THE FEDERAL ELECTION

COMMISSION

1325 KStreet N,W., Washington, D.C. 20463

Volume 8, Number 8

BALLOT ACCESS EXEMPTIONS

DELINEATED

On June 9, 1982, the Commission approved a

recommendation by the Office of General Counsel

delineating the types of ballot access fees, required of candidates for federal office, that would

be exempt from the Act's definitions of "contribution" and "expenditure." (See 2 U.S.C. §§43l(8)(B)

(xiil) and 43l(9)(B)(x).) The exemptions are limited

to fees mandated or permitted by state laws or by

party rules prior to placing a candidate's name on

the ballot. The exemptions include, for example,

filing fees and costs incurred for verifying petition signatures. The fees and other costs covered

by the exemptions vary, therefore, from state to

state, depending on state laws and party rules.

The mandatory filing fee falls within the exemptions regardless of whether the candidate pays it

to a party committee (which, in turn, transfers it

to an election official) or pays it directly to a

state official.

The following article, prepared in response to

inquiries from the public, describes how citizens

may use the Federal Election Commission's campaign finance reports and computer indexes to

answer questions they have about the campaign

finance activities of political committees and

candidates involved in Federal elections. After

each question are listed the types of campaign

finance reports and indexes which contain information that would answer the question. Note that

the computer indexes provide detailed campaign

finance information beginning with the 1977-78

election cycle. In addition, microfilm cartridges

contain information dating back to the 1972 elecAugust 19

tions, These microfilmed reports and statemen

are the Commission's official record of campaig

finance information. Researchers should therefo

use the microfilmed public record as their princ

pal research tool, supplemented by the comput

indexes and other FEC documents that summari

this information.

All the information listed in this article is ava

able for review and copying in the FEC's Publ

Records Office (see p, 7)••

INFORMATION ON CANDIDATES*·

Who is running for federal office in my Congre

sional district or state?

Computer Index A (arranged by type of offi

sought) lists all candidates within a state an

Congressional district. The A Index also giv

each candidate's party affiliation.

FEC files, arranged by state and Congre

sional district, contain this same informatio

on The Statement of Candidacy (FEC Form 

filed by each candidate.

Separate listings provided periodically b

each Secretary of State's Office identify a

the individuals on a state's ballot.

continued on p. 

"'The federal election law places restrictio

on the use of information copied from campai

finance reports and statements. They "may not 

sold, or used by any person for the purpose 

soliciting contributions or for commercial pu

poses, other than using the name and address 

any political committee to solicit contributio

from such committees." 2 U.S.C. §438(a)(4).

* "'Information is provided for: 1) those in

viduals who have attained candidate status und

the Act, Le., individuals campaigning for fede

office who have raised contributions or ma

expenditures aggregating over $5,000 and 2) tho

individuals who have not attained candidate s

tus, but who have nevertheless chosen to regis

with the FEC or whose names appear on sta

ballots.
2

The Record is published by the Federal Election Commission, 1325 K Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20463. Commissioners are: Frank P. Reiche, Chairman; Danny Lee McDonald, Vice

Chairman; Joan D. Aikens; Lee Ann Elliott; Thomas E. Harris; John Warren McGarry; William F.

Hildenbrand, 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.

___ - ....,. ., .", -

s. ,.

• '<, .: '. ,

. . - - - - --'- -.-..-~ - - - - -_. - - - --

ADVlSORY OPINION

INDEX AVAU.ABLE

An updated edition of the Commission's cumulative Index to Advisory Opinions is now available. The June 1982 Index includes three parts: a

subject index and an index by U·,S. Code, both

covering an opinions issued from April 1975

through May 1982; and an index. by FEC Regulations covering opinions from 1977.

Requests for the Index to Advisory Opinions

should be addressed to the FEC's Office of Public

Records. Purchase price (for duplication costs) is

$7.45, payable in advance. Checks, made payable

to the Federal Election Commission, should be

sent to the FEC's Office of Public Records.

ADVlSORY OPINION REQUFSfS

The following chart lists recent requests for

advisory opinions (AORs). The full text of each

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

AOR Subject

1982-45 Affiliated status of two public works

organizations for purposes of PAC solicitations. (Date made publier June 24,

1982; Length: 10 pages)

1982-46 Polltical committee status for a state

PAC that has contributed to a federal

PAC; segregation of contributions for

federal elections. (Date made publics

June 25, 1982; Length: 2 pages)

PUBIJC APPEARANCES

Date Sponsoring Organization

8/8/82 American Bar Association

Annual Meeting, Committee on

Election La w

San Francisco, California

Commissioner Joan D. Aikens

ADVlSORY OPINIONS: SUMMARIES

An Advisory Opinion (AO) issued by the Co

mission provides guidance with regard to t

specific situation described in the AOR~ A

qualified person who has requested an AO a

acts in accordance with the opinion will not 

subject to any sanctions under the Act. Oth

persons may rely on the opinion if they a

involved in a specific activity which is indist

guishable in all material aspects from the activ

discussed in the AO. Those seeking guidance f

their own activity, however, should consult t

full text of an AO and not rely only on t

summary given here.

