FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

TABLE OF aIiI'l'ml'S

2 ADVISORY OPINICfiS

20463 Volume 17, Numb

12 CCl'WERENCES: chicago, November 14-

11 INDEX

9 COMPLIANCE: MURs Released to the P

4 800 LINE: Travel

COORT CASES

1 Faucher and MRLC v. FEC

1 FEC v. NOW

2 New Litigation

IFEC v. NOW, No. 89-5230 (D.C. Cir.).

2FEC v. NOW, 713 F. Supp. 428 (D.D.C.

1989). The decision was summarized in 

July 1989 Record•.

SPECIAL ELECTlCfiS

7 pennsylvania, 2nd Congressional Di

FEe v. NATl<H\L ORGANlZATlOO' FOR

lD'IEN, INC. (mw)

Because of the Supreme Court's ac

in the Faucher case (see above), the

Commission filed a motion to dismiss i

appeal in FEC v. NCM.1/ The court of

appeals granted the motion on October 

1991. Like the lower courts'in the F

case, the district court in NOW also 

on the Supreme Court's "express advoca

construction of 2 U.S.C. §441b in MCF

The NOW court ruled that the prohibiti

corporate expenditures did not apply 

series of letters sent as part of a NO

membership drive because the material

not contain f1 express advocacy.1l2/ Th

court rejected the FEC's broader inter

tation of the 441b prohibition.

(Court Cases conti

999 E Street NW Washington DC

COURT CASES

1Faucher v. FEC, 743 F. Supp. 64 (D. Me.

1990) aff'd, 928 F.2d 468 (1st Cir. 1991).

The decisions were summarized in the

September 1990 and May 1991 Record issues.

FAUCHER AND MAINE RIGHT TO LIFE COMMITl'EE,

INC. v. FEe (90-1923)

on October 7, 1991, the u.s. Supreme

Court denied the FEC's petition for the

Court to review the court of appeals' decision in the Faucher case. In its petition,

the FEC had explicitly urged the Court to

reconsider its "express advocacy" construction of 2 U.S.C. S441b in FEC v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life (MCFL), a construction that was determinative in the Faucher

rulings by the lower courts as well as in

FEC v. NOW (see below article).

Section 441b prohibits "any corporation

whatever U from making "a contribution or

expenditure in connection with any [federal] election••.• " In MCFL, the Supreme

Court said that ttan expenditure must

constitute 'express advocacy' in order to

be subject to the prohibition of S441b."

MCFL, 479 U.S. 238, 249 (1986). Both the

court of appeals and the district~court in

the Faucher case relied upon this statement

in ruling against the FEC.!/

Faucher focused on an FEC regulation

that permits a corporation to use its

treasury funds to prepare and distribute

voter guides to the general public as long

as the guide is nonpartisan. See 11 CFR

114.4(b)(5)(i). Citing the Supreme Court's

MCFL statement, both courts found that the

regulation was invalid because it applied

"issue advocacy" rather than "express

advocacy" as a factor for determining

whether a corporate voter guide constituted

a prohibited expenditure.

November 1991
November 1991 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 17, Number 11 '..'0'; ,

Federal Election Coamission, 999 E Street, NW, Washington, OC 20463

800/424-9530 202;219-3420 202;219-3336 (TOO)

Nmf LITIGATIQ{

White v , U.S.A and FEe

William D. White asks the court to find

that the provision permitting candidates to

make unlimited contributions to their own

campaigns (see 11 CFR 110.10(a}) is unconstitutional because it confers a priVilege

on candidates that is denied to other U.S.

citizens. He further asks the court to:

find that candidates' contributions to

their own campaigns are subject to the

$1,000 limit; order candidates who have

exceeded the limit to pay a penalty in the

amount of their excessive contributions;

and issue a preliminary injunction prohibiting federal candidates from making contributions to their campaigns in excess of

$1,000. The court denied the motion for a

preliminary injunction on August 26, 1991.

U.S. District Court for the western

District of pennsylvania, civil Action No.

91-1201, July 18, 1991.

ADVISORY OPINIONS

ADVISORY OPlNIW ~TS

Recent requests for advisory opinions

(AORs) are listed below. The full text of

each AOR is available for review and comment in the FEC's Public Records Office.

AOR 1991-32

Contributor identification and fundraising

for selected candidates by consultant

company. (Date Made Public: September 26,

1991; Length: 24 pages plus attachments)

.NJR 1991-33

Allocation of expenses when party committee

receives partial state funding to administer primary elections. (Date Made Public:

October 4, 1991; Length: 4 pages plus

attachments)

Jolm Warren McGarry, Chairman

Joan D. Aikens, Vice Chairman

Lee Ann Elliott

'Ihomas J. Josefiak

Danny L. McDonald

SCott E. 'Ibomas

NJ 1991-26: Services for' 900-Line

FundI"aising ,

Versatel Corporation prOpbsed providing

services to candidates and campaigns for

billing, collecting, identIfying and

screening contributions 'raised through 900-

line telephone calls. Versatel's proposed

method of charging political committees for

its services is permissible assuming that

the method conforms to Versatel's ordinary

course of business and represents its usual

and normal charge. Versatel's proposed

services for identifying and screening

contributions are acceptable because the

company will be able to identify all

contributors and will separate contributions of questionable legality.

