September 2001 Federal Election Commission Volume 27, Number 9

Table of Contents

Regulations

1 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

on Brokerage Loans and Lines of

Credit

1 Advisory Opinions

3 Federal Register

Reports

5 Arkansas Special Election

Administrative Fine Program

6 Committees Fined for Nonfiled

and Late Reports

Electronic Filing

7 More Committees File

Electronically

Court Cases

8 New Litigation

Alternative Dispute Resolution

8 ADR Program Update

Publications

9 Results of 2000 Federal Elections

Published

Staff

9 Acting FEC General Counsel

Resigns

9 Information Division Director

Resigns

Outreach

10 Denver Conference for

Candidates, Parties and PACs

10 Public Appearances

11 Index

Compliance Regulations

Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking on Brokerage

Loans and Lines of Credit

The Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001, amended

section 431(8)(B) of the Federal

Election Campaign Act (the Act) to

permit candidates to finance their

campaigns through loans derived

from advances on their brokerage

accounts, credit cards, home equity

lines of credit and other lines of

credit available to candidates. Public

Law 106-346. On July 19, 2001, the

Commission approved a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM),

which proposed amendments to

Commission regulations to conform

with the amendment to the Act.

The NPRM, which was published

in the July 25, 2001, Federal

Register (66 FR 38576), solicited

comments concerning the regulation

and reporting of these loans. The

public comment period ended

August 24, 2001. The Commission

intends to hold a hearing on September 19, 2001, at 10 a.m., if there are

sufficient requests to testify. The

hearing will be held at the

Commission’s public hearing room

at 999 E Street, NW., Washington,

D.C.

Advisory

Opinions

AO 2001-9

Former Candidate’s Use of

Campaign Funds to Pay

Consulting Expenses Related

to Media Inquiries

Former Senator J. Robert Kerrey

may use funds from his principal

campaign committee, Kerrey for

U.S. Senate (the Committee), to pay

the costs of retaining a consulting

firm to respond to media inquiries

concerning his military service.

Such payments would not be a

personal use of campaign funds

because the inquiries were a direct

result of Mr. Kerrey’s activities as a

federal officeholder and federal

candidate.

Background

Mr. Kerry was elected to the

Senate in 1988 and remained in

office until January 3, 2001. He was

also a Presidential candidate in

1992. Until December 1998, when

he announced he would seek a third

Senate term, Mr. Kerrey was

considered a potential Presidential

candidate in 2000. In January 2000,

however, he announced he would

not run for election to any public

office.

(continued on page 2) (continued on page 3)
Federal Election Commission RECORD September 2001

2

Proposed Regulations

In the NPRM, the Commission

proposes to amend the definitions of

contribution and expenditure at 11

CFR 100.7 and 100.8, respectively,

to specifically exclude brokerage

loans, credit card advances and

other lines of credit extended to

candidates—including bank overdrafts. In order to be exempted from

these definitions, the loan must be

obtained:

• In accordance with applicable law;

• Under commercially reasonable

terms; and

• By persons who make such loans

in the ordinary course of business.

Endorsed, Guaranteed and CoSigned Loans. Under the proposed

regulations, an endorser, guarantor

or co-signer of a loan derived from a

candidate’s line of credit would be

considered a contributor for the

amount of the loan for which he or

she was liable. If, however, the

endorser, guarantor or co-signer

were the candidate’s spouse, and the

candidate’s share of collateral

equaled or exceeded the amount of

the loan, then the spouse would not

be considered a contributor. In the

case of an unsecured loan, the

spouse would not be considered a

contributor if the candidate used

only one-half of the available credit

for campaign purposes. The Commission sought comments on

whether the regulations should

allow the candidate to use, for

campaign purposes, the full amount

of the available credit in cases

where the loan is in the ordinary

course of business and the candidate

is liable for the entire amount of the

loan even though the spouse has

endorsed, guaranteed or co-signed

for the loan.

Loans for Personal Living

Expenses. The proposed regulations

would clarify that loans obtained by

candidates and used to pay for their

personal living expenses would not

be considered contributions and

would not need to be reported.1

 The

candidates would, however, have to

repay the loans wholly from their

personal funds. The proposed

exception would be limited to loans

used solely for personal living

expenses. Thus, if part of the loan

proceeds were used in connection

with a campaign, the entire loan

would be reported by the committee.

The Commission sought comments

on this proposal and on an alternative proposal that would require the

candidate’s committee to report

loans used exclusively for the

candidate’s personal expenses.

The proposed exception would

not apply in a case where a third

party endorsed, guaranteed or cosigned the loan. In that case, the

third party would make a contribution in the amount for which he or

she was liable.

Loan Payment and Repayment.

One approach to loan repayment

would allow a candidate’s authorized committee the option of

repaying the loan directly to the

lending institution or to the candidate. If the repayments were made

to the candidate, he or she would be

required to repay the lending

institution within 30 days of receiving the funds from the committee in

order to avoid converting campaign

funds to personal use.2

 As an

alternative approach, the Commission is considering requiring that the

payment and repayment of the loan

pass through the candidate’s personal account in order to distinguish

bank loans made directly to an

authorized committee from loans

derived from a candidate’s line of

credit.

