• 

THE FEDERAL ELECTION 

COMMISSION 

1325 K Street N.w., Washington, D.C. 20463 

Volume 6, Number 10 

J 

LOCAL PARTY COMMITTEES: 

REGISTRATION AND REPORTING 

REQUIREMENTS 

During the last week of July 1980, the Commission sent 

a notice to some local party committees registered with the 

FEC, informing them that it may be possible for them to 

stop reporting to the Commission. Those committees that 

received the notice had not made contributions or expenditures exceeding $1,000 per year during 1977·79. The 

• 

notice alerted the committees to recent amendments to the 

election law that might affect their status as "political committees." 

The notice explained that local party committees are required to	 register and report with the Commission only if 

they: 

1. Receive contributions in excess of $5,000 a year to influence federal elections; or 

2. Make contributions or expenditures in excess of $1,000 

a year to influence federal elections; or 

3. Make payments, exempted from the definition of contribution or expenditure, in excess of $5,000 a year. These 

exempted payments are defined by Commission Regula· 

tions at 11 CFR 100.7(b)(9), (15) and (17) and 100.8(b) 

(10). (16) and (18). 

NOTE: A local party committee may unknowingly be 

making "expenditures to influence federal elections" if it 

transfers funds to a political committee registered with the 

FEC which, in turn, deposits the funds in an account used 

for federal elections. Local committees may avoid making 

this type of "expenditure" if the recipient committee 

(registered with the FEC) either: 1) deposits the transfer (if 

not intended for federal elections) in a separate account to 

be used for nonfederal elections or 2) reports the funds (if 

intended for federal elections) as contributions from the 

October 

ing obligations under the Act. (See the June 1980 Re

for more	 detailed information on terminating repo

obligations.) The notice also explained that local p

committees would be required to re-register with the C

mission if future activity exceeded the registration 

reporting thresholds listed above. 

REPORTS DUE 

During the coming months, several reports are requ

under the~ Election Campaign Act. The follow

paragraphs~ overview of the reporting requireme

For detailed information, committees should consult 

notices sent to them directly or contact the Office of Pu

Communications (see below). 

Third Quarterly Report 

All political committees' (other than monthly filers

below) must file a quarterly report by October 15 reg

less of the amount of funds received or expended by 

committee during the quarter. (FEC Form 3a, the post

waiver, is no longer an acceptable filing.) The quart

report must include all reportable transactions occu

since the last full report filed or (if the committee is n

from the date of registration through September 30, 19

Monthly Reports 

All committees not authorized by a candidate, which 

on a monthly basis, must file their monthly report by O

ber 20. 

In addition, each principal campaign committee of a P

dential candidate which hasreceived contributions or m

expenditures aggregating $100,000 or more (or anticip

doing so) must file the monthly report. 

The reports of monthly filers must cover all transact

that occurred between September 1 and September 

1980. In the event a monthly report was not file

September, the report must cover all transactions sinc

last report filed or (if the committee is new) from the 

• 

original donors who actually contributed the funds to the of registration through September 30.
 

local party committee.
 conti

The notice advised that local party committees that did not "Per an explanation of who qualifies as a political committee, 

exceed any of thesethresholds could terminate their report- sult FEC Regulations (11 CFR 100.5). 
NOTE: Committees filing on a monthly basis are not re­ 2. Form 3P must be used by Presidential campaigns. 

quired to file monthly reports covering the months of 3. Form 3X must be used by all political committees whic

October, November and December. Instead, these commit­ are not authorized by a candidate. 

tees must file a pre-general election report in October 1980, 

a post-general election report in December 1980 and a 

year-end report in January 1981 (see below). 

Pre-General Election Reports 

Committees authorized by candidates running in the 

general election are required to file a pre-general election 

report by October 23. The report must cover all reportable 

transactions between the last report filed and October 15. 

All monthly filers must file a pre-general election report. 

All other political committees which have made contributions or expenditures on behalf of federal candidates on or 

before October 15, 1980, and which have not previously 

reported these transactions, are also required to file a 

pre-general election report. 

Last Minute Contributions 

A committee authorized by a candidate that receives a 

contribution of $1,000 or more between October 15 and 

November 2 must, within 48 hours, disclose the contribution in writing to the FEC, the Secretary of the Senate or 

the Clerk of the House, as appropriate. This notification 

must identify the name of the candidate and the office he 

or she seeks, the name of the contributor, the amount of 

the contribution and the date it was received. These contributions are then disclosed as usual on the post-general 

election r.. port (see below). 

Post-General Election Reports 

All political committees (except authorized committees 

of candidates not in the general election) are required to 

file a post-general election report by December 4, 1980. 

The report should cover all transactions between the last 

report filed and November 24, 1980. 

Year-End Reports 

All political committees must file a veer-end (fourth 

quarter) report by January 31, 1981. The veer-end report 

must include all reportable transactions occurringsincethe 

last full report filed or (if the committee is new) from the 

date of registration through December 31,1980. 

Where Reports Are Filed 

Political committees must file their reports with the 

appropriate federal and state offices. Correct filing pro' 

cedures are described in the instructionson the back of the 

reporting forms (Form 3, 3P or 3X). 

NOTE: Each authorized committee of a candidate must file 

its report with the principal campaign committee, which in 

turn must file a consolldated sreport on FEC Form 32 (or 

3Pb) with the appropriate federal and state offices. 

Reporting Forms 

Political committees must use the following forms, with 

appropriate schedules, to file their quarterly, monthly or 

pre-general election reports: 

1. Form 3 must be used by all political committees authorized by a candidate for the House or Senate. 

Forms and additional information have been sent to 

registered committees. Questions and requests for form

should be addressed to the Office of Public Communic

tions, Federal Election Commission, 1325 K Street, N.W

Washington, D.C. 20463; or telephone 202/523·4068; to

free 800/424·9530. 