Background

Versatel plans to provide its billing

services to long distance providers (such

as AT&T or MCI) for the collection of contributions resulting from 900-line calls.

(Versatel may also contract directly with

telephone service bureaus.) This arrangement differs from the typical arrangement

under which the long distance provider

contracts with a local exchange carrier

(LEe) for billing and collection services.

Versa tel also plans to identify and

screen contributions. (Screening services

should otherwise be provided by a telephone

service bureau or another company certified

by the campaign as offering comparable

services. See AO 1991-20.)

ResJ.Xlllsibilities of 900-Line Companies

In past advisory opinions, when considering the responsibilities of companies

providing 900-line services to political

committees, the Commission has set forth

two principal requirements:

o The company must provide services at the

usual and normal charge in order to avoid

corporate contributions to the committee;

and

o The company must take certain measures to

identify contributors and prevent

Walter J. Stewart, Secretary of the Senate,

Ex Officio Commissioner

Donnald K. Anderson, Clerk of the House of

Representatives, Ex Officio Commdssioner

2
November 1991 FEDERAL ELECTION COrvlMISSION

prohibited and excessive contributions.

AOs 1991-2 and 1990-14 (issued to long

distance providers) and ADs 1991-20 and

1990-1 (issued to service bureaus).

Subject to certain conditions, Versatel's proposal satisfies these requirements.

usual and Nonnal Charge

Versatel proposes charging political

committees a fee for each invoice (bill)

sent to a caller. The per-invoice fee will

be on a "volume-sensitive sliding scale":

the greater the number of invoices, the

less the fee for each invoice. In calculating the fee, Versatel will consider

anticipated calls. Versatel plans to

charge a flat fee for additional services,

such as follow-up letters or telephone

calls to obtain contributor information.

This fee schedule is permissible

asswning it conforms to Versatel's ordinary

course of business and usual and normal

charge •.!/

Contributor Identification

and Screening

Under its proposal, Versatel will

obtain information on contributors through

an invoice form that contributors must

complete and return with their payments

(contributions). The invoices will be

mailed with a brochure that explains the

law's restrictions on contributions.

Versatel will screen contributions for

compliance with those restrictions and will

separately handle contributions that raise

questions of legality. (See below.)

Obtaining Billing NamesjAddresses. In

its billing procedures, Versatel will first

obtain a magnetic tape, prepared by the

long distance provider, that lists the

phone numbers fram which gOO-line calls

were made and the charge per call. Versatel will then match the phone numbers

(including unlisted numbers) with names and

addresses by using Billing Name and Address

services purchased fram local phone compa- nies.~/ Versatel plans to send a three1The Commission assumes that the charges

for each campaign will cover Versatel's

costs plus a reasonable profit.

2service bureaus may provide Versatel with

transcriptions of callers' recorded

responses to contributor identity questions

posed during the phone call, as described

in AD 1991-20. However, this information

is not essential to Versatel's services.

Volume 17, Number 

part invoice to the person listed for each

phone number. (The company will send

separate bills if contributions to more

than one campaign are made from the same

telephone number.)

Requesting Information from Contributors. The first part of the invoice wil

include the amount of the charges, an

account number coded to identify the

campaign and the telephone number, and

instructions to make checks payable to

"Versatel Campaign Billing Services," the

name Versatel will use for political

accounts.

The second part will identify the

charges as a political contribution and

name the recipient candidate or campaign.

It will also include information on each

call (amount, date, time, duration).

The third part of the invoice will ask

the contributor to provide certain inform

tion and will note the importance of

completing and returning the form with the . contribution check. The form will specif

cally request the contributor's address (

different from the billing address), the

name of his or her employer, and whether h

or she is a u.s. citizen or green card

holder.

The brochure enclosed with the invoice

will explain some of the law'S prohibition

and limitations. For example, it will

state that "your contribution must come

from your personal bank. account, and not

fram corporate or labor union funds." Th

brochure will also caution against contri

butions made in the name of another.

Screening Contributions. When deposi

ing payments, Versatel will maintain

separate records for each committee,

recording the amount and donor identifica

tion of each contribution. If a contribu

tion is questionable-if it lacks complete

identification or raises questions of

legality-Versatel will take follow-up

measures (e.g., letters or phone calls).

The returned invoices together with th

accompanying checks will alert Versatel if

someone called on behalf of, or used the

phone of, a corporation or labor union or

if someone used a phone that was not in th

name of an inunediate family member (to mi

~rnize or prevent contributions made in the

name of another). See 2 U.S.C. §§441b(a)

and 441£.

Versatel will separate questionable

contributions when forwarding net proceed

and contributor records to the long distance provider (which will deliver them to

(continued

3
November 1991 FEDERAL ELECTION CONUVlISSIOI\J

the service bureau for distribution to the

campaigns) •

Commissioner Scott E. Thomas plans to

file a dissenting opinion. (Date Issued:

october 1, 1991; Length: 7 pages)

AD 1991-28: Videotaped Twice-Yearly

Solicitation

The Golden Rule Financial Corporation and

its PAC may solicit employees under the

twice-yearly provisions by mailing a videotaped solicitation along with a letter.