Reporting. The Commission

would require a candidate’s principal campaign committee to report

loans derived from an advance on a

candidate’s brokerage account,

credit card or line of credit. The

Commission sought comments on

proposed amendments concerning

how such loans should be reported.

For example, the NPRM sought

comments on whether a candidate’s

loan for personal expenses should

be reported by the committee. The

Commission also considered cases

where a candidate obtained a loan

from his or her line of credit and

then loaned these funds to the

committee. The NPRM proposed

options where the committee would

be required to report only repayments it made to the candidate and

where the committee would report

both the committee’s repayments to

the candidate and the candidate’s

repayments to the lending institution.

The Commission intends to

design new reporting schedules (C-2

and C-P-2) for use in reporting loans

1

 The Commission is also considering a

similar approach for reporting bank

loans used solely for candidates’

personal expenses.

2

 See 2 U.S.C. §439a and 11 CFR

113.2(d).

Regulations

(continued from page 1)

Federal Election Commission

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

800/424-9530

202/694-1100

202/501-3413 (FEC Faxline)

202/219-3336 (TDD for the

 hearing impaired)

Danny L. McDonald, Chairman

David M. Mason, Vice Chairman

Karl J. Sandstrom, Commissioner

Bradley Smith, Commissioner

Scott E. Thomas, Commissioner

Darryl R. Wold, Commissioner

James A. Pehrkon, Staff Director

Lois G. Lerner, Acting General

 Counsel

Published by the Information

 Division

Greg J. Scott, Acting Assistant

 Staff Director

Amy Kort, Editor

http://www.fec.gov
September 2001 Federal Election Commission RECORD

3

derived from a candidate’s brokerage account, credit card or line of

credit.

Other Issues. The Commission

also sought comments on issues

surrounding non-purpose credit and

margin accounts, committees’ debt

settlement and the termination of

committees with outstanding loans

derived from lines of credit.

The full text of the NPRM is

available on the FEC web site at

http://www.fec.gov/pdf/

FR66n143p38576.pdf and from the

FEC faxline, 202/501-3413, document number 251.✦

—Amy Kort

During each of Mr. Kerrey’s

campaigns for federal office, he

engaged in public discussions of his

military service. In 1998, while Mr.

Kerrey was still a Senate candidate

under Commission regulations and

also considered a possible Presidential candidate, a Newsweek reporter

began an inquiry into an incident

that occurred during his service in

the Vietnam War. However, when

Mr. Kerrey announced that he

would not seek the Presidency in

2000, Newsweek declined to publish

the story—a Newsweek editor made

clear in April 2000 that Newsweek’s

publication of the story was contingent upon Kerrey’s plans to run for

President in 2000. The reporter

continued to pursue the story.

In April 2001, the story became

public through other media venues,

and Mr. Kerrey retained a public

relations firm, Westhill Partners, to

aid in his response to media inquiries. The firm subsequently billed

Mr. Kerrey for $59,554.48.

Personal Use of Campaign Funds

Under the Federal Election

Campaign Act (the Act) and Commission regulations, a candidate and

the candidate’s committee may use

excess campaign funds for any

lawful purpose, but may not convert

these funds to the personal use of

the candidate or of any other person.

2 U.S.C. §439a and 11 CFR

113.2(d). Personal use is defined as

“any use of campaign funds in a

campaign account of a present or

former candidate to fulfill a commitment, obligation or expense of any

person that would exist irrespective

of the candidate’s campaign or

duties as a federal office holder.” 11

CFR 113.1(g). In cases such as this

one, where a specific use of campaign funds is not listed in the

regulations as personal use per se,

the Commission determines, on a

case-by-case basis, whether or not

the expense would fall within the

Advisory Opinions

(continued from page 1)

1

 In the Explanation and Justification of

its regulations on personal use, the

Commission explained the case-by-case

approach, stating that if the candidate

“can reasonably show that the expenses

at issue resulted from campaign or

officeholder activities, the Commission

will not consider the use to be personal

use.” Explanation and Justification,

Expenditures; Reports by Political

Committees; Personal Use of Campaign

Funds, 60 Federal Register 7867

(February 9, 1995).

(continued on page 4)

Federal Register

Federal Register notices are

available from the FEC’s Public

Records Office, on the FEC web

site at http://www.fec.gov/

register.htm and from the FEC

faxline, 202/501-3413.

Notice 2001-7

Filing Dates for the Florida

Special Election in the 1st

Congressional District; Notice of

filing dates for special election

(66 FR 31237, June 11, 2001).

Notice 2001-8

Filing Dates for the

Massachusetts Special Election in

the 9th Congressional District;

Notice of filing dates for special

election (66 FR 33962, June 26,

2001).

Notice 2001-9

Voluntary Standards for

Computerized Voting Systems;

Notice with request for comments

(66 FR 35978, July 10, 2001).

Notice 2001-10

Brokerage Loans and Lines of

Credit; Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (66 FR 38576, July

25, 2001).

definition of personal use at 11 CFR

113.1(g).1 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1)(ii).