FEe EXTENDS HOURS 

To accommodate the public's increased need for info

mation during the 1980 general elections, the Commissio

is extending its office hours between October and electio

day (November 4). 

Information Specialists in the Office of Public Commun

cations will be available between 8 a.m, and 8 p.m. (Easter

Standard Time) on weekdays, beginning October 1, t

answer calls on the FEC's toll-free line: 800/424·9530

Individuals may request forms and publicatlons and obtai

information needed to comply with the federal electio

law. When the Office is closed, individuals may still call an

leave a message on the recording device. Their calls will b

returned on the next business day. 

to 

The 

7 p.m. on 

Office of 

weekdays, 

Public Records 

10 a.rn, 

will be 

to 4 p.rn. on 

open from 

Saturday

9 a.m

and 12 p.m, to 4 p.rn, on Sundays, beginning October 15

Those visiting the office may review and copy campaig

finance reports filed by political committees, as well a

other documents such as closed 'compliance cases, statistica

summaries of campaign finance reports and compute

indexes. 

ADVISORY OPINION 

INDEX AVAILABLE 

An updated edition of the Commission's cumulativ

Index to Advisory Opinions is now available. The Inde

includes three parts: a subject index and an index b

U.S. Code, both covering all opinions issued from Apr

1975 through mid-August 1980; and an index by FE

Regulations covering opinions from 1977. In additio

a transfer table indicates numerical changes in the Regul

tions after enactment of the 1979 Amendments to the Ac

Requests for the Index to Advisory Opinions should b

addressed to the Public Records Office, Federal Electio

Commission, 1325 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.

20463. Purchase price (for duplication costs) is $12.7

payable in advance. Checks, made payable to the Unite

States Treasurer, should be sent to the FEC. 

2
 
8

• ADVISORY OPINION REQUESTS 

Advisory Opinion Requests (AOR's) pose questions on 

the application of the Act or Commission Regulations to 

specific factual situations described in the AOR. The following chart lists recent AOR's with a brief description of 

the subject matterI the date the requests were made publ ic 

and the number of pages of each request. The full text of 

each AOR is available to the public in the Commission's 

Office of Public Records. 

Date Made No. of JAOR Subject Public Pages 

1980-' 01	 Publication and sale of political 8/22/80 

action committee directory 

using FEe campaign finance 

information. 

1980-102 Corporate separate segregated 8/25/80 5 

fund's solicitation of family 

members of executive and 

administrative personnel. 

1980-103 State party's distribution to 8/25/80 6 

Congressional candidates of 

funds collected through state 

tax check-off. 

'. 1980-104 Local party committee's news" 8/27/80 2 

paper ad requesting volunteers 

for Presidential campaign. 

1980-105	 Authe rizat ion Inona uth or izatio n 8/29/80 3 

notice for independent expenditure acnvttv. 

1980-106	 Summary of Presidential candl- 9/3/80 4 

dates' positions on issues 

published by unincorporated 

association. 

1980·107	 Senior law partner's volunteer 9/16/80 2 

services to Presidential campaign. 

~HNATE DISPOSITION OF 

A~~~SORY OPINION REQUESTS 

AOR 1980-82 was withdrawn by its requester on August
 

22,1980_
 

AOR 1980-85 was closed as incomplete in a letter issued
 

by the General Cou nsel on September 12, 1980.
 

AOR 1980-91 was withdrawn by its requester on August
 

20,1980.
 

AqR 1980-104 was withdrawn by its requester on
 

September 9,1980.
 

•
 

)TATUS OF 1980 ADVISORY OPINIONS 

Requests for advisory opinions (AOR's) and advi

opinions (AO's) issued by the Commission have sub

tially increased during the first eight months of 1980. W

reading the chart below, keep in mind that an opini

not necessarily issued in the year it is requested. An opi

requested in December 1979, for example, would not 

been issued until 1980. 

1978 1979 19

(1/1·12/31) (1/1-12/31l (1/1-8

AOR's Received 73 52 10

AO's Issued 60 44 

AOR's Pending 

"Thirteen of these AOR's were withdrawn or closed without 

ance of an opinion. 

ADVISORY OPINIONS: SUMMARIES 

An Advisory Opinion (AOj issued by the Commi

provides guidance with regard to the specific situa

described in the AOR's. Any· qualified person who 

requested an AO and acts in accordance with the opi

will not be subject to any sanctions under the Act. O

persons may rely on the opinion if they are involved 

specific activity which is indistinguishable in all mat

aspects from the activity discussed in the AO. T

seeking guidance for their own activity, however, sh

consult the full text of an AO and not rely only on 

summary given here. 

J AO 1980-51: Volunteer Services Provided by 

Bank Employees During Work Hours 

Volunteer services provided by an employee of the 

Farmer and MerchantLlIJat!Q_naL.Bank (the bank) 

political organization during work hours would not resu

an in-kind contribution by the bank, as long as the v

teer activities involved only an u ••• occasional, isolate

incidental use" of the bank's facilities. 11 CFR 114.9I

(iii). 

An employee of the bank could use up to one hour 

week of regularly scheduled work time to provide ser

to a political committee and to act as its official trea

(including lending his or her name to authorization no

for political advertising) because the volunteer activ

would not prevent the employee from completing his o

normal amount of work. 11 CFR 114.9(a)(1 )(i). How

the bank would have to be reimbursed for any addit

overhead or operating costs the bank incurred as a resu

the volunteer activities. 11 CF R 114.9(a). If paid by 

employee, this reimbursement would be considere

in-kind contribution to the political organization. 2 U

§434. 