AO 1982-8: Receipt and Disbursenient of

Credit Units by PAC

Established in Barter Industry

BARTERPAC, the separate segregated fund 

the International Association of Trade Exchang

(the Association), may solicit contributions in t

form of credit units from the solicitable personn

of the Association's member barter firms. BA

TERP AC may then contribute the credit un

directly to federal candidates or use the units 

purchase goods and services for them.

The Association is a trade association represe

ting for-profit commercial barter firms. Each 

the barter firms functions as the organizer of 

marketplace in which the barter firm's membe

exchange goods and services on a barter b

sis. The barter firms use a credit unit to deno

receivable goods and services due in barter tran

actions. The value, in credit units, of any giv

services or goods is equal to its fair market val

at the time the credit units are exchanged. T

barter firms earn their income from commissio

that represent a percentage of the gross value 

each transaction. Under these circumstances, t

transactions proposed by BARTERPAC would 

SUbject to the requirements of the Act detail

below.

Contributions and Expenditures of Credit Units

For purposes of the Act, BARTERPAC m

value the credit units it receives at $1 each (sin

the purchasing power of each credit unit is, 

fact, less than $1). If BARTERPAC contribut

credit units to candidates (who SUbsequently e

change them for services or goods), the value 

again determined on the basis of $1 per cred

unit, The vendor, in turn, may provide the cand

date with goods or services whose value equa

the candidate's credit units. If, however, the val

of the goods or services exceeds the credit un

offered by the candidate, the vendor will ha

made a contribution in-kind.
•

e·

As another alternative, BARTERPAC may itself

exchange credit units for actual goods and services which, in turn, it contributes to a candidate. This transaction constitutes a typical contribution in-kind whose value is determined by the

fair market value of the goods or services provided. Under these circumstances, it is not appropriate to rely on the accounting convention

that each credit unit equals $1.

All Commission regulations regarding the reporting of receipts and disbursements apply to the

receipt and disbursement of credit units.

Commissions Paid for Exchanges

The party that actually exchanges the credit

units for goods and services -- either BARTERPAC or the candidate -- must pay the commission

required by the barter firm for this service. The

amount of the commission. does not increase or

decrease the value of the contribution. Other fees

required by participants in barter transactions

would be SUbject to similar treatment.

Note that, to avoid making an in-kind contribution

to either BARTERPAC or the candidate to whom

BARTERPAC has contributed, the vendor who

provides goods or services in exchange for credit

units must provide them at their fair market

value. Similarly~ any commission charged by a

barter firm must be the usual and normal charge

to avoid a contribution from the firm to either

BARTERPAC or the candidate's committee. (Date

issued: June 18, 1982; Length: 10 pages)

AO 1982-34 Payroll D~tionP:Ian

Sponsored by Foreign

Subsidiaries oru.s.

Corporation

Foreign subsidiaries of Sonat Offshore Drilling,

Inc. (Offshore) may sponsor payroll deduction

plans for their American executive and administrative personnel, provided that neither the foreign national SUbsidiary nor its foreign national

personnel exercise any control over the solicitation or ultimate use of the contributions. Contributions collected through the payroll deduction

plans may then be forwarded to Sonat PAC, the

separate segregated fund of Offshore's parent

corporation, Sonat, Inc. (a domestic corporation). The foreign subsidiaries' system for soliciting contributions to Sonat PAC is permissible

because:

1. A U.S. citizen employed in a foreign country

may lawfully make contributions to the separate segregated fund of a parent corporation

in the U.S.

2. A parent corporation's right to solicit the

eligible personnel of its subsidiaries (and

their subsidiaries) is not affected by the

status of the SUbsidiaries as foreign nationals,

provided the personnel solicited are not foreign nationals.

3. Costs incurred by the foreign subsidiaries in

establishing and administering the plans constitute solicitation expenses exempt from the

Act's definition of "contribution" and are not,

therefore, prohibited by 2 U.S.C. §441e.