Payments to the Public

Relations Firm

Mr. Kerrey’s use of campaign

funds to pay Westhill Partners

would not constitute a personal use

of campaign funds because the

media interest that the public

relations firm responded to would

not have occurred if Mr. Kerrey had

not been a prominent Senator and a

prominent federal candidate—

particularly one whose campaigns

entailed a discussion of his military

record. Two factors demonstrate

that the media attention was a direct

result of Mr. Kerrey’s campaigns

and officeholder activities:

1. The media inquiry began when

he was still in the Senate, was a

Senate candidate under Commission rules and was generally

viewed as a probable presidential

candidate for the 2000 primary

election. Even though the

reporter continued his inquiry

after Mr. Kerrey announced that

he would not seek the Presidency

in 2000, Newsweek’s decision

not to pursue the story after Mr.

Kerrey’s announcement indicates

that the original inquiry was

motivated by a desire to present

important information about the

fitness for federal office of a

federal candidate and officeholder.
Federal Election Commission RECORD September 2001

4

Advisory Opinions

(continued from page 3)

AO 2001-10

Committee’s Employment of

Candidate’s Wife

Jesse L. Jackson, Jr.’s principal

campaign committee, Jesse L.

Jackson, Jr. for Congress (the

Committee), may hire Congressman

Jackson’s wife as a paid consultant.

The Committee must employ Ms.

Jackson on the same terms it would

normally use to employ a consultant

and must pay her no more than the

fair market value for her services.

Personal Use of Campaign Funds

While candidates generally have

wide discretion in making expenditures to influence their election, the

Federal Election Campaign Act (the

Act) prohibits the conversion of

1

 Commission regulations define

personal use as “any use of funds in a

campaign account of a present of

former candidate to fulfill a commitment, obligation or expense of any

person that would exist irrespective of

the candidate’s campaign or duties as a

Federal officeholder.” 11 CFR

113.1(g).

2

 Commission regulations at 11 CFR

113.1(g)(1)(i) provide a list of specific

uses of campaign funds that will be

considered per se personal use. Other

uses of campaign funds are to be

examined on a case-by-case basis using

the general definition of personal use.

3

 The Commission expressed no opinion

regarding the application of any rules

of the House of Representatives or the

Ethics in Government Act to these

activities because these issues are not

within its jurisdiction. For the same

reason, the Commission expressed no

views as to any federal or other tax

ramifications.

2. Questions and comments by the

media concerning Mr. Kerrey’s

failure to disclose information

about the incident while he was a

Senator or when he ran for

president indicate that his

behavior as Senator and candidate was an important cause of

the media activity in April and

May of 2001.

The Committee should report its

payment to Westhill Partners as an

“Other Disbursement” and should

make reference to this advisory

opinion as part of its description of

the purpose of the disbursement. 2

U.S.C. §434(b)(4)(G) and (6)(A)

and 11 CFR 104.3(b)(2)(vi) and

(b)(4)(vi).

The Commission noted that Mr.

Kerrey’s situation is unique and that

this opinion does not establish any

general rule regarding the use of

campaign funds by former candidates or federal officeholders to pay

for public relations expenses.

Date Issued: July 12, 2001;

Length: 5 pages.✦

—Amy Kort

Advisory Opinion Requests

AOR 2001-11

Transfer of funds for allocable

expenses after 70-day period lapsed

due to bank processing problem

(Democratic Party of Virginia, July

24, 2001)

AOR 2001-12

Preemption of state election law

governing donations to political

party’s building fund (Democratic

Party of Wisconsin, August 7,

2001)✦

campaign funds to personal use.1

 2

U.S.C. §439a and 11 CFR 113.2(d).

See also AOs 2001-3, 2000-40,

2000-37 and 2000-12. Under

Commission regulations, salary

payments made to family members

are considered a personal use of

campaign funds per se, unless the

family member is paid the fair

market value for bona fide campaign

services that he or she provides.2

 11

CFR 113.1(g)(1)(i). Payments in

excess of the fair market value are

considered a personal use of campaign funds. 11 CFR

113.1(g)(1)(i)(H).

Application to Proposal

Ms. Jackson has experience

working for various national political campaigns and in government.

The committee believes that as a

consultant Ms. Jackson would

provide critical services to the

campaign. Under the Act and

Commission regulations, the

committee may hire her to provide

bona fide campaign services, so

long as it pays her no more than the

fair market value for her services.

Her contract must contain the same

terms customarily found in such

agreements between paid campaign

consultants and candidate committees.3

Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements

The Committee should report

salary payments it makes to Ms.

Jackson as operating expenditures

on its FEC disclosure reports. See

11 CFR 104.3(b)(2)(i) and

104.3(b)(4)(i). The Committee

should also keep Ms. Jackson’s

contract and any other documents

relating to her employment for at

least three years beyond the date

that it files any report to which those

records may relate. 11 CFR

104.14(b). See also 11 CFR

102.9(b)(1) and AO 2001-03.

