FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

3 ADVISORY OPINIONS

$ 742,065.12

6,158,123.78

5,271,713.64

3,493,418.61

2,041,972.87

1,910,832.05

1,775,857.37

292,933.99

937,325.14

227,423.70

3,464,721.39

5,526,582.62

1,501,101.84

Amount Certified

Volume 14, Number 2

COMPLIANCE

6 Summary of MUR 2271

COURT CASES

4 New Litigation

REPORTS

2 Louisiana Spaeial Election

2 Massachusetts Primary Rescheduled

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PUBLIC FUNDING

1 Matching Funds Approved for Presidential

Candidates

7 INDEX

8 CONFERENCE SERIES

800 LINE

4 Last-Minute Contributions and Independent

Expenditures

Bruce Babbitt (D)

George Bush (R)

Robert J. Dole (R)

Michael S. Dukakis (D)

Pete du Pont (R)

Richard Gephardt (D)

Albert Gore, Jr. (D)

Alexander Haig (R)

Gary Hart (D)*

Jesse Jackson (D)

Jack Kemp (R)

M. G. 11Patt' Robertson (R)

Paul Simon (D)

Candidate

999 E Street NW Washington DC 20463

*On December 28, 1987, the Commission

determined that Senator Gary Hart was eligible

for primary matching funds and certified his first

payment to the U.S. Treasury. The agency's other

1987 eligibility determinations were summarized

in the JlD1.e, July, August, October and November

issues of the 1987 FEe Record.

FEe APPROVES MATCHING FUNDS

FOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

On January 13, 1988, the Commission certified $4,368,387.37 in matching fund payments for

the primary campaigns of eleven eligible Presidential candidates. These certifications raise to

$33,344,072.12 the total amount of payments the

agency has certified thus far for the campaigns of

thirteen eligible candidates.

By the end of December 19B7, the Commission had forwarded certifications for twelve eligible 1988 candidates to the U.S. Treasury, which

began issuing payments to the candidates on January 4, 1988. Prior to certifying the funds, the

Commission had made separate determinations

during 1987 with regard to each candidate's eligibility for primary matching funds.* Under the

Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act, however, the Treasury could not begin making actual

payments to eligible candidates before January 1,

1988. (For a complete explanation of the eligibility requirements, consult 26 U.S.C. §9033 and

Commission Regulations at 11 CFR 9033 and

9036.1.)

On January 5, 1988, a thirteenth candidate,

the Reverend Jesse Jackson, was determined eligible for matching funds. On the same day, the

FEC certified his first payment to the U.S. Treasury.

The chart in column two lists the thirteen

eligible candidates to whom the Commission has

certified payments, as well as the total amount

certified to each candidate, as of January 13,

1988.

During 1988, an eligible Presidential candidate may submit requests for primary matching

funds on the second and fourth Mondays of each

month. The Com mission will certify a percentage

of the amount requested within one week of

receiving a request. (See 26 U.S.C. ~:}9034 and

9036 and 11 CPR 9034 and 9036.1(b) and 2(a).)

February 1988
February 1988 FEDERAL ELECTION COMfVllSSION Volume 14, Numb

2

The Record is published by the Federal Ele¢tion Commission, 999 E Street, N.W., Wa.shington

D.C. 20463. Commissioners are: Thomas J. Josefiak, Chairman; Danny L. McDonald, Vice

Chairman; Joan Aikens; Lee Ann Elliott; John Warren McGarry; Scott E. Thomas; Walter J

Stewart, Secretary of the Senate, Ex Officio; Oonnald K. Anderson, Clerk of the House o

Representatives, Ex Officio. For more information, call 202/376-3120 or toll-free 800/424-9530

(TDD For Hearing Impaired 202/376-3136)

CHART I

Only One Special Election

Filing

Date

9/3

Period Register- Fili

Covered ed/Certi- Dat

tied Mail

Date *

1/1-2/17 2/22 2/2

2 -3/31 4/15 4/15

8/31

Mailing Date of'

Report if Sent by

Registered or

Certified Mail

Pre-special

April quarterly

Report

Election and filing dates for all states 

published in the January 1988 Record, on pag

and 5.