3

Commissioner Thomas E. Harris filed a dissenti

opinion with which Commissioner Danny 

McDonald concurred. (Date issued: June 9, 19

Length: 6 pages, including dissenting opinions)

AO 1982-35: Legal Expense Fund for

Contesting Possible Denial

of Primary Ballot Access

Mr. Al Hopfman, a Democratic candidate seeki

nomination to the Senate from Massachuset

may establish a special legal expense fund 

challenge the constitutionality of a Massachuse

Democratic Party rule that might deny him a

cess to the state's primary election ballot. (Und

the rule, Mr. Hopfman must receive at least 

percent of the votes cast at the party's nomin

ting convention to obtain ballot aceess.) Accor

ingly, since the fund will be used to test a ru

that could preclude Mr. Hopfman's participati

in a federal election rather than to influence t

outcome of a federal election,' donations to t

fund would not constitute contributions subject 

the Act's monetary limits.

. The Commission distinguished this opinion fro

AO 1980-57, Which held that funds raised f

litigation that had sought to remove a candidate

potential opponent from the ballot constitut

contributions. In that instance, the candidate's li

igation could have influenced the outcome af 

federal election by eliminating the voters' oppo

tunity to cast votes for his opponent. Commi

sioner Thomas E. Harris filed a concurring opi

ion. (Date issued: June 9, 1982; Length: 14 page

including concurring opinion)

AO 1982-36: Merger orTrade Association

PACS; FWlClraising Items

Donated by Corporate Members

Upon completion of the merger of the "XY

Trade Association" with the National Audio-Visu

Association, Inc. (NAVA)~ NAVA may transfer t

remaining assets of XYZ's separate segregat

fund (XYZ-PAC) to NAVA's own separate segr

gated fund, the Audio-Visual Communicatio

Fund (AVe Fund), and terminate XYZ-PAC.ln 

separate transaction, NAVA's corporate membe

may donate merchandise to AVC Fund for use 

fundraising prizes in conjunction with solicitatio

at NAVAls annual meeting. The transactions a

subject to the requirements detailed below.

Merger of XYZ-PAC and AVe Fund

With the merger of their parent trade assoc

ations, AVC Fund and XYZ-PAC will becom

affiliated political committees. 11 CFR 100.S

(2). Since FEC Regulations impose no limits 

the transfer of funds between affiliated comm

tees, XYZ-PAC may then transfer all its r

maining funds to AVC Fund. 11 CFR 102.6(

Before terminating, XYZ-PAC must report th

transfer. It may, however, disclose the transf

and terminate on the same report. 11 CFR 102.5

Fundraising Items Donated by

Corporate Members

Merchandise donated to AVC Fund by NAVA

corporate members for use as fundraising item

continue
(e.g., raffle, door and lottery prizes) are considered solicitation expenses exempt from the Act's

definition of contribution. 2 U.S.C. S44lb(b)(2)

(C). AVC Fund and NAVA must, however, ensure

that the fundralsing items are not disproportionately valuable to the contributions they generate. Commission Regulations provide that a

"reasonable practice to follow" is for the separate

segregated fund to reimburse its sponsoring organization for costs which exceed one-third of

the money contributed. 11 CFR 114.5(b)(2). See

also AOs 1981-40 and 1981-7. AVC Fund and

NAVA must also comply with all other relevant

provisions of the Act and Commission Regulations, particularly those governing trade association solicitations. 2 U.S.C. S44lb(b)(4)(Dl; 11 CFR

114.8.

The Commission cautioned that, if the corporate

members' donations were used to defray a significant portion of AVC Fund's solicitation costs, a

question might arise as to whether the corporate

members' separate segregated funds were affiliated with AVC Fund, (Under the Act, affiliated

committees are subject to a single limit on both

contributions they receive and contributions they

give. 2 U.S.C. S44la(a)(5).) Commissioner Thomas

E. Harris filed a dissenting opinion. (Date issued:

June 9, 1982; Length: 5 pages, including dissent)

AO 1982-38: Accotmting Method for

Contributions Made by County

P8I'ty Organizations to Senate

Campaign

The Committee to Re-Elect Senator Moynihan

(the Committee) may not accept contributions

from New York county Democratic organizations

(not registered under federal election law). The

contributions would not be lawful under the Act

because, while the county organizations can ensure, at the close of the reporting period, that

they will have sufficient lawful funds to make

contributions, the organizations cannot be certain

that they will have sufficient lawful funds at the

time they make the contributions.,

Under New York election law, the county organizations may accept corporate donations prohibited under the Act. Commission Regulations stipulate that, under these circumstances, an unregistered organization supporting a federal candidate

must demonstrate through a reasonable accounting method that it has sufficient funds to make a

contribution permissible under the Act. Moreover,

the candidate receiving the contribution must

assume responsibility for determining that the

contribution comes from permissible sources.