Date Issued: July 12, 2001;

Length: 5 pages.✦

—Amy Kort
September 2001 Federal Election Commission RECORD

5

Arkansas Special Election

Reporting

The Special Election to fill the

U.S. House seat vacated by Congressman Asa Hutchinson in the

Third Congressional district of

Arkansas will be held on November

20, 2001. The Special Primary will

be September 25 and the Special

Runoff, if needed, will be October

16. Committees involved in any of

these elections should consult the

accompanying chart for filing

information.1

Note that 48-hour notices are

required of authorized committees

that receive contributions of $1,000

or more between September 6 and

September 22 for the Special

Primary, between November 1 and

November 17 for the Special

General and between September 27

and October 13 for the Special

Runoff, if that election is held.

Reports filed electronically must

be submitted by midnight on the

filing date. A committee required to

file electronically that files instead

on FEC paper reporting forms will

be considered a nonfiler.

Reports filed on paper and sent

by registered or certified mail must

be postmarked by the mailing date;

reports sent by any other means

(including reports sent via first class

mail) must be received by the

Commission’s close of business on

the filing date.

For more information about any

of these filing requirements, please

call the FEC’s Information Division

at 800/424-9530 (press 1, then 3) or

202/694-1100.✦

—Amy Kort

1

 These committees include authorized

committees of candidates running in the

election and other political committees

(including PACs) that support these

candidates and do not file monthly.

Reports Arkansas Special Election Reporting

For Committees Involved Only in the Special Primary Election:

Close of Reg./Cert. Filing

Books Mail Date Date

Pre-Primary Report September 5 September 10 September 13

Year-End Report December 31 January 31 January 31, 2002

For Committees Involved in Both the Special Primary and

Special General If Only Two Elections are Held:

Close of Reg./Cert. Filing

Books Mail Date Date

Pre-Primary Report September 5 September 10 September 13

Pre-General Report October 31 November 5 November 8

Post-General Report December 10 December 20 December 20

Year-End Report December 31 January 31 January 31, 2002

For Committees Involved in Only the Special Primary and

Special Runoff:

Close of Reg./Cert. Filing

Books Mail Date Date

Pre-Primary Report September 5 September 10 September 13

Pre-Runoff Report September 26 October 1 October 4

Year-End Report December 31 January 31 January 31, 2002

For Committees Involved in the Special Primary, Special

Runoff and Special General:

Close of Reg./Cert. Filing

Books Mail Date Date

Pre-Primary Report September 5 September 10 September 13

Pre-Runoff Report September 26 October 1 October 4

Pre-General Report October 31 November 5 November 8

Post-General Report December 10 December 20 December 20

Year-End Report December 31 January 31 January 31, 2002
Federal Election Commission RECORD September 2001

6

Committees Fined and Penalties Assessed

 1. America Service Group Inc. PAC $1,000

 2. American Association of Airport Executives

Good Gov’t Committee $325

 3. American Concrete Pavement Association PAC $1,000

 4. American Crop Protection Association PAC $1,000

 5. American Dental PAC $2,550

 6. American Meat Institute PAC $2,000

 7. American Moving and Storage Association $1,000

 8. Americans for Sound Energy Policy $1,000

 9. Associated General Contractors of America PAC $600

10. Association of American Railroads PAC $1,000

11. Bancorp South Bank PAC $250

12. Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers,

Grain Millers International Union $650

13. Barbara Cooper for Congress $1,650

14. Bipartisan Voluntary Public Affairs

Committee of PNC Bank National Association $500

15. Burson-Marsteller/Young & Rubicam PAC $1,000

16. Cable and Wireless USA Inc. PAC $1,000

17. California Right to Life PAC $1,000

18. Central and South West Services Inc. PAC $1,000

19. Circuit City Stores Inc. PAC $1,000

20. Clinesmith for Congress $9751

21. Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. Employee

Nonpartisan Committee for Good Government $1,000

22. Committee for the Preservation of Capitalism $4,000

23. Democratic Foundation of the Desert $8001

24. Distilled Spirits Council of the United States Inc. PAC $750

25. Distilled Spirits Council of the United States Inc. PAC $1,0001

26. Dorso for Congress Committee $1,650

27. Drummond Company Inc. PAC $1,000

28. Dunn Lampton for Congress $1,300

29. Ernst & Young PAC $2,000

30. Federal Managers’ Association PAC $675

31. Fight-PAC $3,000

32. First Health Group Corp. PAC $2,000

33. Florida Power and Light Co. Employees’ PAC $900

34. Friends of David Bishop $1,000

35. Genesis Health Ventures Inc. PAC $1,000

36. Greene for Congress 2000 Campaign Committee $300

37. Harris for Congress $9001

38. Holland America Line Westours, Inc. PAC $1,000

39. Hutchins for Congress $300

40. Ice Cream, Milk & Cheese PAC-INTL Ice Cream Association,

Milk Industry Foundation and National Cheese Institute $1,000

41. Independent Electrical Contractors Inc. PAC $775

42. Independent Electrical Contractors Inc. PAC $1,000

Committees Fined for

Nonfiled and Late Reports

On July 23 and August 7, 2001,

the Commission publicized its final

action on 85 new Administrative

Fine cases, bringing the total

number of cases released to the

public to 188.