Corporations and their·PACs are

permitted to solicit employees outside the

restricted class1/ twice a year. 2 U.S.C.

§441b(b)(4)(B); 11 CFR 114.6(a). under

those provisions, the corporation must mail

written solicitations to employees' residences and must establish a custodial

arrangement that ensures the anonymity of

those contributing less than $50 and those

not contributing at all. 11 CFR 114.6 (c)

and (d). Congress enacted these restrictionsto preserve employees' anonymity and

to protect them from "person-to-person

coercion. "2/

Because the proposed videotaped solicitation conforms with Congressional intent,

Golden Rule may augment its written

solicitation with· a videotape, provided

that both the letter and the tape contain

the required solicitation wording of 11 ern

114.5(a) and 114.6(c) and provided that

Golden Rule complies with the custodial

arrangement requirement.

(Date Issued: October 1, 1991; Length:

3 pages)

1The restricted class is made up of the

corporation's executive and administrative

personnel, its stockholders, and the

families of both groups. 2 u.s.c.

S441b(b)(4)(A)(i); 11 CFR114.S(g)(1).

2 . Congo Rec. S4151 (dai~y ed. March 24,

1976) {statement of Sen. Cannon) reprinted

in Legislative History of the Federal Election Campaign Act :Amendments ·of 1976, at

493 (1977).

4

Volume 17, Number 11

')0'

TRAVEL

The Commission frequently receives

questions about travel on behalf of

political committees. In general, travel

provided to a political committee results

in an in-kind contribution to the commdttee

because the definition of contribution

includes anything of value provided by any

person for the purpose of influencing a

federal election. There are, however,

circumstances in which a contribution does

not result. The material below explores

travel provided to pOlitical committees.

Advisory opinions (ADs) cited in this

article may be ordered from the Public

Records Office. Call 800/424-9530 (ask for

Public Records) or 202/219-4140.

Exempt Travel and SUbsistence

Under 11 eFR 100.7(b)( 8), payments

made from an individual's personal funds

for his or her transportation expenses

incurred while traveling on behalf of a

candidate or political party committee are

not contributions if they do not exceed

$1,000 per candidate, per election, or

$2,000 per· year for travel on behalf of a

party committee. This exemption applies to

unreimbursed payments by paid canpaign

workers and volunteers~ Moreover, section

100.7(b)(8) also exempts unreimbursed

payments made from a volunteer's personal

funds for subsistence expenses incidental

to volunteer activity.

In AD 1988-10, the Commission applied

this provision to a local political figure

volunteering on behalf of a Presidential

candidate. The Commission said that an

individual who was campaigning for election

as a precinct committeeperson in Oregon and

who supported a candidate in the Presidential primary could spend up to $1,000 in

travel expenses on behalf of the Presidential candidate without the payment's being

considered a contribution. (Also see AD

1978-20, use of corporate airplane, below.)

Reimbursed Travel and subsistence

Under 11 CFR 116.5(b), transportation

and subsistence expenses that are incurred

and paid for by an individual traveling on

behalf of a candidate or party committee,

and that are not covered by the 100.7(b)(8)

exemption above, are not considered contributions so long as the committee reimburses

the individual within specified time

periods:
November 1991 FEDERAL ELECTIOI\J COMMISSION

o When the individual pays with a credit

card, the committee must reimburse the

individual withiQ}60 days after the

closing date of the billing statement on

which the charges··first appear.

o In all other cases, the committee must

reimburse the individual within 30 days

after the expenses are incurred.

Use of corporate and union Transportation

Section 114.9(e) of the FEe's regulations discusses campaign use of airplanes

and other transportation owned or leased by

corpora~ions and labor unions.

Airplanes. A candidate or someone

traveling on the candidate's behalf may use

an airplane owned or leased by a corporation or labor organization that is not an

Itair carrier" under Federal Aviation

Administration· rules. The campaign must,

however, pay the organization in advance of

the trip and at the appropriate rate:

o If the travel is to a city with regularly

scheduled commercial air service, the

campaign must reimburse the organization

at the first class airfare rate.

o If the travel is to a city not served by

regular commercial service, the campaign

must reimburse the organization at the

usual charter rate. 11 CFR 114.9(e)

(1) .1/

In-AD 1979-52, the Commission found

that the requirement to make advance

payment for the use of a corporation'S

airplane applied even when the airplane was

owned by a management company that was

solely owned by the candidate himself.

In AD 1978-20, the Commission found

that an individual member of an incorporated flying club could use the club's

airplane for travel on behalf of a

campaign. The member had to pay the club

in advance in accordance with section

114.9. The Commission also noted that a

club member's payment for the use of the

aircraft would be within the volunteer

exemption for travel expenses related to

campaign activities (assuming the amount

did not exceed $1,000 per candidate per

election) •

other Transportation. If a candidate's

campaign uses other means of transportation

owned or leased by a corporation or labor

1The Commission recently sought comments on

a petition submitted by Common Cause to

amend the rules by requiring payment at the

charter rate in all cases. See 56 FR

41496, August 21, 1991; see also article in

the September 1991 Record.