The Commission expressed no opinion on the applic

of rules of the Comptroller of the Currency to the v

teer services since those rules are not within its jurisdic

(Date Issued: September 3,1980; Length: 3 pages) 

conti

3 

2

 1980-68 Supplement: Post-Dated Contributions The Committee may, however, use stationery imprinte

to Primary Runoff Election with its former title for mailings that solicit contribution

Post·dated checks received by the Zell Miller for U.S. 

Senate Committee (the Committee) for a primary runoff 

ejection are considered contributions to the Committee' 

as of the date the Committee receives them. They are 

subject to a separate contribution limit for the runoff 

election. A post-dated check must be reported as a men1b 

entry for the reporting period during which it is received~ but the amount should not be included in cash totals until 

after the check has been deposited. (Banks will not permi 

the deposit of post-dated checks until the date written on 

the check.) 2 U.S.C. §434(b); 11 CFR 102.9(a)(l) and (2). 

(Date Issued: August 28. 1980; Length: 2 pages) 

1980-81:	 Application of 1980 Annual Limit 

to Individual's 1979 Contributions 

to Draft Committees 

Contributions amounting to $12,000 made in 1979 to three 

"Draft Kennedy" committees by Mr. _Mark B, Dayton 

count against his $25,000 annual contribution limit for' 

1979 - not 1980. Mr. Dayton's contributions do not count 

against his 1980 contribution limit because they were not 

donated to a "single candidate" committee (i.e., a committee supporting Edward Kennedy only) or to COmmittees 

authorized by Edward Kennedy; nor were they designated 

for a particular election. 11 CFR 110.5(b)(2). At the time 

Mr. Dayton made the contributions, Mr. Kennedy had not 

yet announced his candidacy for the Presidency or authorized any of the three draft committees. 

The Commission noted that this opinion did not constitute 

a determination of when Mr. Kennedy became a Presidential candidate or whether the draft committees were affiliated or unaffiliated. (Date Issued: September 11, 1980; 

Length: 3 pages) 

1980-83:	 Reporting by Inactive 

I Presidential Committee 

The Crane for President Committee, Inc. (the Committee), 

the principal campaign committee of former Presidential ( 

! .:	 candidate Philip Crane, must continue to file reports 

on a monthly basis during 1980. The Act and Commission 

Regulations require monthly reporting during an election 

year for principal campaign committees of Presidential 

candidates that have received contributions or made expenditures aggregating $100,000. Mr. Crane's committee 

has exceeded this threshold and, therefore, may not change 

to a quarterly reporting schedule even though Mr. Crane is 

no longer a candidate. 2 U.S.C. §434Ia)(3)(A); 11 CFR 

104.5(b). (Date Issued: September 10, 1980; Length: 2 

pages)

fio 1980-84: Continued Use of Authorized 

Committee's Former Title 

~Congressman Richard C. White's authorized campaign 

committee (the Committee) must use its official title, the 

IliGhard C. White Congressional Club of the Permian Basin, 

on the Committee's statement of organization, on all 

reports filed by the Committee and on all authorization/ 

nonauthorization notices required by 2 U.S.C. §441d. (The 

Committee had recently amended its former title, Congressional Club of the Permian Basin, to include the candidate's 

or advocate his election, provided the Committee includ

a statement giving its full official title and indicatin

it has authorized and paid for the mailing. 2 U.S.C. §441

(a)(I). When the old stationery is used for communicatio

tee's official title does not have to be included. Nor do

that do not require the authorization notice, the Commi

the former title of the Committee's checking account ha

to be amended since the account is not subject to th

authorization/nonauthorization notice required by 2 U.S.C

§441d. (Date Issued: August 28,1980; Length: 2 pages) 

~80-86:	 Abbreviated Title for Separate
 

Segregated Fund
 

The American	 Natu ral Resources, Inco Political Actio

Committees (the Committees), the separate segregate

funds of American Natural Resources, lnc., may n

continue using the abbreviated title"ANR" on Committ

checks and letterhead. "AN RU is not an acceptable acr

nym because it is not a clearly recognized abbreviatio

by which the corporation is commonly known and it do

not adequately inform the public that American Natur

Resources, Inco sponsors the Committees. 2 U.S.C. §432(

(5); 11 CFR 102.14(c). (Date Issued: August 28, 198

Len7'2 pages)
 

~1980-88:	 Personal Services Donated to 

Presidential Campaign Committee. 

Bookkeeping services donated by an individual to th

Citizens for Election of Harry Davis as President Commi~t

would not be considered a contribution under the Act; n

would the services be reportable. 2 U.S.C. § §431 (8)(B)(

and 431 (8)(AHi). The individual would not, therefore, ha

violated the Act's 

uncompensated services 

contribution 

exceeded 

limits when the value 

$1,000. (Date Issue

of th

September 16, 1980; Length: 2 pages) .
 

~980.89: Donation of Food and Beverage to 

C.ongressman's District Office Receptions 

Food and beverage donated by corporations, partnership

sole proprietorships and individuals to receptions hosted b

.QQng~essr:nan Tony CoeJho_at his district offices would n

constitute "contributions" or "expenditures" under th

Act. :'­

The receptions will be held for members of an Arts Com

mittee (and other interested parties) who advise Congres

man Coelho on federal legislation related to the arts. Sinc

the purpose of the receptions is to help Congressma

Coelho carry out his duties as a federal officeholder, an

not to support his reelection campaign, donations to th

receptions .would not be subject to the Act's limits an

prohibitions on contributions or reporting requirements. 

U.S.C.§§431(8) and (9),441b. 