The proposed accounting method is not acceptable

because the county organizations cannot be certain that they will have sufficienUawful funds at

the time they make contributions to the Committee. A county organization's lack of knowledge,

one way or the other, concerning the availability

of permissible funds at the time a contribution is

made does not fulfill the affirmative obligation

imposed on both the county organization and the

4

Committee to determine whether a contributi

is permissible. (Date issued: June 25, 198

Length: 4 pages) .

AO 1982-39: Excess Fund'; Transferred 

Between Senate candidate's

1980 Committee, 1986 Committe

and Presidential Testing-theWaters Committee

Senator Alan Cranston's 1986 Senate campaig

committee (the 1986 committee) may transf

excess campaign funds of his 1980 Senate cam

paign, which had been transferred to the 19

committee in 1981, back to the 1980 comm

tee. The 1980 committee may, in turn, transf

the excess funds, as needed, to a committ

authorized by Senator Cranston to test the feas

bility of his potential Presidential candidacy 

1984 (the testing-the-waters committee). Com

mission Regulations place no limit on the transf

of funds between a candidate's current and form

campaign committees. 11 CFR 110.3(a)(2)(iv). (A

funds transferred must, however, be reported a

cording to procedures spelled out in the Act an

Commission Regulations. See 2 U.S.C. S434 an

11 CFR 104.1 et seq.) Moreover, excess campaig

funds may be used for any lawful purpose, i

cluding testing-the-waters activities. 2 U.S.

S439a.

Since contributions made to a previous campaig

before the date of the election do not cou

against a donor's limits for any future electio

contributions to the 1980 .commlttee that a

contained in the transferred funds do not cou

against the donor's contribution limits for eith

Senator Cranston's 1986 Senate campaign or h

1984 Presidential campaign, should he become 

Presidential candidate. Donations made direct

to the testing-the-waters committee would, how

ever, count against the donor's limits for Senat

Cranston's 1984 Presidential campaign, should 

become a candidate.

The Commission expressed no opinion on the a

plication of Senate rules or income tax laws 

the proposed transactions because they are ou

side its jurisdiction. (Date issued: June 25, 198

Length: 3 pages)

AO 1982-41: Mailing Lists EXchanged

Between Campaign Committee

and Other Organizations

The exchange of mailing lists between the Com

mittee for Congressman Ron Dellums (the Com

mittee) and several other organizations will n

result in contributions to the Committee from th

organizations. Under a proposed plan, the Com

mittee will provide a list of 5,000 names 

organization A, which, in turn, will give its list 

5,000 names to organization B, which will provi

5,000 names to the Committee. T.his multipar

exchange of mailing lists represents an acceptab

type of commercial transaction because:

1. Such multiparty exchanges are considere

routine and usual practice in the list br

kering industry; and
2. As stated in the advisory opinion request, all

mailing lists exchanged between the Committee and the three organizations will be of

equal value, as determined by industry practice. (Date issued: June 9, 1982; Length: 3

pages)

(continued from p. l)

How may I obtain a candidate's full name and

address, as well as the name and address of

his/her campaign committee?

Computer Index A gives a candidate's full

name and address.

Computer Index 93 gives the name and address of a candidate's principal campaign

committee, as well as any other committees

authorized by a candidate.

PEC Form I (Statement of Organization) and

FEe Form 2 (Statement of Candidacy) provide this same information.

How much money did a candidate raise and spend

in a former campaign?

The FEC's Reports on Financial Activity contain information on receipts and disbursements for all federal candidates during the

1977-78 and 1979-80 election cycles. (Receipt and disbursement figures in the Reports

on Financial Activity series, unlike the figures in the computer indexes and campaign

finance reports, have been adjusted for transfers between eornmittees.)

Computer Index E contains information on

total receipts and disbursements for individual federal candidates during the 1977-78,

1979-80 and 1981-82 election cycles.

The FEC's Disclosure Series Nos. 6 and 9

contain information on total adjusted l'eceipts and disbursements for the general

election campaigns of all House and Senate

candidates during the 1975-76 election cycle.

The first and second pages of a campaign's

year-end report include totals for financial

activity during that year.

How may I compare a candidate's past campaign

activity with the post campaign activity of other

candidates in the same Congressional district or

state?