5

Volume 17, l\lumber 

organization, the campaign must reimburse

the organization at the usual rental char

within a commercially reasonable time.

11 CFR 114.9(e) (2). . In AD 1986-30, the Commdssion said th

a campaign had to reimburse the corporate

owner of a sightseeing boat used for

campaign purposes, even though the boat's

owner had intended to provide the boat "t

promote the availability of the vessel n i

the market.

Allocation of campaign and Noncampaign

Travel by candidate

(Non-Publicly Funded CclDpaigns)

Under 11 CFR 106.3, payments for

campaign-related travel are reportable as 

operating expenditures. When a candidate

makes a trip involving both campaign and

noncampaign stops, only the travel costs

related to the campaign are expenditures.

If the campaign pays for the entire ·trave

costs, the noncampaign travel expenses ar

reported as 'father disbursements. f.

If a candidate conducts campaign acti

ity at a given stop, all travel expenses

associated with that stop are considered

expenditures, unless the campaign activit

is merely incidental. For example, a

candidate makes an appearance at a civic

event. If the candidate's public address

refers to his election or. solicits campai

contributions, the entire visit would be

deemed campaign related. If, on the othe

hand, the candidate makes a noncampaign

appearance, and on the way out he respond

to an attendee who asks a question about

the Gampaign, that conversation would not

convert the appearance into a campaignrelated event.

Expenditures for campaign-related sto

are calculated on an actual cost-per-mile

basis, starting at the point of origin of

the trip~ including each campaign-related

stop, and ending at the point of origin.

11 CFR 106.3(b)(2) and (3). For example

an incumbent candidate flies from Washington, DC, to San Francisco to attend a

fundraiser for her campaign, and then fli

to San Diego on official business before

returning to washington. In this case, t

candidate's committee would be required t

pay for transportation from Washington to

San Francisco and for a return trip from

San Francisco to Washington. The govern

ment could pay the cost of the transporta

tion from San Francisco to San Diego. Th

same rule would apply if the purpose of t

San Diego trip were to attend a corporate

event. The corporation could pay for the

San Francisco to San Diego trip, as long 

the event was not campaign related.

(continue
November 1991 FEDERALELECTION COrvIlVlISSIOI\j

Allocation of Individual's Travel

Where an individual, other than a

candidate, conducts campaign-related

activities on a trip, the portion of the

trip attributed to each candidate shall be

allocated on a reasonable basis. 11 CFR

106.3(c){1).

use of Government Conveyance

(1) Travel by Publicly Funded Presidential candidates. FEC rules at 11 CFR

9034.7 and 9004.7 govern the allocation and

payment of campaign travel expenditures by

Presidential candidates who receive public

funds. Under these regulations, a candidate's authorized committee must pay the

government for any individual who uses gov~rnment conveyance (or accommodations

paid for by the government) for campaignrelated travel. 11 CFR 9004.7(b)(4) and

(5); 11 CFR 9034.7(b)(4) and (5).

Under the 1979 amendments to the

Federal Election Campaign Act, the use of

appropriated federal funds for campaign

travel does not result in a contribution to

influence a federal election because the

federal government·is specifically exempt

from the definition of the term "person" at

2 U.S.C. §431(11). Nevertheless, the

legislative history observes that the

mdsuse of appropriated funds is a violation

of federal law and subject to enforcement

by other government agencies. (Report of

Committee on House Adndnistration, Federal

Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1979,

H. Rep. No. 96-422, 96th Cong., 1st Sess.

6, 7, 11 (1979).)

(2) Travel by Non-Publicly Funded

candidates. Under 11 CFR 106.3(e), the

reportable expenditure for a candidate who

uses government conveyance or accommodations for campaign-related travel is the

rate for comparable commercial conveyance

or accommodation. If the candidate is

authorized by law or required by national

security to be accompanied by government

staff and equipment, however, the allocable

expenditures are the costs of facilities

sufficient to accommodate the party, minus

the cost of the authorized or required

personnel or equipment. If such a trip

includes both campaign and noncampaign

stops, costs must be calculated in accordance with 106.3(b) and (c).

(3) Use of stat.e-Owned Aircraft. In AD

1984-48, the Co~ssion found that, for the

use of state-owned aircraft in travel

related to a federal election campaign, the

campaign had to reimburse the first class

airfare for campaign staff traveling to a

6

Volume 17, Number 11

location served by commercial airlines.

Otherwise, the campaign had to reimburse

the cost at the usual and normal charter

rate. The AD discusses specific methods

for calculating the reimbursements.

Travel Between candidate's District and.

washington, DC

Costs incurred by an incumbent

candidate for the House or Senate for

travel between washington, DC, and the

state or district in which the individual

is a candidate are subject to reporting

only if the costs are paid by the candidate's campaign committee or by another

political commdttee. 11 CFR 106.3(d).

Travel by Spouse and Family

The travel expenses of a candidate's

spouse and family are reportable expenditures only if the spouse or family members

conduct campaign-related activities. 11

CFR l06.3(c)(2).

House and senate Rules

Readers should be aware that both the

House and Senate have their own rules

governing travel by Members. For more

information, consult the following offices:

o House Standards of Official Conduct

Committee, 202/225-7103

o Senate Select Committee on Ethics,

2021224-2981.
7

48-nour Notices Filed by Authorized CODmittees: Requirement applies from October 17 throu

November 2.