Civil money penalties for late

reports are determined by the

number of days the report was late,

the amount of financial activity

involved and any prior penalties for

violations under the administrative

fine regulations. Penalties for

nonfiled reports—and for reports

filed so late as to be considered

nonfiled—are also determined by

the financial activity for the reporting period and any prior violations.

Election sensitive reports, which

include reports and notices filed

prior to an election (i.e., 12 Day preprimary, October quarterly and

October monthly reports), receive

higher penalties. The committees

and the treasurers are assessed civil

money penalties when the Commission makes its final determination.

Unpaid civil money penalties are

referred to the Department of the

Treasury for collection.

The committees listed in the

charts at right, and their treasurers,

were assessed civil money penalties

under the administrative fine

regulations.

Closed Administrative Fine case

files are available through the FEC

Press Office, at 800/424-9530 (press

2) and the Public Records Office, at

800/424-9530 (press 3).✦

—Phillip Deen

Administrative

Fines

1 This civil money penalty has not been collected.
September 2001 Federal Election Commission RECORD

7

Electronic

Filing

More Committees File

Electronically

During July 2001, nearly 3,000

committees filed electronic disclosure reports with the Commission.

Of this total, 1,135 committees were

new electronic filers. On the July 31

mid-year report filing date alone, the

Commission received and processed

519 electronically-filed reports; 318

of these reports were filed by new

electronic filers.

Many of these committees filed

under the mandatory electronic

filing regulations that took effect

January 1, 2001. These regulations

require candidate and political

committees to file electronically if

they:

• File reports directly with the

Commission;1

 and

• Exceed (or expect to exceed)

$50,000 in contributions or

expenditures in a calendar year.

Other committees may choose to

file electronically under the

Commission’s voluntary electronic

filing program, which began in

1997.

The Commission makes electronically-filed reports available for

public viewing on the FEC web site,

www.fec.gov, within seconds of

receipt. Images of reports that are

filed on paper are posted on the site

within 24 to 48 hours.✦

—Amy Kort

1

 Senate committees, which file their

reports with the Secretary of the Senate,

are not required to file electronically.

43. Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries PAC $1,000

44. International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees PAC $1,000

45. Lawler 2000 Committee $325

46. Leadership PAC 2002 $2,000

47. Madison Project Inc. Fund $1,000

48. National Association of Mortgage Brokers PAC $2,000

49. National Association of Professional

Insurance Agents PAC $1,000

50. National Association of Wheat Growers PAC $1,000

51. National Beer Wholesalers Association PAC $5,000

52. National Community Pharmacists Association PAC $1,000

53. National Cotton Council Committee $325

54. National Utility Contractors Association Legislative

 Information & Action Committee $1,000

55. Noble Willingham for Congress $2,000

56. Nortel Networks Inc. PAC $1,000

57. Osteopathic PAC $2,000

58. Outdoor Advertising Association of America PAC $1,000

59. People for Royal Hart $1,8001

60. Prairie Leadership Committee $1,000

61. Reliant Energy Entex Citizenship Responsibility Group $1,000

62. Republican Party of Minnesota $16,000

63. Richard Pombo for Congress $1,650

64. Rick Hill for Congress Committee $900

65. Securities Industry Association PAC $1,000

66. Seekings for Congress $900

67. Sills Federal PAC Inc. $1,000

68. Rite Aid PAC $5,000

69. Rolls-Royce North America PAC $1,000

70. Ryder Empls PAC $1,000

71. Services Group of America PAC $1,000

72. Sisisky for Congress $325

73. Southwestern Electric Power Company PAC ———2

74. Sunbelt Good Government

Committee of Winn-Dixie Stores Inc. $1,000

75. SunTrust Mid-Atlantic Responsible Government Fund $1,000

76. Texas-New Mexico Power Company

Responsible Government Association $1,000

77. Textron Inc. PAC $3,000

78. Title Industry PAC $1,000

79. Trotter 2000 for Congress $900

80. United States Telecom Association PAC $2,000

81. Volunteer PAC $1,000

82. Waddell & Reed Financial Inc. PAC $1,000

83. Western Pistachio Association Pistachio PAC $1,000

84. Wynn for Congress $5,000

85. Wynn for Congress $5,025

Committees Fined and Penalties Assessed, Cont.

2 The committee provided evidence that the report was filed timely, so the

Commission took no further action.

1This civil money penalty has not been collected.
Federal Election Commission RECORD September 2001

8

Court Cases

New Litigation

AFL-CIO and DNC Services

Corp./DNC v. FEC

On July 17, 2001, the U.S.

District Court for the District of

Columbia granted Plaintiffs’ request

for a preliminary injunction barring

the Commission from publicly

releasing documents relating to

closed enforcement matters (MURs)

4291, 4307, 4328, 4338, 4463,

4500, 4501, 4513, 4555, 4573 and

4578 (MUR 4291, et al.) until the

conclusion of the litigation. The

injunction does not bar the Commission from releasing the:

• General Counsel’s Report, dated

June 12, 2000;

• Certification of the Commission’s

Acting Deputy Secretary, dated

July 12, 2000;

• Statement of Commissioner Scott

E. Thomas, dated September 5,

2000; and

• Conciliation agreement between

the Commission and the Democratic-Republican-Independent

Voter Education Committee.