CHARTm

Two Elections: Candidate Runs in Both

Report Period Register- Fili

Covered ed/Certi- Dat

tied Mail

Date*

Pre-special 1/1-2/17 2/22 2/2

Pre-general 2/18-3/27 4/1 4/4

April quarterly 3/28-3/31 4/15 4/1

Post-general 4/1-5/6 5/16 5/1

CHARTU

Two Elections: Candidate Runs Only in First

Closing Date

of Books

MASSACHUSETTS PRIMARY RESCHEDULED

Massachusetts will hold its Congress

primary election on September 15 instea

September 20, 1988. The new schedule for f

the 12-day pre-election report by commi

supporting Congressional candidates in 

primary is as follows:

8/26

1/1-2/17 2/22 2/25

2/18-3/28 4/7 4/7

Report is waived.

Period Register- Filing

Covered ed/Certi- Date

tied Mail

Date*

Pre-primary

Post-election

April quarterly

Report

*Reports sent by registered or certified mail

must be postmarked by the filing date (except in

the case of the pre-election report). Reports

mailed first class or hand delivered must be

received by the filing date.

LOUISIANA SPECIAL ELECTION

On March 8, 1988, Louisiana will hold a

special primary election in its fourth Congressional District to fill the seat to be vacated by the

election of Representative Buddy Roemer as the

state's governor. If no candidate obtains a

majority of the votes, a special general election

will be held on April 16, 1988.

Political committees authorized by candidates (candidate committees) who are participating in these special elections must file the appropriate pre- and post-election reports. The reporting schedule will depend on whether one or two

elections are held. (See below.)

All other political committees which support

candidates in the special election(s) (and which

do not report on a monthly basis) must also follow

the reporting schedule for the special electionls),
February 1988 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 14, Number 2

Aoa SUbject

- - • ~,..v .,.. ""..---.. ;,-¥ '~-7" - 1 :':'1""" -~

. ~-,' !}:.~~~ .:~\ \~: ~-i :.<-( :-: ,~, _ _ _. .L__ 

ADVISOR Y OPINION REQUESTS

The following chart lists recent requests for

advisory opinions. The full text of each AOR is

available to the public in the Commlssion's Office

of Public Records.

Commission's Conclusion

Initially, the Commission noted that its opinion addressed only those issues related to the

consolidated campaign loan assumed by the FDIC.

The opinion did not address any issues raised by

the Ripleys' earlier campaign loan transactions

because those issues concerned past, rather than

ongoing or future, federal election activities.*

With regard to Mrs. Ripley's use of personal

assets to help liquidate the FDIC loan obligatlcn,

the Commission noted that, under the election

law, any valuable assets which an individual donates to a candidate's campaign constitute contributions to the campaign, which are SUbject to the

law's $1,000 per election limit. 2 U.S.C. §S441a-

(a)(l)(A) and 431(3)(A)j 11 CPR 100.7(a)(l){i)(D).

Under FEe Regulations, a loan guarantee, endorsement or other form of loan security would

also qualify as a campaign contribution at the

time it is made, regardless of whether the loan is

repaid. 11 CFR IOO.7(b)(lI) and 1l0.l(b){l).

The $1,000 per election, contribution limit

applies to a donation made to retire 8. candidate's

campaign debts, regardless of whether the contributor is .~ member of the candidate's Iamlly, 11

CPR .I10.1(g); AOs 1981-15 and. 1984-60. Accordingly, any personal assets Mrs. Ripley donates to

help liquidate her husband's outstanding primary

continued

*FEe advisory opinions address only future

activities or activities Which are under way and

may continue into the future. 11 CFR 112.1(b)

Background

Beginning in May 1983, the Ripleys obtained

a series of loans for Mr. Ripley's primary campaign effort from a local Montana bank. When

the bank consolidated these loans, Mrs. Ripley had

to co-sign the consolidated loan (and a renegotiated consolidated loan) because the Ripleys jointly

owned the real estate used as collateral. After

the bank failed, the Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation (FDIC) assumed the current, consolidated loan. Since Mr. Ripley does not have

sufficient personal assets to repay the loan, the

FDIC is demanding that Mrs. Ripley's assets be

combined with those of her husband to payoff the

outstanding loan obligation.