Filing Date

OCtober 24

December 5

January 31, 199

Volume 17, Number 1

Please note that pre-convention report

were not required. convention activity

should have been disclosed in the pregeneral election report, which was due

October 24. (The election date was

announced too late for publication of the

reporting dates in the October Record.

However, the FEC mailed reporting information to candidates on the balLot s ):

" If you have any reporting questions

after reading this article, call the FEC

(800/424-9530 or 202/219...3420). 

(continued

Beg'.jCert. Mailing Date2

october 21

December 5

January 31, 1992

SPECIAl:"ELECTIONS'

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

48-Bour Notices and 24-Hour Reports (see explanation on page 8)

November 1991

Report Closing Datel

NOTE: Authorized committees of general election candidates must file both the pre- and

post-election reports. PACs and party committees should consult page 8 for special electi

filing requirements.

Pre- and Post-Election Reports

pre-Genera13" october 16

Post-General November 25

Year-End December 31

24-Hour Reports Filed by PACs, Including Monthly Filers: Requirement applies from October

17 through November 3.

IThis date indicates the end of the reporting period. A reporting period always begins on

the day following the closing date of the last report filed. If the committee is new and

has not previously filed a report, the first report must cover all 1991 activity that

occurred before the committee registered andf if applicable, before the individual became 

candidate. Candidates participating in the general election should refer to the FEC

reporting notice on the Pennsylvania special.

2Reports sent by registered or certified mail must be postmarked by the mailing date.

Otherwise, they must be received by the filing date.

3The date of the general election was announced too late for the Record to publish the

reporting dates in the October issue.

PENNSYLVANIA SPECIAL HOOSE ELECTIOO

This article and the accompanying

table provide reporting information for the

special Pennsylvania general election

scheduled for November Sf 1991, to fill the

2nd Congressional District seat. The seat

was formerly held by Congressman William H.

GraYf III, who resigned from Congress in

September 1991. (Pennsylvania will also

hold a special Senate election on November

5; reporting dates are the same for both

elections. )
November 1991 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION.

AUthorized cCllllli.ttees

Pre-Election and Post-Election Reports.

Commdttees authorized by candidates running

in the special general election must file

both pre- and post-election reports (see

table) •

48-Bour Notices on Contributions.

Authorized committees must also file

special notices on contributions of $1/000

or more that are received between October

17 and November 2.

Please note that this special notice

requirement applies to a~l types of eontributions, including:

o In-kind contributions;

o Loans (other than bank loans);

o Guarantees and endorsements of bank

loans; and

o Contributions, personal loans and

endorsements of bank loans made by the

qandidate.

The notice must reach the Clerk of the

House and the Pennsylvania filing office

within 48 hours after the committee's

receipt of the contribution. (The

Pennsylvania address is given under "state

Filing," below'.)

Committees may fax 48-hour notices to

the Clerk of the House (fax number:

202/225-7781). Other reports and statements may not, however, be faxed because

they require the treasurer's signature. AO

1988-32.

For information on the content of the

notice, see 11 CFR l04.5(f}.

PAC,.. and party CODIOittees

semiannual Filers. A PAC or party committee that reports on a semiannual basis

during 1991 may have to file additional

reports for the pennsylvania special election. The requirement to file a pre-election or post-election report is triggered

if the co~ttee makes a contribution or

expenditure on behalf of a special election

candidate during the applicable reporting

period. 11 CFR 104.5(h). A reporting

period begins the day after the close of

books for the last report filed and

continues through the c~ose of books for

the special election report (see table).

Example: A PAC's most recent report

was theSerniannual report that covered

activity through June 30, 1991 (the closeof-books date). Subsequently, the committee made a contribution to a Pennsylvania

candidate's general election campaign on

october 14. The committee was therefore

required to file a pre-election report,

which covered activity between July 1 and

8

Volume 17, Number 1

October 16. If the commi.ttee makes another

contribution between October 17 and November 25, it must also file a post-election

report. Any contributions made between

November 25 and December 31 must be

disclosed in the committee's year-end

report.

Monthly Filers. PACs and party commit

tees that file monthly during 1991 do not

have to file pre- and post-special election

reports, but PACs may have to file 24-hour

reports (see below).

24-Hour Reports on Independent Expendi

tures. Any PAC (including a monthly filer)

that makes independent expenditures in

connection with the special election may

have to file a 24-hour report. This

reporting requirement is triggered if the

cornmittee makes independentexpenditures

aggregating $1,000 or"more between October

17 and November 3.

The report must be filed within 24

hours after the expenditure is made. Although most PACs normally file with the

FEC, 24-ho~r notices disclosing independen

expenditures on" behalf of House candidates

are filed with the Clerk of the House. A

copy must also be filed with the state

filing office (address given below). For

more information on this reporting require

ment, see 11 CFR 104.4(b) and (c} and

104.5(g).

state Filing

In addition to filing with the Clerk of

the House or the FEC, committees filing

pennsylvania special general election

reports must also file copies of reports

with the pennsylvania Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation, 305 North

Office Building, Harrisburg, PA 17120-0029

Authorized co~ttees of candidates

must file the entire report; other committees must file only the portion of the

report that is applicable to the candidate

(for example, the Form sx Summary Page and

any schedules that disclose contributions

or expenditures on behalf of the candidate). 2 U.S.C. §439(a); 11 CFR 108.3.