Background. On June 17, 1997,

the Commission found reason to

believe that the American Federation of Labor and Congress of

Industrial Organizations (AFLCIO), the DNC Services Corporation/Democratic National

Committee (DNC) and others had

violated the Federal Election

Campaign Act (the Act) during the

1995-96 election cycle (MUR 4291,

et al.). The Commission subsequently conducted an investigation

into the alleged transgressions,

during which the AFL-CIO and the

DNC produced more that 20,000

pages of documents relating to their

activities. On July 11, 2000, the

Commission voted to take no further

action on MUR 4291, et al., and it

subsequently informed the AFLCIO and DNC that the closed MUR

files would be placed on the public

record. The Commission’s longstanding practice is to make copies

of its closed MUR files available to

the public within 30 days after

notifying all respondents that a

MUR has been closed. 11 CFR

5.4(a)(3) and (4).

In May and June 2001, after

reviewing the files that the Commission planned to make public,

Plaintiffs made multiple submissions to the Commission requesting

that the MUR files not be publicly

released. Plaintiffs argued that

releasing the files would violate the

enforcement confidentiality provision of the Act, 2 U.S.C.

§437g(a)(12)(A), the First Amendment and the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C.

§552a. Plaintiffs also claimed that

the files contained information

exempted from disclosure under the

Freedom of Information Act

(FOIA). 5 U.S.C. §552. The

Commission denied Plaintiffs’

requests.

Court Case. On July 13, 2001,

Plaintiffs filed a complaint with the

U.S. District Court for the District

of Columbia seeking a permanent

injunction that would prevent the

Commission from publicly disclosing most of its investigatory files in

closed MUR 4291, et al. They also

requested a preliminary injunction

or temporary restraining order to bar

the Commission’s release of the

documents while the case was

heard.

The court issued a preliminary

injunction barring release of the

files, which will maintain the status

quo while the court considers

Plaintiffs’ arguments. The court also

set an accelerated briefing schedule

for final resolution of the case.

U.S. District Court for the

District of Columbia, CA-01-

1522.✦

—Amy Kort

Alternative

Dispute

Resolution

ADR Program Update

In July 2001, the Commission

publicized information on three

additional cases resolved in the

Alternative Dispute Resolution

(ADR) program. The respondents,

the alleged violations and the

penalties assessed are listed below.

The Commission reached agreement with Omaha State Bank. The

bank agreed to pay a $500 civil

money penalty for making a prohibited contribution by a national bank

toward a federal election. 2 U.S.C.

§441b(a). In addition, the bank will,

within 90 days of the agreement,

Campaign Guides

Available

 For each type of committee, a

Campaign Guide explains, in

clear English, the complex

regulations regarding the activity

of political committees. It shows

readers, for example, how to fill

out FEC reports and illustrates

how the law applies to practical

situations.

 The FEC publishes four

Campaign Guides, each for a

different type of committee, and

we are happy to mail your

committee as many copies as you

need, free of charge. We

encourage you to view them on

our Web site (go to www.fec.gov,

then click on “Campaign Finance

Law Resources” and then scroll

down to “Publications”).

 If you would like to place an

order for paper copies of the

Campaign Guides, please call

800-424-9530, press 1, then 3.
September 2001 Federal Election Commission RECORD

9

Publications

adopt and distribute to bank personnel a policy prohibiting bank

contributions in connection with

federal elections.

The Commission also reached

agreement with Kurth for Congress.

The committee, which had failed to

provide adequate disclaimer information, acknowledged the admonishing nature of the agreement and

agreed to file for termination.

Finally, the Commission dismissed allegations against Friends

of Roger Kahn, Roger Kahn, and

Matthews & Maxwell, Inc., concerning corporate contributions and

failure to report receipts. The ADR

Office concluded that the alleged

violations were unsubstantiated, and

the Commission concurred by

dismissing the matter.

Closed ADR-negotiated settlement summaries are available from

the Public Records Office at 999 E

Street, NW., Washington, D.C.

20463. The Public Records Office

may also be contacted at 800/424-

9530 (press 3).✦

—Phillip Deen

Results of 2000 Federal

Elections Published

The Commission has released

Federal Elections 2000, a 197 page

publication detailing the official

primary, runoff and general election

results for the 2000 Presidential and

Congressional elections. For each

state, Federal Elections 2000 lists

the names of candidates on the

ballot, party affiliations and the

number and percentage of votes

each candidate received. It also

provides charts that illustrate and

summarize election results. The

publication’s statistical data, which

is based on official figures provided

by state election officials, includes

election results as amended through

June 2001.

Information Division

Director Resigns

Louise D. Wides, who served 16

years as the Assistant Staff Director

of the Information Division, has

resigned from the agency in order to

begin work in the private sector. Her

last day with the Commission was

June 29, 2001.