Such 'donations could, however, result in prohibited con

tributions from oorporations or in-kind contributions from

individuals, sole proprietorships and partnerships if:
 

'l, Any communication made in connection with the rece

tions expressly	 advocated the election or defeat o

Congressman Coelho or any other candidate for federa

name, as required by 2 U.S.C. §432(e)(4) and 11 CFR 2. Contributions were solicited, made or accepted for Co

office; or 

102.14(a).) gressman Coelho's campaign. 

4 
This opinion supercedes those portions of AD 1975-14 and Mr. Anderson will not be excluded from receiving 

OC 1975-125 that held that donations received and spent election public funding because his campaign efforts fo

• 

by federal officeholders to defray expenses related to 

their office are reportable contributions and expenditures. 

The Commission expressed no opinion on the application 

of Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives or of the 

Internal Revenue Code to the donations. (Date Issued: 

Presidency have qualified him as a "candidate," and 

various organizations supporting him have qualifie

newly established "political parties" for purposes of 

Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act and rele

Commission Regulations. 

September 5, 1980; Length: 3 pages) 

~1980-90: Public Affairs Program 

Produced and Distributed by Corporation 

The Public Affairs Division of the Atlantic Richfield Company (the Company) may not produce a videotape of interviews with the major Presidential candidates on energyrelated topics for use on commercial and cable television 

because the communication would result in a prohibited 

in-kind contribution to each of the candidates. Commission 

Regulations permit corporations to distribute nonpartisan 

communications to the general public only if the communications: 

1. Do not	 favor one candidate or political party over another; and 

2. Are obtained from	 a civic or other nonprofit organization which does not endorse or support, or is not affiliated with, any candidate or political party. 11 CFR 

114.4(c)(3). 

• 

Although nonpartisan in nature, the proposed videotape 

would still result in a prohibited in-kind contribution 

to each of the participating candidates since it was prepared 

by the Company - not a civic or other nonprofit organization. Nor would the program be considered a news story 

exempt from the Act's definition of expenditure since that 

exemption applies only to election-related news stories, 

commentaries and editorials sponsored by broadcasters, 

newspapers or other public media. 2 U.S.C. §431(1)(B)(i). 

Chairman Max L. Friedersdorf and Commissioner Joan D. 

Aikens will file dissenting opinions. (Date Issued: September 9, 80; Length: 3 pages) 

o 1980-93: Coin as Campaign Item . .: 

"I '.'.1 

Richard Bozzuto, a Senate candidate from Connecticut, 

may distribute a United States penny as a campaign item. 

All costs related to the distribution must be reported 

pursuant to 2 U.S.C. §434. The Commission expressed no 

opinion on the possible application of other federal statutes 

to the item. (Date Issued: September 10, 1980; Length: 2 

pages) 

1980-96: Post-Election Public Funding for 

New Party Presidential Candidate 

John B. Anderson will not be excluded from receiving postelection public funding as the Presidential candidate of a 

new party, provided: 

• 

1. Mr. Anderson receives five percent or more of the total 

popular votes cast in the 1980 Presidential general 

election (including votes cast for him as an independent 

candidate); and 

2. Mr. Anderson satisfies all other eligibility requirements 

for public funding stipulated in the Presidential Election 

Mr. Anderson qualifies as a "candidate" under the Pres

tial Election Campaign Fund Act because he is pres

certified to be on the ballot (or has met all requirement

ballot access) in 10 or more states as either an indepen

candidate or the candidate of a political party.* 26 U

§9002(2) (B). 

A number of the organizations supporting Mr. Ander

candidacy qualify as "political parties" because they 

the three criteria established in Commission Regulation

a "political party ."Specifically, each of these pol

organizations constitutes: 111) an association, committe

organization 2) which nominates or selects an individua

election to any federal office, including the office of P

dent or Vice President of the U.S. 3) whose name ap

on the general election ballot as the candidate of 

association, committee or organization" (numbers a

for emphasis). 11 CFR 9002.15. 

The National Unity Campaign, headquartered in Wash

ton, D.C.• and various state organizations supporting 

Anderson satisfy the second criteria of a political party, 

that of "nominating" or "selecting" a candidate, bec

they have met the requirements in their respective states 

obtaining ballot access for a candidate. In some states, 

Anderson organizations have conducted successful peti

drives while in other states the organizations have obta

ballot access by holding caucuses to select delegates to s

conventions which, in turn, have selected Mr. Anderso

their Presidential candidate. 

The organizations which have nominated Mr. Anderson 

fulfili the third criteria of "political party" when the 

receives verification from appropriate state election offi

that Mr. Anderson will appear on the ballot in their res

tive states as the candidate of one of these organizations

The Commission did not decide whether theNationalU

Campaign or any of the other organizations which 

nominated Mr. Anderson constitute a "national comm

of a political party" as defined by 2 U.S.C. §431(14). 

Chairman John Warren McGarry filed a dissenting OPi

Commissioners Frank P. Reiche and Robert D. Tie

filed concurring opinions (Date Issued: September 4, 1

Length: 21 pages, including dissenting and concu

opinions] 

"In AO 1980·50, the Commission concluded that a new party c

date would be eligible to receive post-election public funding b

on all the popular votes received by the candidate in the 

Presidential general election, includinq those votes cast for 

Campaign Fund Act.	 candidate as an independent candidate. 

5 
After issuing the Anderson opinion, the FEC filed a su

plement to its motion to dismiss the suit, submitting th

opinion and arguing that it fully supported its consiste

position that the case should be dismissed. Plaintiffs, wh

had opposed the FEC's motion to dismiss, also filed the

own motion to dismiss the case as moot. 