Coordinated party Spending Limits

The coordinated party spending limit

for the pennsylvania House seat is $26,500

This amount may be spent by the party's

national committee on behalf of the party's

nominee in the special general election.

state party commdttees in pennsylvania may

also spend up to $26,500 on" behalf of the

party's nominee. 11 eFR 110. 7(b).
November 1991 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

IIIJRS RELEASED 'ID 'll1E PUBLIC

Listed below are HURs (FEe

enforcement cases) recently

released for public review.

'Ihe list is based on the FEC

press releases of September 4,

10, 23 and 30, 1991. Files on

closed MURS are available for

review in the Public Records

Office.

Unless otherwise noted,

civil penalties resulted from

conciliation agreements reached

between the respondents and the

Conani.ssion.

Pre-IIJR 239

Bespondents: (a) Santa Fe

National Bank (CA); (b) James

Hawkins (CA)

ec.plainant: Comptroller of

the Currency, Los Angeles Field

Office

SUbject: Contribution by

national bank

Disposition: Declined to open a MUR

JIIJR 2071

Bespondents: (all located in

SC) (a) Congressman Robin M.

Tallon, Jr.; (b) Tallon for

congress Committee, Lamar J.

Rabon, treasurer; (e) G.B.

Stokes; (d) Joe W. Pearce, Jr.;

(e) Ed Saleeby; (f) LeMasters,

Inc.; (g) Gary H. Slavens;

(h) Vicki Slavens; (i) Robin's

of Florence, Inc.; (j) Jane

Harris; (k) Jerry Harris;

(1) Lynn A. Hartnett;

(m) Roland Minshew; (n) Robert

(Bobby) welch; (0) Mark Lawson;

et a1. (p)-(r)

caq;.lainant: Referral by

Election Crimes Branch, U.S.

Department of Justice (DC)

SUbject: Contributions in name

of another; excessive cash

contributions; failure to

forward contribution to

treasurer; commingling of

funds; corporate contributions

Disposition: (a)-(f) No probable cause to believe; (g) $250

civil penalty; (h) $250 civil

penalty; (i) $1,250 civil

penalty; (j) $125 civil penalty; (k) $125 civil penalty;

(1) $250 civil penalty;

(m) $250 civil penalty; (n) $500 civil penalty;

(0) u.s. district court default

judgment: $5,000 civil penalty ($3,500 settlement); (p)-(r) no

reason to believe

MUR 2774;2773;2755

gespondents: (a) Ronald

Crutcher (OH); (b) Delbera

Crutcher (OH); (c) Dayton

Lubrication, Inc. and Bill

Johnson (MO);' (d) Crutcher for

congress (OH); (e) Financial

Counseling, Inc. and Arvin M.

vaughan (OH)

COql1ainants: Referral by

Election·Crimes Branch, U.S.

Department of Justice (DC)

(2773); Richard J. Vara (OR)

(2773); Alex P. ugolini, Jr.

(OH) (2774); Donna Van Pelt

(OH) (2755)

SUbject: Failure to disclose

bank accounts on Statement of

Organizationr corporate contributions; personal use of campaign funds; colNllingling of

campedgo funds

Disposition: (a)-(c) No

probable cause to believe;

(d) probable cause to believe

but took no further action

(disclosure of bank accounts)

and no probable cause to

believe (other allegations);

(e) no reason to believe

JIIJR 3029

Respondents: (a) Springfield

Region Laborers' Political

League, John M. Evans, treasurer (IL); (b) North Central

Illinois Laborers' District

Council Political Action

Committee, John M. Evans,

treasurer

CoIIIpl.ainant: FEC initiated

SUbject: Impermissible transfers and improper solicitations

Disposition: (a) $1,200 civil

penalty; (b) $1,000 civil

penalty

IIJR 3038

ReS(XJl'ldent5: (a) Bentsen for

Vice President-1988, Preston M.

Geren, III, treasurer (TX);

(b) Media Southwest (TX)

complainant: FEC initiated

SUbject: Corporate contribution

Disposition: (a) and (b) Reason to believe but took no

further action

JIIlR 3114

RespoIdents: (a) Previdi for

Congress, Paul Hiramura, treasurer (NY); (b) Robert Previdi

(NY)

complainant: Richard Bates, Executive Director, Democratic

9

Volume 17, Number 1

,.' ,'r-,

Congressional Campaign Commit

tee (DC)

SUbject: Failure to disclose

complete contributor information

Disposition: (a) No probable

cause to believe; (b) no reaso

to believe

NOR 3170/3169/3168

Respondents: (a) North Carolina Republican Party, R. Jack

Hawke, Chairman; (b) North

Carolina Republican Executive

Committee, carl G. Ward, treas

urer

complainants: National Abortio

Rights Action League (NARAL)

Foundation (DC) (3168); NARAL

Political Action Committee (DC

(3169); ~North Carolina

Political Action Committee

(3170)

SUbject: Confidentiality of

MUR cOIIplaint.