AO 1987-30: Assets of Candidate's Wife Used to

Pay Off Bank LOM to Candidate

Mrs. Martha. Ripley may not contribute more than

$1,000 in assets to satisfy an outstanding loan

obligation incurred by her husband, Robert K.

Ripley, for his 1984 Senate primary campaign in

Montana, She may contribute up to $1,000 of her

personal assets only if she has made no other

contributions to her husband's primary campaign

either before or after the 1984 Senate primary in

Montana.

3

Agreements between corporation

and political committees to transmit committees' political messages

on "900" telephone lines. (Date

made public: December 23, 1987;

Length: 6 pages, plus s-page supplement)

Candidate's use of aircraft leased by

bank. (Date made publics January l ,

1988; Length: 3 pages)

Solicitation of restricted class of

joint venture partnership by subsidiary of joint venture. (Date made

public: December 17, 1987; Length:

4 pages, plus 41-page supplement)

Status of individual partner and his

law firm as government contractors

for purposes of PAC contributions.

(Date made publici December 14,

1987; Length: 2 pages)

Eligibility of membership organlzation's eight membership classes for

PAC solicitations. (Date made public: December 4, 1987; Length: 14

pages, plus 58-page supplement)

Senate campaign's receipt and deposit of a contribution made in silver dollars. (Date made public: December 8, 1987; Length: 2 pages,

plus 3-page supplement)

1987-35

1987-36

1987-34

1987-32

1987-33

1987-31
February 1988 FEDERAL ELECTION COrvlrvllSSION Volume 14, Numo

campaign obligation would constitute a contribution, which may not exceed $1,000 when added to

any other contributions she has made to his primary campaign.

The opinion did not address the application of

state laws to the loan obligation because such

laws are not within the Commission's jurisdiction.

Further, the Commission expressed no opinion as

to whether Mrs. Ripley would be making a contribution to her husband's campaign if a court order

required her to help payoff the loan. (Date

issued: December 3, 1987; Length: 4 pages)

LAST-MINUTE CONTRIBUTIONS AND

INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES

This article answers several frequently a

questions about contributions and independent 

penditures which are made shortly before 

election.

Last-Minute Contributions

What is a last-minute contribution? A l

minute contribution is a contribution of $1,00

more which the candidate committee rece

after the 20th day, but more than 48 hours, be

an election. 2 U.S.C. S434(a)(6); II CFR l04.5

Are last-minute contributions subject to 

cial reporting rules? Yes.

,'';',-,<".';-.• "

" .... ,i, '._' :'-;' .'--:\-', " " ~--,-_ .._

········:~i'~e_.s;',:?;:~:"·:\§i0'~;~~·: ~~ ..

NEW LITIGATION

FEe. v: New York State Conservative Party

State Committee/ 1984 Victory Fund, et al,

In its complaint, the FEe alleged that the

New York State Conservative Party State

Committee (the Committee) and the Committee's

treasurer, Vincent G. Downing, violated the

election law by making excessive in-kind

contributions to the campaign of Florence

Sullivan, a candidate seeking the Republican

nomination in New York's 1982 Senate primary.

Specifically, it is alleged tht defendants

permitted the Sullivan campaign to use the

Committee's nonprofit postage permit for

campaign mailings. The FEC claimed that the

difference between costs resulting from normal

postage rates for such mailings and the mailing

costs incurred by the Sullivan campaign in using

the Comrnittee's.nonproflt postage rates resulted

in excessive in-kind contributions from the

Committee to the campaign.

The FEG therefore asked the court to declare

that the defendants violated the election law by:

o Exceeding the $5,000 limit on total

contributions to the Sullivan primary campaign

(2 U.S.C. §441a(a)(2)(A»; and

o Failing to report the contributions of postage (2

U.S.C. §434(b».

The FEC further asked the court to asses an

appropriate civil penalty against defendants.

u.S. District Court fol' the Southern District

of New York, Civil Action No. 87 cr-, 3309 (RO),

May 13, 1987.