Since information in the Reports on Financial

Activity series (see above) is arranged by state,

the researcher may easily compare all the campaigns within a Congressional district or state

during 1977-78 or 1979-80. Disclosure Series Nos.

Sand 9' provide information for the 1975-76

election cycle.

5

How much money has a eandidate raised or spen

in his/her current campaign?

Computer Index E lists the total receipts an

disbursements fol' a candidate's campaig

(based on all reports filed with the PE

during the election cycle).

The first and second pages of the most recen

report filed by a candidate's campaign con

tain year-to-date totals for campaign f

nance activity. The report also includes de

tailed information on receipts and disburse

ments for the period covered by the report.

How does a candidate's current campaign compar

with the campaigns of other candidates runnin

for the same office?

Using the A Index to determine the names o

all the candidates running for office within 

state or Congressional district, the researche

may then:

Use the E Index to determine each cand

date's total receipts and disbursements.

Examine reports filed by each candidate

campaign committee to obtain more detaile

information on his/her campaign finance ac

tivity.

Whohas given or loaned money to a candidate?

The campaign finance reports of a cand

date's campaign (FEe Form 3, Schedule A

itemize any contributions from an individua

which have totaled over $200 a year. Contr

butions from political party committees an

PACs'" and any loans to the candidate (in

cluding bank loans) are itemized on Schedu

A, regardless of amount. Any outstandin

loans are also itemized on Schedule C of 

campaign's reports.

Computer Index G (arranged by campaig

name) lists all individuals who have made 

contribution of $500 or more to a candidate

campaign. Another listing of the G Index (a

ranged alphabetically by contributor) show

all individuals throughout the United State

. who have made a contribution of $500 o

more to any federal candidate. This listin

also identifies the candidate to whom a

individual has contributed, as well as the dat

and amount of the contribution.

Are other types of campaign support cross-refe

enced on computer indexes?

Yes. Computer Index E lists:

Contributions made to a candidate's cam

paign by political action committees (PAC

and political party committees.

Independent expenditures made by indivi

uals, groups and political committees to ad

continue

"'PAC is a popular term used to define a

political committees that have not been autho

rized by candidates or political parties. The term

includes separate segregated funds sponsored b

corporations and labor organizations, as well a

political committees without any sponsoring o

ganization.
vocate a candidate's election or defeat.

(These expenditures are not coordinated with

the candidate or any agent or aide associated

with his/her campaign. See 2 U.S.C. §431(I7)

and Commission Regulations at 11 CPR

109.1(9.).) In addition, three Independent Expenditure Indexes, produced monthly, provide

summary and detailed information on all PAC

expenditures made for and against candidates.

Special "coordinated" expenditures made by

political party committees on behalf of a

candidate. (These limited expenditures are

made by political party committees on behalf

of federal candidates in general elections.

See 2 U.S.C. §441a(d) and Commission Regulations at 11 CFR 110.7.)

Partisan communications* made by unions

and corporations on behalf of, or in opposition to, a candidate.

May more detailed informstion on sources of

campaign support be obtained from reports filed

by political committees and individuals?

Yes. Reports filed by PACs, political party

committees and individuals list:

Contributions by political party committees

and PACs, which are itemized on FEC Form

3X, Schedule B, filed by these committees.

Independent expenditures, which are reported

by an individual on FEC Form 5 and by

political committees on FEC Form ax,

Schedule E.

Special coordinated expenditures made by political party committees, which the committees report on FEC Form 3X, Schedule F.

Partisan communications made by unions and

corporations, which they report on FEe Form

7 when their total communication costs exceed $2,000 per election.

How is a eandidate spending his or her campaign

funcb?

Reports filed by a candidate's campaign committee (FEC Form 3, Schedule B) itemize any

expenditures that, in the aggregate, exceed $200

per year to a particular vendor or organization.

What other documents does the Commission make

available concerning candidates' campaign activity?

Index to Advisory Opinions and copies of

opinions issued by the Commission.

*A corporation or labor organization may

engage in certain partisan com munica tions, provided the communications are made only to the

organization's restricted class of individuals. (See

Part 114 of Commission Regulations.) Note that

the rules governing corporate partisan communications apply to a broad range of incorporated

organizations, including national banks, corporations with capital stock and ineorpoeated membership organizations (i.e., incorporated trade associations, corporations without capital stock and

incorporated cooperatives).

6

MURS (closed compliance actions and index

Audits (GAO 1972-74, FEe 1975-present).

Court cases.

A consolidated card index also lists can

dates, organizations and other persons w

have received FEC advisory opinions, w

have been respondents (or complainants) 

enforcement actions or who have been 

dited. The index: is arranged in alphabeti

order by the last name of the person or 

name of the organization. The index a

cross-references names of candidates 

states appearing in an organization's title.