Disposition: (a) and (b) No

reason to believe

JUt 3197

Respondents: Victor Romero fo

Congress, William E. Cox,

treasurer (CA)

~ainant: Clarence R. Klei

SUbject: Disclaimer

Disposition: $250 civil pena

ty

SJR 3214/3100

Respondents: Louisiana Host

Committee 1988, Inc., Louis

Costa, treasurer (LA)

Cmplainant: FEe initiated

SUbject: Failure to: file

reports on time; report certai

receipts, in-~ind contribution

and exempt accounting services

keep proper documentation

Disposition: $4,000 civil

penalty

ftUR 3220

Bespondents: progressive

Political Action Committee,

Victor Kamber. as treasurer and

indiVidually (DC)

complainant: FEC initiated

SUbject: Excessive contribution

Disposition: Reason to believ

but took no further action

l'IUR 3240

Respondents: (a) Equitable

Financial Services Political

Action Committee, George A.

(continued)
10

Political cemnittees

Treasurers of registered political committees automatically receive the Record.

A change of address by a political committee (or any change to information disclosed

on the Statement of Organization) must, by law, be made in writing on FEC Form 1 or by

letter. The treasurer must sign the amendment and file it with the secretary of the

Senate, the Clerk of the House or the FEC (as appropriate) and with the appropriate

state office.

other SUbscribers

Record Subscribers who are not registered political committees should include the

following information when requesting a change of address:

o Subscription number (located" on the upper left hand corner of the mailing label);

o Name of the subscriber;

o Old address; and

o New address.

Subscribers (other than political committees) may correct their addresses by

phone as well as by mail.

Volume 17, Number 11

Disposition: $500 civil pena

ty

IIJR 3318

Respondents: (a) Bush-Quayle

,88, J. Stanley Huck~, treas

urer (VA); (b) Randy Travis

(TN); et ai. (cl-(f)

~ainant: Linda Accurso

(NY) .

Subject: Corporate contribution; disclaimer

Disposition: (al-:(f) No reaso

to believe

JIJR 3334

Respondents: The William Lyon

Company Federal political

Action Committee, Paul

Pfeiffer", treasurer (CAl .

COOplainant: FEe ioitiated

SUbject: Failure to file

report on time

Disposition: $350 civil penai

ty

PIJR 3335

Respondents: Wine and Spi rits

Wholesalers of America Political Action Committee, Douglas

W. Metz, treasurer (DC)

COOplainant: FEC initiated

SUbject: Failure to file

report on time

Disposition: $900 civil penal

ty

~ainant: FEC initiated

SUbject: Failure to file 48-

hour notices

Disposition: $2,800 civil

penalty

ftJR 3281

Respondents: Brotherhood of

Locomotive Engineers Legislative League, Larry D. McFather,

treasurer (OR)

Coaplainant: FEC initiated

SUbject: Failure to file

report on time

Disposition: $775 civil penalty

I'IJR 3287

Respondents: First City

Bancorporation of Texas Inc.

Political Action Committee,

Mark W. Peterson, treasurer

(TXI

caaplainant: FEe initiated

SUbject: Failure to file

report on time

Disposition: $750 civil penalty

1'IUR 3297

Respondents: Marine Engineers

Beneficial Association Retirees

Group Fund (AKA MESA Retirees

Group Fund), Rauol A. AmadorI

treasurer (DC)

COq:l1ainant: FEe initiated

SUbject: Failure to file

report on time

November 1991 FEDERALELECTION COMMISSION

CBl-\HiE OF ADDRESS

Williams, treasurer (NY);

(b) Donaldson, Lufkin &

Jenrette, Inc.--Better GOvernment Fund, Anthony F. oaddino,

treasurer (NY)

~ainant: FEC initiated

SUbject: Excessive contributions affiliated commdttees;

failure to amend statement of

Organization

Disposition: (a) $1,500 civil

penalty; (b) $750 civil penalty

ftJR 3Z46

Respondents: Charles Taylor

for Congress committee, James

M. Baley, Jr., treasurer (NC)

CQlplainant: FEC initiated

SUbject: Failure to file 48-

hour notices

Disposition: $1,200 civil

penalty

fU{ 3257

Respondents: Jolene" Unsoeld

1990 Campaign, Hal Wolfe sr,;

treasurer (WA)

~lainant: FEC initiated

SUbdect: Failure to file 48-

hour notices

Disposition: $1,750 civil

penalty

ftJR 3264

Respondents: Commi ttee to

Elect Marc Morial for Congress,

Toni Hackett Antrum, treasurer

(tA)
November 1991 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

The first number in each

citation refers to the "number"

(month) of the 1991 Record

issue in which the article

appeared; the second number,

following "the colon, indicates

the page number in that issue.