Ms. Wides had worked for the

Commission since 1975, starting her

career as an Information Specialist.

Under her direction, the Information

Division wrote and produced the

Campaign Guide series, the brochure series and the Record. In

addition, Ms. Wides oversaw the

growth and development of the

FEC’s conference program and the

toll-free line to provide compliance

help to the regulated community.

Greg J. Scott, who served as

Deputy Assistant Staff Director

under Ms. Wides, has been named

Acting Assistant Staff Director of

the Information Division. A 1988

graduate of Indiana University, Mr.

Scott has worked in the Information

Division since 1990.✦

—Amy Kort

The largest edition in the series,

Federal Elections 2000 features two

new additions:

• An appendix that provides statistics for previous Presidential

general elections; and

• A chart showing the general

election votes cast for all federal

races by party.

The publication is available for

viewing and downloading at the

FEC’s web site at www.fec.gov, in

the “Elections and Voting” section.

To obtain a free copy of Federal

Elections 2000, or for more information, call the Public Records

office at 800/424-9530 (press 3) or

at 202/694-1120.✦

—Amy Kort

Staff

Acting FEC General

Counsel Resigns

Lois Lerner, the FEC’s Acting

General Counsel, will leave the

Commission in September to take a

senior post with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Ms. Lerner will

be the Director of Rulings and

Agreements in the Exempt Organizations Technical Division at the

IRS. This division deals with taxexempt political organizations.

Ms. Lerner had been Acting

General Counsel since January of

2001. She joined the staff of the

FEC’s Office of General Counsel in

1981 and later served as the FEC’s

Associate General Counsel for

Enforcement. Prior to joining the

FEC, she was a staff attorney in the

Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.✦

—Jim Wilson

Back Issues of the

Record Available on

the Internet

This issue of the Record and all

other issues of the Record starting

with January 1996 are available

through the Internet as PDF files.

Visit the FEC’s World Wide Web

site at http://www.fec.gov and

click on “What’s New” for this

issue. Click “Campaign Finance

Law Resources” to see back issues. Future Record issues will be

posted on the web as well. You

will need Adobe® Acrobat®

Reader software to view the publication. The FEC’s web site has

a link that will take you to Adobe’s

web site, where you can download

the latest version of the software

for free.
Federal Election Commission RECORD September 2001

10

PACronyms, Other

PAC Publications

Available

 The Commission annually

publishes PACronyms, an

alphabetical listing of acronyms,

abbreviations and common names

of political action committees

(PACs).

 For each PAC listed, the index

provides the full name of the

PAC, its city, state, FEC

identification number and, if not

identifiable from the full name,

its connected, sponsoring or

affiliated organization.

 The index is helpful in identifying PACs that are not readily

identified in their reports and

statements on file with the FEC.

 To order a free copy of

PACronyms, call the FEC’s

Disclosure Division at 800/424-

9530 (press 3) or 202/694-1120.

PACronyms also is available on

diskette for $1 and can be

accessed free under the “Using

FEC Services” icon at the FEC’s

web site—http://www.fec.gov.

Other PAC indexes, described

below, may be ordered from the

Disclosure Division. Prepayment

is required.

• An alphabetical list of all

 registered PACs showing each

 PAC’s identification number,

 address, treasurer and

 connected organization ($13.25).

• A list of registered PACs

 arranged by state providing the

 same information as above

 ($13.25).

• An alphabetical list of

 organizations sponsoring PACs

 showing the PAC’s name and

 identification number ($7.50).

 The Disclosure Division can

also conduct database research to

locate federal political committees

when only part of the committee

name is known. Call the telephone

numbers above for assistance or

visit the Public Records Office in

Washington at 999 E St., NW.

Outreach

FEC Regional Conference

in Denver for Candidates,

Parties and PACs

This October, the Federal Election Commission will hold a comprehensive, two and one-half day,

regional conference in Denver. This

conference is designed to help

federal political committees and

candidates understand and comply

with federal campaign finance law.

The conference will provide an

overview of the basic provisions of

the federal election law and discuss

specific requirements that apply to

candidates, political parties and

corporate, labor and trade association PACs (as well as their sponsoring organizations).

The conference will consist of a

series of workshops presented by

Commissioners and experienced

FEC staff. A representative from the

Internal Revenue Service will be

available to answer election-related

tax questions.

The conference will be held

October 2-4, 2001, at the Westin

Westminster, 10600 Westminster

Blvd., Westminster, Colorado

(Denver metro area). The registration fee for the conference is $360,

which covers the cost of the conference, reception, materials and

meals. The registration fee and the

registration form, which is available

by mail and online, must be received by August 31. A late registration fee of $10 will be added as of

September 1. A full refund will be

made for all cancellations made

before that date.

A room rate of $158 single or

double is available for hotel reservations made by August 31. Call (303)

410-5000 or (800) 937-8461 and

specify the Federal Election Commission room block. After August

31, room rates are based on availability. Free parking is located

across from the hotel.

Registration

Conference registrations will be

accepted on a first-come, firstserved basis. Attendance is limited,

and other FEC conferences have

sold out this year, so please register

early.