DWORMATION ONPOUTICAL AcnON

COMMITTEES (PACs)*

How much money has a PAC raised and spent?

A PAC's reports (FEC Form 3X, pages I 

2) summarize its receipts and disburseme

for the reporting period covered and g

year-to-date totals.

Computer Index C lists a PACls receipts 

disbursements for each reporting period w

in an election cycle and gives the to

receipts and disbursements for the elect

cycle to date.

The FEC's Reports pn Financial Activity c

tain information on receipts and disbur

ments for all PACs supporting federal can

dates during the 1977-78 and 1979-80 el

tion cycles.

FEC press releases, issued periodically, p

vide summary information on PAC recei

and disbursements.

What eandidates has a PAC supported?

A PAC's reports (FEC Form 3X, Schedule 

list candidates to whom the PAC has m

contributions.

A PAC's reports (FEC Form 3X, Schedule 

show independent expenditures the PAC 

made for or against a given candidate.

Computer Index D (arranged by PAC nam

lists candidates who have received contri

tions and contributions in-kind* * from 

given PAC. The D Index also shows any in

pendent expenditures made by a PAC 

advocate a candidate's election or defeat.

*PAC is a popular term used to define 

political committees that have not been aut

rized by candidates or political parties. The te

, includes separate segregated funds sponsored 

corporations and labor organizations, as well 

political com rnittees without any sponsoring 

ganization. 

• • Contributions in-kind include services, go

and property given to a political committee f

or at less than the usual charge.
Do ~veral PACs support the same candidate or

candidates?

-- Computer Index E identifies all the political

committees that have contributed to, or

spent money on behalf of or against, a particular candidate.

Computer Index Combined D can be used to

identify all the candidates to whom a group

of PACs (selected by the researcher) have

contributed. This index also shows total independent expenditures the PACs have made on

behalf of, or against, the candidates.

Who has contributed to a PAC?

-- A PAC's reports (FEC Form 3X, Schedule A)

list each individual whose combined contributions have totaled over $200 a year to the

PAC.

Computer Index G lists any individual giving

a contribution of $500 or more to a PAC. The

G Index also lists contributions from other

political committees to a PAC, regardless of

amount.

Does a PAC qualify as a muIticandidate committee?*

-- A computerized Multicandidate Committee

Index, published monthly, identifies qualified

multicandidate committees, the date they

qualified for rnulticandidate status, and their

connected organizations, if any.

Computer Index B for PACs (arranged alphabetically by committee name) notes PACs

that have attained multicandldate status and

indicates each PAC's address, treasurer and

identification number.

If a PAC is a separate segregated fund, what

corporation or labor organization has sponsored

it?

A computerized Sponsor-Committee Index

lists sponsors (l.e., the parent organizations)

and identifies their separate segregated

funds.

A computerized Committee-Sponsor Index

lists separate segregated funds and then gives

the sponsors' names.

Computer Index B (arranged alphabetically by

PAC name or by state) also provides this

same information.

FEC Form 1 (the Statement of Organization),

filed by each PAC, gives the name of the

sponsoring organization, the kind of organization it is and identifies any affiliated PACs.

*A qualified multicandidate committee is

permitted to contribute $5,000 per candidate, per

election. See Commission Regulations at 11 CFR

IOO.5(e)(3).

7

INFORMATION ON POLl11CAL PARTY

COMMlTI'EES*

Which political party committees are active in 

state?

Computer Index B (which arranges all re

tered political committees by state) includes l

ings of registered political party committ

within each state.

Who are the major contributors to a polit

party committee?

-- A political party committee's reports (F

Form 3X, Schedule A) list each individ

whose combined contributions have tota

over $200 to the committee during the y

Contributions from other political pa

committees and PACs are also itemized 

Schedule A, regardless of amount.

Computer Index G lists any individual w

has made a contribution of $500 or more t

political party committee. It also lists con

butions from other political party comm

tees and PACs, regardless of amount.

Which candidates has a political party commit

supported?

-- Computer Index D lists contributions made 

candidates by political party committees 

eluding contributions in-kind) and any spe

coordinated expenditures they have made 

behalf of candidates.

This same information may be obtained 

reviewing each political party committ

reports (FEC Form 3X). For example, Sch

ule B of Form 3X shows any contributio

contributions in-kind or loans a commi

has made to candidates. Schedule F sh

any special coordinated expendi tures a co

mittee has made on behalf of candidates.