./ 

COURT DENIES FEC'S 

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

MOTION 

IN 

INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES SUIT 

On August 28, 1980, the U.S. District Court for the 

District of Columbia issued an expedited order in the suit 

FEC v, Americans for Change, et al. (Civil Action No. 80­

1754) with an opinion to follow at a later date. In its order, 

the Court denied the FEC's motion for summary judgment 

while granting defendants' motion for summary judgment. 

The FEC had sought a ruling from the Court that: 

1. Expenditures defendants proposed	 to make on behalf of 

a publicly funded Presidential nominee of a major party 

were in violation of 26 U.S.C. §9012(f)(I); and 

2. 26 U.S.C. §9012(f), which limits expenditures made by 

unauthorized political committees on behalf of a Presidential nominee receiving public funds, is constitutional 

as applied to defendants' expenditures. 

Defendants, on the other hand, had sought a ruling that: 

1. This	 provision of the Presidential Election Campaign 

Fund Act did not apply in cases where a committee's 

activities were independent of the candidate's campaign; 

and 

2. Altematively, if the statute were applied as suggested by 

the Commission, it would be unconstitutional. 

DISMISSES
 

OHN B. ANDERSON ET AL.
 

v. FEC 

On September 9, 1980, the U.S. District Court for the 

District of Columbia dismissed the SUit, John B. Anderson 

et al. v. FEC (Civil Action No. 80-1911 I. The Court determined that there was no longer a need for a decision either 

on the FEC's motion to dismiss the suit or on the substantive issues raised in the suit. 

In the suit, plaintiffs had sought an expedited ruling by the 

Court that John B. Anderson would be eligible as an 

independent candidate for the same post-election public 

funding as that provided Presidential candidates of "new 

parties," if he received five percent or more of all popular 

votes cast in the 1980 Presidential general election and met 

other requirements of the Act. Such a ruling, plaintiffs told 

the Court, would immediately make large bank loans available to the Anderson campaign. 

The FEC had consistently argued that plaintiffs should have 

requested an advisory opinion from the. FEC on the application of the Act and the Commission's new regulations to 

the Anderson campaign before seeking a Court ruling. On 

August 13, plaintiffs did file an advisory opinion request 

NEW LITIGATION 

v:;;;;.n B. Anderson et al. v. FEe (Seoond Suit! 

Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to declar

unconstitutional those provisions of the Act which entitle 

national party committee to receive contributions of up t

$20,000 per year from individuals (2 U.S.C. §441a(a)(

(B)) and to make special limited expenditures on behalf 

its Presidential nominee (2 U.S.C. §441a(d)(I)). Plaintif

ask the District Court of Maine to certify the questions 

constitutionality to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fir

Circuit and to grant a preliminary injunction directing th

FEC to permit the "National Unity Campaign 441a(

Committee," a committee which registered the day befo

suit was filed, to: 

1. Receive contributions of up to $20,000 from individua

during 1980, as provided by 2 U.S.C. §441a(a)(I)(B

and
 

2. Make special "coordinated" expenditures on Mr. Ande

son's behalf, as provided by 2 U.S.C. §441a(d)(I).
 

On September 22, the Commission filed a motion to d

miss the case and opposed plaintiffs' motion for a prelim

nary injunction.
 

(U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, Docket N

tember 

80·0272P 

II, 

and 

1980.) 

Supplement, September 8, 1980, and Se

REVISED GENERAL ELECTION
 

REGULATIONS PRESCRIBED
 

On September 5, 1980, the Commission prescribe

revised regulations governing the public financing of Pre

dential general election campaigns. The revised regulatio

contain refinements based on the Commission's experien

in administering the public funding program for the 197

general election. They also reflect the 1979 Amendments t

the Act.
 

These regulations. which were renumbered to conform wit

(AOR 1980-96) with the FEC, and on September 4 the the section of the U.S. Code on which they are based (2

Commission issued an opinion declaring Mr. Anderson U.S.C. §9001, et seq.), were published in their entirety 

eligible for post-election public funding as the candidate of the Federal Register on June 27, 1980 (45 FR 43371

a new political party. (See summary of AO 1980·96, page Highlights of major modifications in the regulations a

5.) peared in the August 1980 Record. 

6 
STATUS OF FEC REGULATIONS 

• Date Sent Federal Register Date Prescribed* * 

Regulations'" to Congress Publication by the Commission 

11 CFR 9033.9 4/10/80 4/15/80 7/3/80 

Suspension of Primary (45 FR 25378) 

Matching Fund Payments 

11 CFR Part 4 Not applicable 5/13/80 6/12/80 

Public Records and the (45 FR 31291) 

Freedom of Information Act 

11 CFR Part 5 Not applicable 5/13/80 6/12/80 

Access to Public Disclosure (45 FR 31292) 

Division Documents 

11 CFR, Parts 100 and 110 5/14/80 5/23/80 817/80 

Contributions to and (45 FR 34865) 

Expenditures by Delegates

to National Nominating 

Conventions 

11 CFR, Parts 100,106, 6/13/80 6/27/80 9/5/80 

110,140-146 and 9001-9007 (45 FR 43371) 

Public Financing of Presidential General Election 

Campaigns 

•
 

"The chart is cumulative. listing all amendments to the FEe Regulations Proposed after the April 1980 edition of 11 CFR was pu

lished. including any technical amendments.
 

