. (D

issued: OCtober 18, 1984; Length: 2 pages)

AO 1984-49: Excess Campaign Funds Used

for Travel of Aide

The Geraldine A. Ferraro for Congress 1984 C

mittee (the Committee), the principal campa

committee for the Congressional campaign 

Ferraro waged before accepting the Dernoera

Party's Vice Presidential nomination, may 

excess funds remaining from the campaign 

reimburse Ms. Ferraro's Executive Assistant 

travel expenses she incurred while accompany

Ms. Ferraro to the June 1984 annual convention 

the National Organization of Women (NOW). 

that time, Ms. Ferraro was a candidate for 

House of Representatives. Because Ms. Ferr

was a member of Congress on January 8, 198

the law permits her to use excess campaign fu

for personal use. Consequently, she may use 

cess funds from her Congressional campaign 

Clover the travel costs of her aide, regardless 

the purpose of the trip. (The advisory opin

request did not specify the purpose of the trip 

did state the trip was not "official.") 2 U.S

S439a.

Reporting Requirements

If the travel reimbursement exceeds $2

the Committee should report it as an itemi

"other" disbursement with a brief description 

its purpose, such as "travel expense reimbu

ment for noneampalgn travel." 11 CFR 104.

(4)(vi). (Date made publtes October 18, 19

Length: 2 pages)

*The law prohibits candidates who were 

members of Congress on January 8, 1980, fr

using excess campaign funds for personal use.

The Record is pUb~sh.ed by the Federal Elec~ion Com~ission, 1325 K Street,. N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20463. Commissioners are: Lee Ann Elliott, Chairman; Thomas E. Harrfs, Vice Chairman'

J~an' D. Aikens; Danny Lee McDonald; Jobn Warren McGarry; Frank P. Reiche; William F:

Hildenbrand, Secretary of the Senate, Ex Officio; Benjamin J. Guthrie, Clerk of the House of

Representatives, Ex Officio. For more information, call 202/523-4068 or toll-free 800/424-9530.

2
D::n3mb3r 1984 FEDERAL ELEC1l0N COMMISSION \blume 10, Numb3r 1

AOR Subject

1984-57 Corporate communication on legislatio

distributed to employees and retiree

(Date made public: November I, 198

Length: 5 pages, plus 6-page supplemen

1984-58 Presidential campaign's reimbursemen

to city for security services. (Date mad

public: November 5~ 1984; Length: 

pages, plus 2-page supplement)

1984-59 Committee's purchase of van for cam

paign purposes; reimbursements for non

campaign use. (Date made public: No

vember 13, 1984; Length: I page)

In-Kind Contributions Made by Vice

Presidential C8ndidate's Former

Congressional Campaign to National

Party Committee

The Geraldine A. Ferraro for Congress 1984 Committee (the Commlttee), Ms. Ferraro's principal

campaign committee for the Congressional campaign she conducted prior to becoming the D~moeratle Vice Presidential nominee, may contribute

500 caricature cards (valued at $95.05) and 12

caricature posters (valued at $13.80) to the

Democratic National Committee's (DNC's) 1984

Victory Fund.* The cards and posters qualify es

excess campaign funds because they are part of

the Committee's assets and are not needed to

defray the Committee's campaign expenses. Candidate committees may transfer excess campaign

funds without limit to party committees. II CPR

113.I(e) and AO 1981-11.

AO 1984-S0

•

•

Reporting Requirements

On the Detailed Summary Page (FEC Form

3) the Committee should disclose the transaction

a; a negative entry on the same tine that the

Committee originally used to disclose the payments for the cards and posters. The transfer

should also be disclosed on the Detailed Summary

Page as "other dis_bursementsTl and itemized on

Schedule B as an "unlimited in-kind contribution

from excess campaign funds." 11 CPR 104.3(b)(4).

The DNC should report the receipt of the in-kind

contribution on the Detailed Summary Page under

"contributions from other political committees"

(line l Ie) and should itemize it on Schedule A as

an in-kind contribution. The transaction should

also be disclosed as an operating expenditure on

Schedule B, with a note indicating that the funds

represent the value of an in-kind contribution

from the Ferraro committee. (Date issued:

October 29, 1984; Length: 3 pages)

ADVISORY OPINION REQUESTS

The following chart lists recent requests for

advisory opinions (A0 Rs). The full text of each

AOR is available to the public in the Commission's Office of Public Records.