HOW TO OBTAIN INFORMATION

The documents listed in this article may 

obtained from the PUblic Records Office, loca

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

Those outside the Washington area may requ

documents by phone or mail. When identifying 

documents you want, please try to include 

much information as possible, such as the 

name of the political committee reporting, 

date or type of report or document desired, 

your address and telephone number. The c:omm

sion charges five cents per page for copies fr

paper files and 10 cents per page for copies fr

microfilm. Checks for orders should be made p

able in advance to the FEC. For more infor

tion, call the Public Records Office at 202-5

4181 or toll free 800-424-9530.

*Information is provided only for: I) th

political party committees that have attai

political committee statu~ un~er the. Act an

those political party orgamzations WhICh have 

attained political committee status under 

Act, but which have nevertheless chosen to re

ter with the FEC.
8

*Parentheses indicate sponsoring organizations.

Spending

Against

$216,960

115,540

57,507

8,754

8,048

7,521

7,390

7,389

7,101

6,054

$545,607

406,038

100,046

90,930

87,090

60,665

401

11,199

10,705

10,705

10,705

4,802

4,388

3,408

$1,872,111

42,820

28,692

20,104

14,318

7,820

5,571

AmOWlt Spen

10,930

$ 3,705

$ 500

20,634

Spending

Por

Political Committee

National Conservative Political

Action Committee

Independent Action

Life Amendment Political Action

Committee, Inc.

Democrats for the 80's, Inc.

League of Conservation Voters

Ohio Right to Life Society

Ine., PAC

NRA Political Victory Fund

Progressive Political Action

Committee (PROPAC)~

Californians for Better Leadership

UAW-V-CAP (United Auto Workers)

Candidate

House

Jim Wright (D-TX)

James R. Jones (D-oK)

Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL)

Robert W. Edgar (D-PA)

Paul Simon (D-IL)

Raymond P. Kogovsek (D-CO)

Stephen L. Neal (D-NC)

Neal Smith (D-IA)

James J. Florio (D-NJ)

Les Aspin (D-WI)

CHARTH

CANDIDATES POR OR AGAINST WHOM MOST

INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES WERE MADE

CHART I

COMMl'ITEES REPORTING LARGEST

INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES

*These independent expenditures were made i

connection with Senator Culver'S 1980 Senate cam

paign.

Senate

Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA)

Paul S. Sarbanes (D-MD)

John Melcher (D-M~ N Robert C. Byrd (D

Lowell P. Weicker, r, (R-CT)

Daniel P. Moynihan (D-NY)

*John C. Culver (D-IA)

Jesse Helms (R-NC)

Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

Harrison H. Schmitt (R-NM)

Malcolm Wallop (R-WY)

*Roughly another $100,000 in independent

expenditures was disbursed during this same period on behalf of 1980 Presidential and Senate

races.

Chart I below lists those political committees.

that made the largest independent expenditures

from January '1, 1981, through March 31, 1982.

Chart II lists the candidates for or against whom

the most money was spent.

The information released by the FEC was obtained from three different indexes on indepen-

-dent expenditures which showed the independent

expenditure activity of 23 nonparty/noncandidate

committees and four other political committees. (To date, no reports have been filed by

individuals making independent expenditures.) The'

indexes will be released monthly through 1982.

INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES APPROACH

$2 MILLION DURING 1981-82 ELECTION

CYCLE

During the first 15 months of the 1981-82

election cycle, independent expenditures made to

influence the outcome of 1982 Congressional

campaigns totaled $1.9 million* -- an amount approaching .itYthe $2.3 million spent independently

during the entire 1979-80 election cycle for U.S.

Senate and House campaigns. (Under the federal.

election law, individuals or groups may spend

unlimited funds advocating the election or defeat

of federal candidates as long as these expenditures are made independently, Le., without cooperation or consultation with the candidate or

his/her earnpaign.)

Preliminary data released by the FEC on June 23,

1982, showed that 98 percent of the independent.

expenditures made on behalf of Congressional

candidates between January 1, 1981, and March

31, 1982, advocated their defeat. The expendi-.

tures were made to oppose forty-four candidates

running for office in 1982. .