4

How should a candidate committee re

last-minute contributions? A candidate com

tee receiving a last-minute contribution m

disclose the contribution within 48 hours of 

receipt: In addition to filing this rep

sometimes called a 48-hour notice, the comm

must itemize the contribution a second time 

its next scheduled report. 2 U.S.C. §434(a)(6)

CPR 104.5(f}. 

Must a candidate committee also inc

contributions of less than $1,000 in the 48-

notice? No, but these contributions mus

reported on the next scheduled report. 2 U.

~434(b)(2); 11 CPR 104.3(a)(3).

What information must the candidate c

mittee disclose in a 48-hour notice?

o The name of the candidate;

o The office sought;

o The identification* of the contributor; and

o The date and amount of the la.st-minute co

bution. 11 CPR 104.5(f).

How can the committee be sure that 

notice will be filed on time? To ensure that a 

hour notice arrives on time, many commit

send rnailgrams or use an overnight mail serv

First class mail is also acceptable, provided 

notice is received by close of business on 

filing date. II CPR l04.5(e),

"'''Identificationr

, means, in the case of 

individual, his or her full name, mailing addr

occupation, and the name of his or her emplo

and, in the case of any other type of contribu

the person's full name and address. 11 

100.12.
February 1988 FEDERAL ELECTION COrvlNIISSION Volume 14, Numoor2

Does the contributing committee (for example, a PAC or party committee) also have to file a

48-hour notice'? No. The contributing committee

must, of course, itemize the contribution on its

next report.

Last-Minute Independent Expenditures

What constitutes last-minute independent expenditures? Last-minute independent expenditures

are independent expenditures aggregating $1,000

or more which are made after the 20th day. but

more than 24 hours, before an election. 11 CPR

l04.5(g), l09.2(b).

Who must report these last-minute independent expenditures? The individual, group or political committee that makes them.

How should such expenditures be reported?

Last-minute independent expenditures must be

reported within 24 hours to the FEe, the Clerk of

the House or the Secretary of the Senate, as

appropriate. State filing is also required; see 11

CPR l04.4(c). These reports are referred to as

24-hour notices. Z U.S.C. ~434(e)(2); II CF R

104.5(g) and 109.2(b).

A political committee making a last-minute

independent expenditure must report the expenditure a second time, using Schedule E, on its next

regularly scheduled report.

What information must be disclosed in a 24-

hour notice?

o The name and identification number of the

reporting political committee or, in the case of

an individual or group, the reporting person's

name, address, occupation and employer. See

11 CFR l09.2(a)(1)(i);

o The name and mailing address of the payee;

o The date, amount and purpose of the expenditure (e.g., radio, television or newspaper);

o The name of the candidate and office sought;

o A statement as to whether the expenditure was

in support of or in opposition to the eandidate;

o The identification* of each person who contributed over $200 for the purpose of making the

independent expenditure; and

o A notarized certification, under penalty of perjury, as to whether the expenditure was made

with the cooperation or consent of any

candidate or his or her authorized committee.

11 CPR l09.2(a)(1).

What form is used for 24--hour notices?

Schedule E (political committees) or FEC Form 5

(individuals and groups other than political committees) or a statement to the same effect, The

form or statement must be signed by the committee treasurer or, in the case of individuals and

groups, by the individual who is reporting the

information. 11 CFR 104.l4(a).

5

Must a 24-hour notiee be filed if independent

expenditures made shortly before en election aggregate less than $1,000? No. However, a

political committee must report such expenditures on a Schedule E when it files its next report

after the election. 2 U.S.C. 5434(b)(G)(B)(iii); 11

CFR l04.3(b)(3)(vii). In the case of an individual

or a group of individuals, such expenditures must

be disclosed on Form 5 (or in 8. letter to the same

effect) filed at the end of the next reporting

period, but only if their independent expenditures

aggregate more than $250 during a calendar year.

11 CFR 109.2(a).

Public Access to Last-Minute Transactions

How can I check up on last-minute

contributions and last-minute independent

expenditures? The Public Records Office makes

available a large computer printout which lists all

last-minute contributions for the calendar year.