ADR Subject

1984-56 Income from book considered honorarium

from publisher. (Date made public:

October 25, 1984; Length: 2 pages)

"Since the Committee did not explain how It

had assessed the value of the cards and posters,

the Commission did not address the validity of

their w.lue.

DEMOCRATICCONGR~IONALCAMPMGN

COMMITTEE v. FEC

On November 5, 1984, the U.S. District Cou

for the District of Columbia issued an ord

denying plaintiff's motion for a preliminary i

junction in Democratic Con essional Cam ai

Committee v. FEC Civil Action No. 84-3352 •

Background

In its suit, filed on November 2, 1984, th

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committe

(the Committee) had sought action against th

FEC for the agency's failure to expedite action o

an administrative complaint that the Committe

filed on October 22, 1984. In light of the Novem

ber 6 general election, the Committee's admini

trative complaint had asked the FEC to initia

expedited enforcement proceedings against th

Republican National Committee and the Nation

Bepubliean Congressional Committee for the

alleged violations of the election law. In its civ

complaint, the Committee asked the court t

enter a permanent injunction directing the Com

mission to institute expedited enforcement pro

ceedings concerning the violations of the electio

law alleged in the Committee's complaint. Th

Committee also asked the court to establish an

announce the compliance standards no later tha

5:00 p.rn, on November 2, 1984.

In addition, the Committee sought a preliminar

injunction ordering the Commission to give expe

dited consideration to the Committee's admini

trative complaint and to announce its determina

tion on that complaint no later than 5:00 p.rn. o

November 2, 1984.

continue

3
CtEn3moor 1984 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION \blume 10, Numoo

Court's Ruling

On November 2, 1984, the court denied the

Committee's motion for a preliminary injunction.

The court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to

require the Commission to make an expedited

decision on the Committee's administrative complaint because 120 days had not yet elapsed since

the Committee had filed the complaint with the

FEC. See 2 U.S.C. §437g(a)(8)(A). In addition, the

court stated that it clearly lacked authority to

direct the Commission to shorten the time period

set forth in the Act's enforcement provisions

because Congress had given that authority to the

Commission's discretion. The Committee filed a

notice of appeal on November 6, 1984.

McDONALDv: FEC

On October 5, 1984, the U.S. District Court

for the District of Columbia granted the FEC's

motion to dismiss George T. McDonald v. FEC

(CA No. 84-2710) on grounds that Mr. McDonald

had failed to prosecute the suit and to meet the

statutory deadline for filing it. See 2 U.S.C.

S437g(a)(8)(B).

In his suit, Mr. McDonald, a 1984 candidate for a

House seat representing New York's 15th Congressional district, sought action against the FEC

for dismissing an administrative complaint he had

filed in May 1984. For a summary of the suit, see

page 9 of the October 1984 Record.

ROSE v. FEC (Second Suit)

On October 31, 1984, the U.S. District Court

for the District of Columbia issued an order in

Rose v. FEe (Civil Action No. 84-2278) stating

that the FEC's delay in acting on an administrative complaint filed by Congressman Rose was

contrary to law. The court ordered the FEC to

conform its conduct to the decision within 30 days

of the court's order. See 2 U.S.C. §437g(a)(8).

Background

On JUly 24, 1984, Congressman Charles E.

Rose had repetitioned the district court to issue

an order requiring the FEC to take action on his

administrative complain t, originally filed' with the

FEC in October 1982. (For summaries of previous

action, see the following Record articles: August

1983, p, 9; April 1984, p, 10; and October 1984, p,

9.)

Court Rulings

On October 4, 1984, the district court found

that the FEC had acted contrary to law by failing

to resolve the complaint. However, after reviewing the case on appeal, on OCtober 24, 1984, the

appeals court summarily reversed the district

court's original decision and remanded the case to

the district court for reconsideration.

4

Upon reconsideration, the district court gra

plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. 

court concluded that a variety of factors 

unreasonably delayed the conclusion of the in

tigation into Mr. Rose's administrative compla

MUR 1412: Loan Repayments and

Reimbursements by Corporation

to its PAC

On May 2, 1984, the Commission entered in

conciliation agreement with a nonprofit corp

tion (the Corporation) and its separate segreg

fund (the P,AC). The Corporation had made pr

bited contributions to the PAC (in violation 

2 U.S.C. S441b) by: 1) reimbursing the PAC f

portion of the PAC's administrative expenses 

2) repaying a loon which the PAC had made to 

Corporation in October 1980. The PAC, in t

had violated section 441b by accepting the re

bursements and loan repayments from the Co

ration.