During the entire 1979-80 Presidential election

CYCle, on the other hand, approximately $16 million was spent independently. Most of this

amount, $13.7 million, was spent to influence the

outcome of Presidential elections. Of the remaining $2.3 million spent on U.S. Senate and Housecandidates, 59 percent was spent to advocate

their defeat.
•

NONPARTY!NONCANDIDATB COMMl'ITEE

CONTRIBUTIONS EXCEED $22 MILLION

DURING 1981-82 ELECTION CYCLE

Contributions made by nonparty/noncandidate political committees (PACs) to federal candidates totaled $22.8 million during the first 15

months of the 1981-82 election cycle. More than,

half of that amount, $16.3 million, was contributed during the 1981 nonelection year. By oon-.

trast, during the first fifteen months of the

1979-80 election cycle, nonparty/noncandidate

committees contributed $14.3 million to federal

candidates, of which $9.2 million was given during.

the 1979 nonelection year.

With regard to receipts, information released by

the FEC on June 30, 1982, shows that nonparty/noncandidate committees raised a total of

$109.1 million during the period from January 1,

1981, through March 31, 1982. During the same

period in 1979-80, nonparty/noncandidate comCHART I

TOP 10 POLITICAL

COMMITI'EE MONEY RAISERS

mittees raised approximately $71.6 million. T

disbursements also varied between the two e

tion cycles. During the first 15 months of 

current CYCle, these committees spent a tota

$75.8 million, whereas, in the first 15 month

the 1979-80 campaign, nonparty/noncandi

committees spent $48.7 million.

To date, incumbents have received more mo

from nonparty/noncandidate committees 

have Challengers. The committees have also m

more contributions to Democrats than to Repu

cans. Charts I and II list those nonparty/nonca

date committees that have raised the most mo

and made the most contributions to federal ea

dates so far during the 1981-82 election 

ele. Chart ill (p, 10) summarizes the total fin

cial activity of nonparty/noncandidate com

tees during the first 15 months of the 198

election cycle.

CHARTB

TOP 10 CONTRIBUTORS TO CANDIDATES

Political Committee

Amount Raised

1/81 - 3/82 Political Committee

Amount Contrib

1/81 - 

·Political committee sponsors are indicated

tn parentheses.

·Political committee sponsors are indic

in parentheses.

National Congressional Club

National Conservative Political

Action Committee

American Medical Political

Action Committee (American

Medical Association)"

Citizens for the Republic

Realtors Political Action

Committee (National Association

of Realtors)

Fund for a Conservative Majority

Committee for the Survival of a

Free Congress

National Committee for an

Effective Congress

California Medical Political

Action Committee (California

Medical Association)

Committee for Thorough

Agricultural Political Education

(Associated Milk Producers, Inc.)

$6,720,039 .

5,879,040.

1,841,436

1,634,206

1,570,158

1,461,239

1,408,678

1,335,895

I,L52,568

I,L45,163

9

American Medical Political

Action Committee (American

Medical Assoelation)«

Realtors Political Action

Committee (National Association

of Realtors)

Machinists Non-Partisan Political

League (International Association

of Machinists & Aerospace Workers)

American Bankers Association

BANKPAC (American Bankers

Associatlon)

Responsible Citizens Political

League-A Project of the

Brotherhood of Railway & Airline

Clerks (Railway Airline & Steamship

Clerks)

UAW Voluntary Community Action

Program (United Auto Workers)

Engineers Political Education

Committee (International Union of

Opera ting Engineers)

Seafarers Political Activity

Donation (Seafarers International

Union of North America)

MEBA Political Action Fund

(Marine Engineers Beneficial

Associa tion)

Committee for Thorough AgricuLtural

Political Education (Associated

Milk Producers, lnc.)

$502

293

291

284

274

262

231

228

224

213
35

CHARTm

SUMMARY FINANCIAL ACTIVITY OF PACS, 1/1/81 - 3/31/82

30

25

20

15

10

5

o

Total Number

of

Committees**'"

1,450 372 739

• Receipts'" 

_"t;S. Disbursements... 4-~

Contributions'" $:

0 C8sh-0~H8Dd

Trade/Mem- Coopera- Corporabersllipl tives tions

Health Orga w/o

nizatiom Stock

639 48 86

"'Total receipts and disbursements include transfers between affiliated committees.

*.Includes contributions to committees of: 1982 House and Senate candidates; and all federal

candidates (for House, Senate and Presidency) campaigning in future or special elections or retiring debts

of former campaigns•

.......Includes total number of PACs active in federal elections at any time between January I, 1981, and

March 31, 1982. Since some committees have terminated, this figure does not represent all committees

active as of March 31, 1982.

OFFiCIAL BUSINESS

31 45

FI RST CLASS MAl L

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

FEe

WASHINGTON, D.C.

PERMIT NO. G·31

Number of 1,035 179 194 430

Committees

M8king

Conbibutlons

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

1325 K STREET, NW

WASHINGTON, DC 20463