October 1996 Federal Election Commission Volume 22, Number 10

Table of Contents

Reports

1 Reports Due in October

7 Texas Special Elections

8 Missouri Special Election

Court Cases

1 FEC v. Christian Action Network

2 Stockman v. FEC

2 New Litigation

Public Funding

3 Dole, Clinton, Perot Receive

Public Funds

Regulations

3 Final Rules on Electronic Filing

Statistics

4 18-Month House and Senate

Activity

4 18-Month Party Activity

4 How to Get Statistical Press

Releases

Information

4 New Party Guide

10 Flashfax Menu

5 Advisory Opinions

Election Administration

6 Simplifying Election Forms

Compliance

9 Nonfilers

9 MUR Information Available

On Line

9 Federal Register Notices

11 Index

Reports

1 The exception is for committees of

candidates who did not seek election in

1996. Their next report is the 1996

year-end report covering July through

December, which is due January 31,

1997.

Reports Due in October

With one exception,1 all types of

political committees must file one or

more reports in October, as explained below. Reports must be filed

with the appropriate federal and

state filing offices.

For more information on reporting, see the January Record or call

the FEC’s Flashfax service (202/

501-3413) and request document

number 0345.

Third Quarter Report

Committees filing on a quarterly

basis must file an October quarterly

report due October 15.

October Monthly Report

Monthly filers must file a report

due October 20 and covering

September activity.

12-Day Pre-Election Report

The pre-election report for the

November 5 general election must

be filed by:

• Committees of candidates running

in the November 5 election;

(continued on page 6)

(continued on page 2)

Court Cases

FEC v. Christian Action

Network

On August 2, 1996, the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Fourth

Circuit, in an unpublished opinion,

upheld the district court’s dismissal

of this case.

The FEC had brought suit against

the Christian Action Network for

making independent expenditures 1

with corporate funds and for failing

to comply with the law’s reporting

and disclaimer requirements.

The communications in question—a television advertisement and

two newspaper ads run in the weeks

before the 1992 Presidential election

were critical of then-candidate Bill

Clinton’s positions on homosexual

issues.

The district court ruled that the

communications were outside the

FEC’s jurisdiction because they did

not expressly advocate the election

or defeat of Bill Clinton. (The

district court decision is summarized

in the September 1995 issue,

page 2.)

1 An independent expenditure is an

expenditure made without any coordination with a candidate’s campaign for

a communication which expressly

advocates the election or defeat of a

clearly identified candidate for federal

office. 11 CFR 100.16.
2

Federal Election Commission RECORD October 1996

Federal Election Commission

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

800/424-9530

202/219-3420

202/501-3413 (Flashfax Service)

202/219-3336 (TDD for the

hearing impaired)

800/877-8339 (FIRS)

Lee Ann Elliott, Chairman

John Warren McGarry,

Vice Chairman

Joan D. Aikens, Commissioner

Danny L. McDonald,

Commissioner

Scott E. Thomas, Commissioner

John C. Surina, Staff Director

Lawrence M. Noble, General

Counsel

Published by the Information

Division

Louise D. Wides, Director

Stephanie Fitzgerald, Editor

http://www.fec.gov

Court Cases

(continued from page 1)

The court of appeals, finding “no

error” in the district court opinion,

affirmed that court’s decision.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the

Third Circuit, No. 95-2600, August

2, 1996; D.Ct. No. 94-82-L, June

28, 1995. ✦

Stockman v. FEC

In August 1996, a U.S. District

Court in Texas dismissed Congressman Stephen E. Stockman’s claim

that the FEC had unreasonably

delayed its investigation into his

1994 campaign. The court said:

“There is no evidence showing that

the time spent to investigate this

matter is a product of anything other

than the excessive demands on a

strapped federal agency.”

In an earlier decision, the court

dismissed the claim that the FEC

had improperly leaked information

about the matter to the press.

Background

Various newspapers reported that

Mr. Stockman’s opponent in the

1994 Republican primary (9th

Congressional District, Texas) had

filed a complaint with the FEC

claiming that: (1) a newspaper

allegedly published in the Stockman

home and campaign headquarters

should have been identified as

campaign literature; and (2) the

newspaper’s advertising revenue

should have been reported as

campaign contributions.

Mr. Stockman and his two

campaign committees filed suit in

November 1995 asking the court to

dismiss the complaint (Matter Under

Review or MUR 3847) for a number

of reasons, including their claim that

the FEC had unreasonably delayed

its investigation into the matter in

violation of the Administrative

Procedure Act. The plaintiffs also

claimed that the FEC had breached

the confidentiality provisions of the

Federal Election Campaign Act by

leaking information to the press

about MUR 3847. (The confidentiality of MUR proceedings is provided

for under 2 U.S.C. §437g(a)(12).)

June Court Decision

In a June 13, 1996, decision, the

court rejected the argument that

MUR 3847 should be dismissed

because the FEC had violated the

confidentiality provisions. The court

ruled that the plaintiffs could not

raise the confidentiality issue in

court because they had failed to first

raise the issue before the FEC.

Furthermore, the court said that

there was no evidence indicating

that the FEC had improperly leaked

information. The court noted that

the agency had not breached confidentiality by merely confirming to

reporters that a complaint had been

filed against the plaintiffs. The only

issue remaining after the June

decision was whether the Commission had unreasonably delayed the

investigation.

August Court Decision

On August 27, 1996, the court

found the FEC had not unreasonably

delayed action on MUR 3847. The

court considered several facts in

reaching this decision:

• The FEC is not required to resolve

MURs within a statutory deadline.