Complaint

Based on its normal review of the P

reports during 1980 and 1981, the Commiss

Reports Analysis Division noted that the PAC 

accepted funds from the Committee that 

have constituted prohibited corporate contr

tions. On September 29, 1982, the Commis

found reason to believe that the Committee 

the PAC had violated the election law and aut

ized the General Counsel's Office to investi

the transactions in question.

General Coumel's Report The election law prohibits the donation 

acceptance of corporate contributions for fed

elections. 2 U.S.C. §441b. This prohibition ap

to loan repayments made by a corporation to 

PAC and reimbursements made by a corporat

to its PAC for the PAC's administrative expen

(Under a narrow exemption to this prohibi

however, the law permits corporations and l

organizations to directly pay for the admini

"Utuier reVISIOns to' FEC Regulations 

scribed in August 1983, a parent corporation 

reimburs..e its PAC for administrative expen

provided it does so within 30 days after the 

has paid for them. 11 CFR 102.6(c)(2)(ii).
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION \blume 10, Numte

·PAC is a popular term used to defin

political committee that has not been establis

by a candidate or political party.

Chart I on page 5 compares PAC spending 

Congressional campaigns during the sa

18-month period in the 1979-80, 1981-82 

1983-84 election cycles. Chart II lists the PA

which have made the most contributions to 

federal candidates during the first 18 months 

the 1983-84 election cycle.

therefore recommended that the Commission f

probable cause to believe that the Corporat

and the PAC had violated the election law.

PAC CONTRIBUTIONS UP 46 PERCENT

FOR 1984 RACES

PACs* contributed $50.7 million to Cong

sional campaigns during the first 18 months of 

1983-84 election cycle, a 46 percent incre

over the $34.6 million contributed to Congress

al races during the same period in 1982 and a 

percent increase over the $20.8 million given 

Congressional campaigns during the first 

months of the 1979-80 election cycle.

More detailed information on PAC activity m

be obtained from the four-volume study, F

Reports on Financial Activity: 1983-84, Inte

Re ort No.8: Part and Non-Part Polit

Committees. The study may be purchased 15 

volume) from the FEC's Public Records Off

1325 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 204

Checks should be made payable to the FEC.

contin

Commission Determination

On August 9, 1983, the Commission fo

probable cause to believe that the Corporat

and the PAC had violated section 441b. On Ma

1984, the Commission entered into a conciliat

agreement with the respondents in which t

agreed:

The reimbursements and loan repayments 

violated section 441b of the election law;

The PAC had to return those funds (amou

ing to $10,159.28) that it had reported 

reimbursements from the Corporation for 

adm inistrative expenses; and

To pay a civil penalty of $250 to the U

Treasury.

~mter1984

In this case, .. the General Counsel said, "The

reimbursements were not a one time, isolated

event but a continuous course of conduct over a

couple of years. It also appears that the conduct

will continue into the future, since [the PAc'sl

reports indicate that the administrative expenses

are still not being paid directly" by the Corporation. (See also AD 1982-42.) The General Counsel

Corporation's Repayment of a $9,000 Loan to the

Fund. In its 1980 year-end report, the PAC disclosed that, in December, the Corporation repaid

$3,000 of a $9,000 loan which the PAC had made

to the Corporation in October 1980. On being

informed by the Reports Analysis Division that

the Committee's loan repayment constituted an

illegal corporate contribution, the PAC amended

its 1980 and 1981 reports to reflect the loan

repayment as reimbursements from the Corporation for administrative expenses originally paid by

the PAC. The General Counsel noted that the

Corporation appeared to have used the reimbursements "as a guise to repay the loan to the

[PAC] in violation of the election law."

The General Counsel found, however, that the

transactions presented in these advisory opinions

differed from the respondents' transactions because the corporate reimbursements occurred

within a reasonable time after the PAC's payments and because the reimbursements covered

isolated payments made inadvertently or mistakenly.

Reimbursement of Administrative Expenses. Several reports 'filed by the PAC disclosed that it had

incurred operating expenditures amounting to

over $17,000, of which more than $11,000 had

been reimbursed by the Corporation. A review of

the PAC's reports suggested that few of the

reimbursements occurred within 30 days after the

original payments.

The respondents did not challenge the illegality of

the Corporation's loan repayments to the PAC.