The printout is indexed by the candidate's name.

Another index shows last-minute independent

expenditures listed by the individual or group

making expenditures, as well as by the candidate's

name. There is also a chronological notebook of

recent independent expenditure telegrams.

Because the volume of reports on last-minute

transactions is high (over 600 4a-hour notices

arrived in the week before the 1986 general

election), the FEC's PUblic Records Office extends its hours in the weeks before the general

election.

Can I purchase copies of these materials?

Yes. Should you wish to obtain copies of the 48-

hour and 24-hour notices relating to a certain

committee or a copy of an FEe index, call the

FEe's Public Records Office, 202/376-3140. All

interested reporters and media personnel should

contact the FEC Press Office, 2021376-3155. If

you have further questions, telephone the FEels

Information Services Division, 202/376-3120.

AU three offices can be reached on the tollfree line, 800/424-9530.
February 1988 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 14, Numb

MUR 2271: Use of Corporate Faeilities by

P8l'tner of Incorporated Law Firm

On April 22, 1'987, the Commission found no

reason to believe that an incorporated partnership

and its owner had violated the election law (2

U.S.C. §44lb(a» by employing a company secretary and using firm stationery to assist a principal campaign committee.

Complaint

On October 10, 1986, a party political committee filed a complaint against a principal campaign committee claiming that its fundraising

package had included a letter produced on corporate letterhead. The complainant contended that

the letter, signed by a senior member of the

(incorporated) law firm, had invited the reclpient

to attend a fundraising event and to make a

contribution directly to the candidate. The complainant stated that the letter failed to contain a

disclaimer, in violation of 2 U.S.C. §44ld. Further, the complaint alleged, the letter represented 8. corporate contribution made "in connection''

with federal elections, and resulted in a prohibited contribution from the law firm, in violation of

2 U.S.C. S441b.

General Counsel's Report

Corporate Contributions. The Federal Election Campaign Act prohibits a corporation from

making a contribution or expenditure in connection with any election. 2 U.S.C. §441b(a). But,

pursuant to 11 CPR 114.9(a), stockholders and

employees of a corporation may make "occasional, isolated, or incidental use" of the facilities of

a corporation for individual volunteer activity in

connection with a federal election and will be

required to reimburse the corporation only to the

extent that the overhead or operating costs of the

corporation are increased. "Incidental use" of

facilities is defined as one hour per week or four

hours per month.

In this case, the respondent, a partner and an

owner of the law firm, reimbursed the firm $25 to

cover the cost of preparing invitations on company stationery and mailing them to nine associates.

However, the General Counsel asserted that 11

CFR 1l4.9 does not permit an individual to dir-ect

other employees to assist in conducting campaign

activity. By using a secretary, the General Counsel said, the respondent had converted permissible

volunteer activity into a. contribution by the incorporated partnership.

6

Being an owner and partner of the firm

respondent had the authority to act on beha

the corporation, so the respondent's activity 

came the firm's activity. In his report, 

General Counsel said that the law firm's l

was something of value because it solicited 

tributions for the candidate. However, purs

to 2 U.S.C. §44lb(a), a corporation may 

contribute to a candidate's political commi

Therefore, the General Counsel concluded th

appeared that the partnership had violate

U.S.C. §44lb(a). And since the respondent w

owner and partner of the corporation, the res

dent also had violated §441b(a). But, given 

small apparent value of the contribution, 

Office of General Counsel recommended tha

Commission take no further action with rega

these S441b(a) violations.

Since the owner and partner of the firm 

also a member of the principal campaign com

tee, and because he had requested and rece

ten to fifteen copies of the committee's soli

tion materials, the General Counsel held tha

committee had had an indication that the su

materials would be used for fundraislng purp

Based on these facts, the General Counsel 

cluded that the partner had solicited funds 

the knowledge, authorization and cooperatio

the principal campaign committee staff; and 

cordingly, that his payment for the solicit

expenses constituted an in-kind contributio

the committee. For these reasons the Ge

Counsel said that the committee had violat

U.S.C. §44Ib(a) by knowingly accepting a ec

rate in-kind contribution. But, again, given 

small size of the contribution, the Offic

General Counsel recommended that the Com

sion take no further action.