ADVISORY OPINIas

1990-14: AT&T's gOO-line

fundraising service, 2:4

1990-19: Vendor/coDttee

relationship; sale and

repurchase of fundraising

items, 1:8

1990-22: Blue Cross/Blue

Shield's solicitation of

member plans' personnel, 1:9

1990-25: Parent corporation's

obligations to labor organization under twice-yearly

provisions, 2:5

1990-26: Sale of campaign

asset; personal use of excess

funds after November 30,

1989, 3:7

1990-27: Transfer to party's

federal account of funds

mistakenly deposited in state

account, 3:9

1990-29: Return to federal

account of funds transferred

to state account, 4:5

1990-30: Designation of postelection contributions to

retire debts, 4:6

1991-1: Credit card contributions to nonconnected PAC of

federal contractor

partnership, 5:4

1991-2: Disposition of possibly

illegal funds raised through

900-line telephone calls, 5:5

1991-3: PAC newsletter distributed outside restricted

class, 6:6

1991-4: payment to Senate

employee for two-week

teaching appointment, 5:6

1991-5: party office building

fund; preemption issues, 7:4

1991-6: calculating ballot

composition ratios; allocating pre-1991 expenses, 6:6

1991-8: payment to Senator for

radio series, 6:8

1991-9: Retroactive interest

payments on loans made by

candidate, 7:5

1991-10: candidate's use of

assets jointly held with

spouse, 6:8

1991-12: Transfer from candidate's multi-purpose

INDEX

committee to campaign

committee, 8:6

1991-13: Labor union jointly

established by two other

unions, 7:5

1991-14: state tax checkoff

funds used for party's

federal activity, 8:7

1991-15: Party committee's

transfer to correct federal

account's overpayment of

allocated expenses, 8:7

1991-16: Sale/use restriction

applied to FEe forms filed

under Indiana law, 8:8

1991-17: Corporate sponsorship

of "good citizenship" video

tape featuring Member of

Congress, 8:9

1991-18: Telemarketing services

provided by corporate vendor,

9:7

1991-19: Employee payroll

deductions after corporate

merger, 9:8

1991-20: Procedures for service

bureau providing 900-line

fundraising services, 10:6

1991-21: Terminating PAC's

payment of remaining funds to

individual, 10:8

1991-23: Donation of raffle

prize to trade association by

nonmember corporation, 10:8

1991-24: Candidate-advocacy

communications by trade associations to members, 10:9

1991-25: 1991 special election

and local elections: ballot

composition change, 10:9

1991-26: Services for 900-line

£undraising, 11:2

1991-28: Videotaped twiceyearly solicitation, 11:4

<XXJRT CASES

Dole v. International

Association Managers, Inc.,

6:9

FEC v ,

- AugUStIne for Congress, 2:7 - Dramesi for Congress, 3:10 - Fletcher, Friends of

Isaiah, 4:6 - Lawson, 6:10 - LegI:Tech, Inc., 3:11 - Mann for Congress

Committee, 5:7

- Mid-America Conservative

PAC, 2:10 - NRA Political Victory Fund,

3:10 - National Organization for

Women, Inc., 11:1

11

Volume 17, Number 1

- National Republican

Senatorial Committee, 6:1

- Political Contributions

Data, Inc., 2:8; 5:7; 10:

- Populist Party, 8:11 - Schaefer, Friends of, 7:8 - Smith, Dennis, for

Congress, 5:7 - Speelman, 3:10 - Webb for Congress

Committee, 2:10

- West Virginia Republican

State Executive Committe

3:10 - Working Names, Inc. (90-

1009-GAG and 87-2467-GAG

5:7

v. FEe

----=-Common Cause; National

Republican Senatorial

Committee, Appellant (90-

5317), 1:7

- Faucher and Maine Right t

Life Comadttee, Inc. (90-

1832), 5:8; 11:1 - International Association

Managers, Inc., 7:8

- Republican party of

Kentucky, 7:8

- Schaefer, 6:11

- Spannaus (91-0681), 6:11 - stern, 2:7 - White, 11:2

Stern-v:-General Electric

Coopany, 7:6

800 LINE

Allocating expenses through

ballot composition, 2:1

Debt retirement by candidate

coumittees, 4:7

PACs: allocating federal and

nonfedera1 expenses, 6:1

Redistricting, 8:12

Staff advances and salaries,

2:6

Travel, 11:4
CONFERENCES

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 17, Number 

Bulk Rate Mail

Postage and Fees Paid

Federal Election Commission

Permit Number G-31

Hotel

The conference will be held at the

Swissotel Chicago, 323 East Wacker Drive,

chicago, Illinois 60601-9722. Call

312/565-0565 for room reservations. To

receive the group rate of $110 per night,

notify the hotel that you will be attendin

the FEe conference.

Registration Information

Call the FEC to order a conference

registration form and schedule of workshop

(800/424-9530 or 202/219-3420). The $130

registration fee covers the cost of the

conference, materials and meals for both

days (continental breakfast, lunch). A $

late fee must be added to registrations

postmarked after October 30.

FEDERAL ELECTiON COMMiSSION

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

Official Business

November 1991

workshops

In addition to workshops on the federal

campaign laws, the conference will include

a workshop on state campaign finance laws

presented by the Illinois State Board of

Elections.

A representative of the Internal

Revenue Service will be available to answer

election-related tax questions.

CHICAGJ COOFERENCE

on November 14 and 15, the FEC will

hold a regional conference in Chicago to

assist candidates, political party organizations and PACs with their preparations

for the 1992 elections.