They contended, however, that since the election

law permitted a parent corporation to directly

pay the administrative expenses of its separate

segregated fund, the election law also authorized

the corporation to reimburse its PAC for these

expenses. In support of this view, the respondents

cited several advisory opinions involving corporate reimbursements for PAC payments for administrative expenses: ADs 1979-33 and 1979-22

and AOR 1976-111.

tive expenses of their respective PACs. See 2

U.S.C. §441b(b)(2)(C).)

The General Counsel found that the Corporation

had made prohibited contributions in two kinds of

•

transactions:

•

5
15-----l

CHART I

PAC CONTRIBUTIONS TO CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES

Millions of Dollars

20--------------------------

Corporations

w/o

Stock

'vbIume 10, Numte

Election Cycle

D1/1/83 - 6/30

1/1/81 - 6/30

.1/1179 - 6/30

Trade/Membership/

Health Organizations

Non-Connected

Organizations

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

Labor

Organizations

Corporations

5

o

[);x:emte" 1984

10-~~

CHARTn

TOP 10 PAC CONTRIBUTORS TO

ALL FEDERAL CANDIDATESPolitieal Action Committee

Amount

Contributed

1/83 - 6/84

CAMPAIGN FINANCE ACTIVITY OF 1984

CONGRESSIONAL RACES

election

During

cycle,

the

2019

first

House and

18 months

Senate

of the

candida

1983

spent a record $161.8 million on their campaig

a 21 percent increase over the $133.6 mill

spent by 2020 Congressional campaigns during 

same period in 1981-82.

·Contribution figures do not include totals

for independent expenditures made for or against

candidates.

Realtors Political Action Committee

American Medical Association

Political Action Committee

Seafarers Polltical Activity Donation

National Education Association

Political Action Committee

Build Political Action Committee

Of the National Association

Of Home Builders

UAW Voluntary Community Action

Program (UAW-V-CAP)

Machinists Non-Partisan Political

League

Active Ballot Club of the

United Food and Commercial

Workers International Union

American Bankers Association

BANKPAC

American Federation Of State

County and Municipal Employees - P.E.O.P.L.E., Qualified

$890,736

792,962

758,222

715,078

669,453

649,039

609,902

596,356

496,125

494,497

The study released by the FEC on October 

1984, showed that from January 1, 1983, throu

June 30, 1984, Congressional candidates raised 

total of $213.4 million, of which 23 percent ca

from PACs.· During the same period in 1981-

Congressional candidates raised $175.6 million, 

which 19 percent came from PACs.

Chart Ion page 7 provides detailed information 

the sources of House and Senate candidates' 

ceipts during the first 18 months of the 1983

election cycle. Chart II on page 8 plots to

spending by Congressional campaigns over fo

election cycles.

More detailed information may be obtained fro

the study, the FEC Report on Financial Activi

1983-84: U.S. Senate and House Cam ai n

Interim Report No.7, available at 15 per co

from the FEC's Public Records Office, 1325 

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463. Chec

should be made payable in advance to the FEC•

·PAC is a popular term used to define 

political committee that has not been establish

by a candidate or political party.

6
W:::emb9r 1984 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION \blume 10, Numter 1

CHART I

• RECEIPTS* OF CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATF..'J, 1/1/83 - 6/30/84

SENATE RECEIPTS BYSOURCE

....-------------- Individual Contributions (63%)·

------ PAC Contributions (1696)

------ Party Contributions (I%)

------ Candidate Contributions (2%)

1IIIIIIIIr--- Candidate Loans (12%)

~-- Other Loans (1%)

'---- Miscellaneous (5%)

.. HOUSB RBCRIPTS B.....Y_S_O_U_R_C_E _

.. Individual Contributions (52%)

--- PAC Contributions (3096)

IIIIi~ ===----- Candidate Party Contributions Contributions (2%)(2%)

Candidate Loans (8%)

""'44.~~--=::::::':--~-- Other Loans (1%) --~-- Miscellaneous (4%) .

• *Receipts include funds transferred between authorized committees.

7
Millions of Dollars

180 1---'---

CHARTn

SPENDING BY CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGNS

!Ja::Bmter 1984 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION \bIume 10, NumtE

160 1--------

140 . ... ~_~_:;;;,;'.c;..------

p,

80 1-:-------- oZ ---..,.,.. _

1001------

120 ..---------

Hlection Cycle 1/1/77 - 6/30/78 1/1/79 - 6/30/80 . 1/1/81 - 6/30/82 1/1/83 - 6/30

Total Number

of Candidates 1812 2184 2020 2019

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

1325 K Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20463

Official Business

Bulk Rate Mail

Postage and Fees Paid

Federal Election Commission

Permit Number G-31