"'The Commission may prescribe its regulations 30 legislative days after it has transmitted them to Congress, provided neither the Hou

nor the Senate disapproves them during this period.
 

campaign ($20 million plus a cost-of-living adjustm

Major party candidates accepting public financing 

their general election campaigns are subject to a spen

limit of $29,440,000 (the amount of the grant). In 

tion, the use of the nominees' personal funds is limite

FEC CERTIFIES DEMOCRATIC $50,000. (All expenditures made by or on behalf of a 

GENERAL ELECTION FUNDS---- Presidential candidate are considered to be made on b

On August 21,1980, the Commission approved payment of the Presidential candidate.) Private contributions 

of $29,440,000 in federal funds for the general election individuals and groups may not be accepted. Preside

campaign of Democratic Presidential nominee Jimmy candidates may, however, solicit private funds, subje

Carter and his Vice Presidential running mate, Walter monetary limits, to cover legal and accounting expe

Mondale. President Carter and Vice President Mondale had incurred to ensure compliance with the Act. These lega

requested the funding in an August 15 letter to the Com­ accounting costs are exempt from the overall spending 

mission. In that letter, the candidates agreed to abide by for each of the Presidential candidates. 

the overall spending limit, to use only public funds for the 

campaign and to comply with other legal requirements. As of August 21, 1980, the Commission had also cert

They designated the Carter/Mondale Reelection Commit­ $29,440,000 to the Republican Presidential and 

• 

tee, Inc.• based in Washington, D.C., as the recipient of the Presidential nominees, $8,832,000 in Presidential n

funds. : nating convention payments to the Democratic and He

Iican National Committees ($4,416,000 each) 

By law, the Presidential nominee of each major party is $29,624,936.78 in Presidential primary matching fund

entitled to full public financing of the general election ten Presidential primary candidates. 

7 
Mayan 

believes a 

individual 

candidate 

file a 

or 

complaint 

committee 

with the FEC if he or she 

has violated a provision 

The list beiow identifies all FEC documents which 

of the election law or FEC Regulations? 

Yes. A complaint should be filed with the FEC's Office 

of General Counsel. It must contain the name, address and 

telephone number of the person making the complaint; a 

clear statement of facts; and any evidence concerning the 

violation. The complaint must be sworn to by the person 

making the complaint, and it must be signed and notarized. 

(For information on how the FEe processes a complaint, 

see the April 1980 Record, page 6.) 

How can an individual obtain information on electionrelated topics over which the FEe has no jurisdiction, such 

as tax deductible contributions? 

Topics that are related to federal elections, but which 

do not come under the FEe's jurisdiction, are listed below 

with the appropriate agency to contact for more information: 

Ballot Access. State election office in state where candidacy 

is desired. 

Communications Issues (equal time provisions, equal access 

to media and editorial replies). Federal Communications 

Commission, Complaints/Political Broadcast Branch, 1919 

M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554; Telephone: 

202/632-7586. 

Political Activity and the Hatch Act (federal employees). 

Office of Personnel Management, Office of General Counsel, 1900 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20415; Tele· 

phone: 202/254-3230. 

Tax Issues (tax deductible contributions and federal taxation of political committees). Internal Revenue Service 

(I RS), Information Office, 1201 E Street, N.W., Washing· 

ton, D.C. 20226: Telephone: 202/488-3100. In addition, 

each state IRS office has an 800 line. Call the local operator 

for the number. 

Tabulation of the Popular Vote. State election office in 

each state. 

Voter Fraud or Violation of Voting Rights. State election 

office in each state. For alleged violations of federal law: 

Justice Department, Public Integrity Unit, 10th Street and 

Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20530; 

Telephone: 202/724-7062. 

appeared in the Federal Register between August 7,1980, 

and September 5, 1980. Copies of these notices are not 

available from the FEC. 

Federal Register 

Notice Title Publication Date Citation 

1980-26 11 CFR, Parts 100 and 8/7/80 45 FA 52356 

110: Contributions to
 

and Expenditures by
 

Delegates to National
 

Nominating Conventions
 

(Notice ot tinal rule-


making)
 

1980-27	 i t CFR, Chapter 1: 9/25/80 45 FR 56349 

Nonpartisan Cornmunlcations by Corporations or 

Labor Organizations 

(Notice of proposed 

rutemaking) 

1980-28 11 CFA. Parts100.106. 9/5/80 45 FA 58820 

110, 140·146 and 90Q1­

9007: Public Flnancmq of 

Presidential General Election Campaigns; Ettectwe 

Date Confirmation 

FEe PUBLISHES 

NAMES OF NON FILERS 

From July 23 through August 22, 1980, the Federal 

Election Commission published five separate listings of 

nonfilers who failed to file campaign finance reports 

required by the Federal Election Campaign Act (the Act). 

On July 23, August 1 and August 4, 1980, the Commission 

published the names of six campaign committees authorized by Senate and House candidates which had failed to 

file their pre-election reports for primaries held in Connectlort, Georgia, Michigan, Missouri and Tennessee. On July 

31, 1980, the Commission published a list of campaign 

committees authorized by five Senate and 28 House candidates which had failed to file their second quarterly reports. 

This list included committees based in 14 states. On August 

The RECOAD is pubtisbed by the Federal Election Commission, 1325 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463. Cornmissioners are: Max L. Friedersdorf, Chairman; John Warren McGarry, Vice Chairman; Joan D. Aikens; Thomas E. 

Harris; Frank P. Reiche; Robert O. Tieman; J.S. Kimmitt, Secretary of the Senate, Ex Officio; Edmund L. Henshaw, 

Jr., Clerk of the House of Representatives, Ex Officio. For more information, call 202/523-4068 or toll-free 800/424­

9530. 

8 
22, the Commission published the names of two campaign MUR 960: National Political Committee's 

committees authorized by House candidates which had Failure to Include Notices 

failed to file their pre-election reports for a Georgia primary 

•
 

runoff.
 