For registration information, call

Sylvester Management Corporation

at (800) 246-7277 or send an e-mail

to toni@sylvestermanagement.com.

To download the agenda or fill out a

registration for the conference

online, visit www.fec.gov/pages/

infosvc.htm#Conferences.✦

—Phillip Deen

Public Appearances

September 11, 2001

NABPAC

Washington, D.C.

Commissioner Thomas

September 17, 2001

John M. Asbrook Center for

Public Affairs

Ashland, Ohio

Commissioner Smith

September 26, 2001

American University

Washington, D.C.

Commissioner Mason

September 29-30, 2001

California Political Attorneys

Association/

California Political Treasurers

Association

Monterey, California

Commissioner Wold
September 2001 Federal Election Commission RECORD

11

Index

The first number in each citation

refers to the “number” (month) of

the 2001 Record issue in which the

article appeared. The second

number, following the colon,

indicates the page number in that

issue. For example, “1:4” means

that the article is in the January

issue on page 4.

Advisory Opinions

Alternative disposition of 2001-5,

5:6

2000-24: Preemption of state

election law mandating fixed

allocation ratio for administrative

and voter drive expenses, 2:2

2000-27: Status of party as state

committee, 3:6

2000-28: Disaffiliation of trade

associations and their PACs, 2:3

2000-30: Nonconnected PAC’s

receipt and use of securities, 5:1

2000-32: Reporting uncollectable

loan, 1:9

2000-34: Name and acronym of

SSF, 2:5

2000-35: Status of party as state

committee, 1:10

2000-36: Disaffiliation of nonconnected PACs, 2:5

2000-37: Use of campaign funds to

purchase and present Liberty

Medals, 2:6

2000-38: Registration of party

committee due to delegate

expenses, 2:7

2000-39: Status of party as state

committee, 2:8

2000-40: Donations to legal defense

fund of Member of Congress, 3:7

2001-1: Use of political party’s

office building fund to pay

building renovation costs and

fundraising expenses of building

fund, 4:5

2001-2: Status of party as state

committee, 4:6

2001-3: Use of campaign funds to

purchase an automobile for

campaign purposes, 5:5

2001-4: Use of electronic signatures

for PAC contributions by payroll

deduction, 6:6

2001-6: Status of party as state

committee, 6:7

2001-7: Nonaffiliation of LLC PAC

with SSFs of member companies

of the LLC, 8:6

2001-8: Campaign committee’s

purchase of candidate’s book for

distribution to contributors, 8:9

2001-9: Former Senator’s use of

excess campaign funds to pay

expenses resulting from media

inquiries made after his term

expired, 9:1

2001-10: Employment of

candidate’s spouse by campaign

committee, 9:4

Compliance

Committees fined under Administrative Fines Program, 2:6, 4:7, 5:7,

6:5, 7:8, 9:6

MUR 4594: Prohibited Foreign

National Contributions, 6:8

MUR 4762: Prohibited union

contributions and other violations,

2:9

MUR 5029: Contributions in the

name of another made by corporation and government contractor,

2:10

Court Cases

_____ v. FEC

– AFL-CIO and DNC Services

Corp./DNC, 9:8

– Beaumont, 2:8, 3:2, 5:6, 6:9

– Buchanan, 1:10

– Cunningham, 8:4

– DNC, 2:8. 3:2

– Dole, 5:6

– Kieffer, 7:7

– Miles for Senate, 3:3

– Nader, 4:8, 6:9

– Natural Law Party of the United

States of America, 1:10, 2:8, 3:2

FEC v. _____

– Colorado Republican Federal

Campaign Committee, 8:1

– Friends for Fasi, 6:8

– NRA, 8:3

– Toledano, 7:8

Other

– Hooker v. All Campaign Contributors, 1:10

– Hooker v. Sundquist, 4:8

Regulations

Advance Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking on definition of

“political committee,” 4:1

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on

brokerage loans and lines of

credit, 9:1

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on

reporting of independent expenditures and last-minute contributions, 6:1

Final rules for general public

political communications coordinated with candidates and party

committees; independent expenditures, 1:2, 6:3

Reports

Amendments to Statements of

Organization, 2:1

Arkansas special election, 9:5

Arizona state filing waiver, 6:10

California special election, 3:5

Committees required to file tax

returns, 3:4

Florida special election, 7:4

July reporting reminder, 7:1

Massachusetts special election, 7:6

Nevada state filing waiver, 2:2

Pennsylvania special election, 4:5

Reports due in 2001, 1:4

Virginia special election, 5:6

Need FEC Material

in a Hurry?

 Use FEC Faxline to obtain FEC

material fast. It operates 24 hours

a day, 7 days a week. More than

300 FEC documents—reporting

forms, brochures, FEC

regulations—can be faxed almost

immediately.

 Use a touch tone phone to dial

202/501-3413 and follow the

instructions. To order a complete

menu of Faxline documents, enter

document number 411 at the

prompt.
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300

Presorted Standard

Postage and Fees Paid

Federal Election Commission

Permit Number G-31

Printed on recycled paper

Federal Election Commission RECORD September 2001