Although the corporation, respondent 

com mittee had violated 2 U.S.C. §441b(a), 

General Counsel found no evidence to sug

that the candidate had been involved. There

the Counsel's offiee concluded that there wa

reason to believe that the candidate had vio

§44Ib(a).

Disclaimer. Pursuant to 2 U.S.C. §4

whenever any person solicits a contribu

through direct mail, the communication must 

one of the disclaimers set forth in the statute

this case, the General Counsel eoneluded tha

mailing was not a direct mailing, for purpos

the Act. Accordingly, the General Counse

commended that the Commission find no re

to believe the respondent had violated S441d.

Commission Determination

The Commission voted 6-0 to reject the 

ommendations of the General Counsel's of

The U.s. Court of Appeals had previously ru

·See Common Cause v. FEC (85-0

summarized on p, 6 of the August 1986 Record
February 1988 FEDERAL ELECTION COIV1MISSION \blume 14, Numter2

that in cases where the Commission rejects the

General Counsel's recommendation, it must provide a statement of reasons to demonstrate why

its decision is legally correct.

Commission's Statement of Reasons

In this instance, the Commission noted that

the respondent had reimbursed the corporation for

the use of stationery, postage and secretarial

assistance, and that the reimbursements made by

the respondent were properly reported as an inkind contribution. Since the contribution by the

respondent was permissible under Commission

regulations, the Commission found no reason to

believe the incorporated partnership had made a

prohibited in-kind contribution to the candidate's

campaign committee, and found no reason to

believe the candidate or committee had accepted

a prohibited in-kind contribution from the partnership.

CHANGE OF ADDRESS

This cumulative index lists advisory

opinions, court cases and 800 Line articles

published in the Record during 1988. The firs

number in the citation refers to the "number

(month) of the Record issue; the second number

following the colon, indicates the page number in

that issue.

OPINIONS

1987-30: Assets of candidate's wife used to pay

off bank loan to candidate, 2:3

COURT CASES

Ralph J. Galliano v. U.S. Postal Service, 1:7

FEC v". _ -Augustine for Congress, 1:8

-Citizens to Elect Jerald Wilson for

Congress, 1:9

-New York State Conservative Party State

Committee/1984 Yietory Fund, et al., 2~7

___ v; FEC

-Antosh, 1~8

800 lJNE

Last-Minute Contributions and Independen

Expenditures, 2:4

•

Political Committees

Registered political committees are automatically sent the Record. Any change of address by

a registered committee must, by law, be made in writing as an amendment to FEe Form I

(Statement of Organization) and filed with the Clerk of the House, the Secretary of the Senate, or

the FEC, as appropriate.

Other Subscribers

Record SUbscribers (who are not political committees), when calling or mailing in a change of

address, are asked to provide the following information:

1. Name of person to whom the Record is sent.

2. Old address.

3. New address.

4. Subscription number. The SUbscription number is located in the upper left hand corner of the

mailing label. It consists of three letters and five numbers. Without this number, there is no

guarantee that your subscription can be located on the computer.

7
February 1988 FEDERAL ELECTION COrvllVlISSION Vdume 14, Numbe

CONFERENCE SERIES

ON ELECTION LAWS

In upcoming months, the Federal Election Commission will cosponsor a series of thre

confepences with state election offices. The conferences will present workshops on candidat

campaigns, party and PAC activity, contributions and reporting. The conference schedule 

detailed below. For more information on the series, contact the FEe's Information Services Div

sion at: 202/376-3120 or toll-free 300/424-9530.

Conference Schedule

February 19

March 25

May 12-13

Louisville, Kentucky

FEe and Kentucky Registry of Election

Columbus, Ohio

FEe and Ohio Secretary of State

Seattle, Washington

FEe ana PUblic Disclosure Commission

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

999 E Street,NWWashington, D.C. 20463

Official Business

Bulk Rate Mail

Postage and Fees Paid

Federal Ejection Commission

Permit Number G-31