The Act specifies that the Commission publish only the 

names of committees authorized by candidates [l.e., lndividuals who have received or expended in excess of $5,000 

to influence federal elections), Nevertheless, the Act gives 

the Commission broad authority to initiate enforcement 

actions against any type of political committee for failure 

to file required reports. Enforcement action against nonfilers and late filers is based on the level of financial activity, the percentage of total votes received by the candidate, 

and the degree of lateness of the report. 

SUMMARY OF MUR's 

Selected compliance cases, which have been closed and 

put on the public record, are summarized in the Record. 

Compliance matters stem from possible Violations of the 

Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, which 

come to the Commission's attention either through formal 

complaints originating outside the Commission or by the 

FEC's own monitoring procedures. The Act gives the FEC 

the exclusive jurisdiction for the civil enforcement of the 

Act. Potential violations are assigned case numbers by the 

Office of General Counsel and become "Matters Under 

Review" (MUR's), All MUR investigations are kept confidential by the Commission, as required bv the Act. 

• MUR's may be closed at anyone of several points during 

the enforcement process, including when the Commission: 

Determines that no violation of the Act has occurred; 

Determines that there is no reason to believe or no 

probable cause to believe a violation of the Act has 

occurred; . 

Enters Into a conciliation agreement With the respondent; 

Finds probable cause to believe a violation has occurred 

and decides to sue; or 

Decides at any point during the enforcement process to 

take no further action. 

After the MUR is closed and released by the Office of 

General Counsel, the Commission makes the MUR file 

available to the public. This file contains the complaint, 

the findings of the General Counsel's Office and the Commission's actions with regard to the case, including the full 

text of any conciliation agreement. The Commission's 

actions are not necessarily based on, or in agreement with, 

the General Counsel's analysis. 

Selection of MUR's for summary is made only from MUR's 

closed after January 1, 1979. The Record article does not 

summarize every stage in the compliance process. Rather, 

• 

the summary provides only enough background to make 

clear the Commission's final determination. The full text of 

these MUR's and others which were closed between 1976 

and the present are available for review and purchase in the 

Commission's Public Records Office. 

9 

on General Public Communications 

On April 28. 1980, the Commission entered into a conc

tlon agreement with a national political committee w

had violated 2 U.S.C. §441d by failing to display s

ments of candidate authorization/nonauthorization 

communications which were directed to the general pu

and which expressly advocated the election of cle

identified federal candidates. 

Compleint: On April 30, 1979, a national "pro-cho

political committee filed a complaint against a nati

"pro-life" political committee (registered under the 

and a state "pro-life" group (not registered under the A

The pro-choice committee alleged that the pro-life poli

committee had made significant expenditures during 

to influence federal elections, but had failed to report t

expenditures to the FEC. Specifically. the pro-ch

committee claimed that: 

1. The	 national pro-life committee and the state pro

group may have violated 2 U.S.C. §434 by failin

report expenditures for the preparation and distribu

of brochures and flyers endorsing federal candid

The complaint noted that the national pro-life com

tee sponsored newspaper advertisements directed 

contin

FEC PUBLIC APPEARANCES 

In keeping with its objective of making informa

tion available to the public, the Commission accept

invitations to address public gatherings. This colum

lists upcoming scheduled Commission appearance

the name of the sponsoring organization, the locatio

of the event and the name of the Commission

speaker. For additional information on any schedule

appearance, please contact the sponsoring organiza

tion. 

10/14	 Human Factors Society 

Los Angeles, California 

Dr. Gary Greenhalgh, Director, 

Clearinghouse 

10/22	 American Society of Women Accountants 

Washington, D.C. 

Commissioner Joan D. Aikens 

10/26	 Bradley Hills Presbyterian Church 

Adult Education Seminar 

Bethesda, Maryland 

Commissioner Frank P. Reiche 

10/29	 American University Students 

Federal Election Commission 

Commissioner Robert O. Tiernan 
the general public costing approximately $955, widely group had neither paid for nor authorized the printing of it

distributed a brochure costing $699, and distributed a name on the communications cited in the complaint

one-page flyer. 

2. The national pro-life committee may have violated 2 

U.S.C. §434 by failing to report the liquidation of a 

debt. The complaint noted that, while the national 

pro-life committee had reported expenditures jar 

printing the brochure as an outstanding debt to a printing company on its 1978 post-general election report, it 

did not report the debt (or its liquidation) on any 

subsequent report. 

3. The state pro-life group constituted a "political committee" by virtue of making expenditures in excess of 

$1,000 to advocate the election of federal candidates, 

and should have registered with the Commission and 

reported pursuant to 2 U.S.C. § §433 and 434. 

4. The	 national pro-life committee and the state pro-life 

group may have violated 2 U.S.C. §441d by making 

expenditures for communications expressly advocating 

the election of clearly identified federal candidates 

without including the required statements of authorization/nonauthorization by those candidates; and 

5. The national pro-life committee may have violated 2 

U.S.C. §433 by jailing to include the state pro-life group 

and/or other pro-life groups as affiliated organizations in 

the statement of organization it had filed with the FEe. 

General Counsel Reports: After investigating these allegations, the Office of General Counsel reached the following 

conclusions: 

While the national pro-life committee had failed to report 

the debt for printed materials on its 1978 year-end report, 

the committee had responded promptly to the Commission's request jar further information (RFAII concerning 

this debt. Therefore, since the committee had corrected this 

reporting error prior to the jiling of the complaint, the 

Office of General Counsel recommended that the Commission take no further action on the committee's failure to 

report debt liquidation. 

Although the national pro-life committee did not refute the 

fact that certain publications were examples of express 

advocacy, it maintained that they were exempted from the 

requirements of 2 U.S.C. §441d since this provision omitted any direct reference to a requirement to print a notice 

on "hand bills." The General Counsel's report pointed out, 

however, that §441d exempted only those "small items" 

which could not bear the notice. In addition, since the 

national committee distributed more than 15,000 copies of 

the handbills, the General Counsel concluded they were 

general public advertisements - not "personal correspondence," as the national pro-life committee had maintained. The Office of General Counsel therefore recommended that the Commission find reasonable cause to 

believe that the national pro-life committee had violated 2 

U.S.C. §441d. 

During its investigation into the state pro-life group's 

possible failure to include arthorization/nonauthorization 

notices by candidates on express advocacy communications, the Office of General Counsel found that the state 

10 

Investigation revealed that the state group's name was use

by two individuals representing local pro-life groups, with

out the authorization or knowledge of the state pro-lif

group. Therefore, the Office of General Counsel recom

mended the Commission find no reasonable cause to believ

that the state pro-life group had violated 2 U.S.C. §441d

The General Counsel believed that the two individual

representing local pro-life groups may have violated 

U.S.C. §441d, but, because the publications sponsored b

the two individuals were minimal in cost and limited i

circulation, the General Counsel recommended that th

Commission take no further action. The Office of Genera

Counsel did, however, send certified lette rs to the tw

individuals explaining that they should have indicated tha

they had "paid jar" the publication of the communication

and stated whether or not the publications were authorize

by a candidate. 

The Office of General Counsel recommended that n

further action be taken with regard to the national cornrnit

tee's failure to report the state pro-life group or other loca

pro-life groups as affiliated organizations in violation of 

U.S.C. §433. 

Commission Determination: On November 1, 1979, th

Commission found reasonable cause to believe that th

national pro-life committee had violated 2 U.S.C. §441d b

making expenditures for communications expressly advo

cating the election of clearly identified federal candidate

without properly displaying statements of authorization

nonauthorization by those candidates endorsed. On Apr

28, 1980, the Commission entered into a conciliation agree

ment with the national committee in which the committe

agreed to pay a civil penalty for the violation. 

CHANGE OF ADDRESS 

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 FEC Form 1 (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 lett 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. 
/ 

Date M

Audit Public 

•	 

12. Roger Lea MacBride, The MacBride For 7/16/80 

PresidentCommittee and all Authorized 

Committees of Roger Lea MacBride 

AUDITS RELEASED
 

TO THE PUBLIC
 13. Gus Hall, Hall Tyner Election Campaign 7/24/80 

The Federal Election Campaign Act, as amended (the 

Act) requires candidates and political committees to file 

financial disclosure reports with the Commission. The Act 

also gives the Commission authority to audit campaigns of 

all Presidential candidates who receive public funds, and 

the	 reports of other political committees. Final audit 

reports are available to the press through the Press Office 

and to the general public through the Office of Public 

Records. The following is a chronological listing of audits 

released between May 15, 1980, and September 11, 1980. 

Date Made 

Audit Public 

1.	 Black Voters For Republican Congress 5/15/80 

2.	 Herman Badillo, NY/21, Committee 5/15/80 

For the Re-Election of Congressman 

Herman Badillo and the Friends of 

Herman Badillo 

3. State Republican Executive Committee	 5/28/80 

of Texas 

• 4. Nebraska Republican State Central 5/28/80 

Committee and the Nebraska Hepublican 

Federal Campaign Committee 

5.	 Ohio Democratic State Voter Registra- 5/28/80 

tion Drive 

6.	 National Democratic Party Affairs 5/28/80 

Committee of the Arkansas Democratic 

State Committee 

7.	 American Conservative Union 5/28/80 

8.	 Republican National Committee - 6/12/80 

Contributions 

9.	 Texas Medical Political Action 6/25/80 

Committee 

10.	 Honorable Richard H. Austin, Austin 6/25/80 

For Senate 

11.	 The Carter/Mondale Presidential Com- 7/10/80 

mittee, Inc. (Threshold Audit Report 

of Primary Campaign) 

Committee, Hall Tyner Election Campaign Committee of California and 

New York Hall-Tyner Aptheker Campaign Committee 

14. Gus Hall/Hall-Tyner-Flory 8/1/80 

Campaign '76 

15.	 Republican State Central Committee 8/12/80 

of Maryland 

16.	 Regular Hudson County Dinner 9/11/80 

Committee 

17.	 Idaho Republican Congressional 9/11/80 

Carnpaiqn Committee/Idaho Republican 

State Central Committee 

SUBSCRIPTIONS TO 

THE ELECTION LAW UPDATES 

AND THE ELECTION CASE LAW SERIES 

The following publications from the FEC's Clea

house are now available on a subscription basis from 

Government Printing Office: 

Election Law Updates is a quarterly series which 

marizes all new state and federal election legislation

series is cumulative through the year, culminating i

annual summary. It is indexed by topic and state. 

scription price: $11.00 per year. 

Election Case Law is a quarterly serieswhich summa

recent state and federal litigation relating to elec

matters. The series is cumulative through the 

culminating in an annual summary. It is indexed 

topic and case. Subscription price: $10.00 per year. 

You may order these subscriptions by mail from: Sup

tendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Of

Washin9ton, D.C. 20402. Identify report title. Enclo

check or money order for subscription price(s) payab

Superintendent of Documents. Please do not send check

money orders to the Federal Election Commission. 

•
 

11 
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
 

1325 K STREET, NW
 

WASHINGTON, DC 20463
 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS
 

FIRST CLASS MAIL
 

POSTAGE & FEES PAID
 

FEC 

WASHINGTON, D.C.
 

PERMIT NO. G-31