• The agency’s delay in MUR 3847

does not risk human health and

welfare, where delay would be

intolerable.

• The time the FEC has taken thus

far to investigate MUR 3847 is

reasonable considering that similar

MURs have taken the agency

between 3.3 and 4.6 years to

resolve.

• If the court were to force the FEC

to take immediate action, the

agency would have to divest scarce

resources from matters of equal or

higher priority.

• The plaintiffs provided no real

evidence that the delay had caused

them any injury.

• The issues presented in MUR 3847

are novel and will likely require

substantially more time to consider

than issues more frequently

investigated.

In granting summary judgment to

the FEC, the court said that the

agency’s delay in resolving MUR

3847 was not unreasonable, given

the complexity of the FEC’s current

workload and the depleted level of

agency resources to handle the

workload.

U.S. District Court for the

Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont

Division, 1:95-CV-1049, August 27,

1996. ✦

New Litigation

FEC v. Kalogianis

The FEC asks the court to declare

that Anastasios Kalogianis violated

the contribution limits of 2 U.S.C.

§441a by making $249,000 in loans

to the Tsongas for President Committee, the 1992 authorized committee of Senator Paul E. Tsongas. One
3

October 1996 Federal Election Commission RECORD

of the loans was made payable to an

individual, the committee’s chief

fundraiser, but was purportedly

solicited on behalf of the committee

and given with the intention of

funding the campaign.

The FEC also asks the court to

assess an appropriate civil penalty

against Mr. Kalogianis and permanently enjoin him from similar

violations.

U.S. District Court for the

District of New Hampshire, C-96-

427-JD, August 9, 1996. ✦

Public Funding

Dole, Clinton, Perot Receive

Public Funds

The FEC recently approved

public funding grants for the

Democratic, Republican and Reform

Party tickets.

On August 15, the FEC certified

payment of $61.82 million for the

general election campaign of

Republican Presidential nominee

Bob Dole and his Vice Presidential

running mate, Jack Kemp.

On August 30, the same amount

was certified to the Democratic

party ticket, President Bill Clinton

and Vice President Al Gore.

On August 22, Ross Perot, the

Reform Party nominee, and his Vice

Presidential running mate were

certified to receive $29.055 million

in public funds for the general

election. (Mr. Perot temporarily

named James Campbell as his

running mate, later replacing him

with Pat Choate.)

The U.S. Department of the

Treasury made the payments to the

candidates shortly after the FEC

certified the funds.

Under the Presidential Election

Campaign Fund Act, the Democratic

and Republican nominees are each

entitled to a grant of $20 million

increased by a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA). The 1995 COLA

(309.1 percent) increased the base

grant to $61.82 million. Major party

nominees have received public

funding grants since the program

began in 1976.

Mr. Perot became eligible for a

$29 million entitlement because he

won more than 19 percent of the

vote in the 1992 Presidential

election. Under the public funding

law, a nonmajor party candidate

who collects more than 5 percent of

the vote in a Presidential election is

entitled to receive pre-election

funding in the next Presidential

election once he or she obtains the

nomination of a political party and

meets other requirements. The preelection entitlement is based on the

ratio of votes received by the

nonmajor party candidate in the

previous election to the average

votes received by the major party

candidates. (In Mr. Perot’s case, the

ratio works out to 47 percent.)

All the candidates had to submit

“letters of agreements and certifications” in which they agreed to

comply with the law and submit to a

post-election campaign audit.

Major party nominees must agree

to limit campaign spending to the

amount of the public funding grant.

Although their acceptance of full

public funding precludes them from

accepting private contributions for

their campaigns, they may accept

contributions designated for their

general election legal and compliance (GELAC) funds. These funds

are special accounts maintained

exclusively to pay for legal and

accounting expenses related to

complying with the campaign

finance law. Compliance expenses

do not count against the expenditure

limit. However, contributions to a

GELAC fund are subject to the

limits and prohibitions of the federal

campaign finance laws.

Mr. Perot, as a nonmajor party

candidate, may accept private

campaign contributions but, like the

major party nominees, he must limit

total campaign spending to $61.82

million. His legal and accounting

compliance expenses (like those of

the major party candidates) are

exempt from the spending limit.

All the candidates must limit

spending from personal funds to

$50,000.

The last time a nonmajor party

candidate received general election

funding was in 1980, when John

Anderson and his running mate,

Patrick J. Lucey, received $4.2

million after the general election.

They were entitled to post-election

funding because they won over 5

percent of the vote in the election.

Thus far in the 1996 Presidential

season, the Commission has certified $234 million in public funds:

• $56 million to the 11 primary

candidates who qualified for

matching funds;

• $25 million to major parties for

their nominating conventions; and

• $153 million to the general election candidates. ✦

Final Rules

on Electronic Filing

On August 15, 1996, the FEC

published new rules implementing an electronic filing system for

campaign finance reports filed

with the agency (61 FR 42371).

The electronic filing system will

be in place in time for the 1997-

98 election cycle (i.e., for reports

covering activity after December

31, 1996).

Electronic filing will be

voluntary. It will be available to

committees that file with the

FEC; Senate campaigns and other

committees that file with the

Secretary of the Senate will not

have the option of filing electronically.

The November issue of the

Record will give more details on

electronic filing. ✦
4

Federal Election Commission RECORD October 1996

Statistics

18-Month House and Senate

Activity

House and Senate campaigns

raised $60 million more and spent

$23 million more from January

1995 through June 1996 than they

did in the same 18-month period in

the previous election cycle. The

1996 campaigns raised $447.7

million—an increase of 15 percent

over the previous cycle, and spent

$293.6 million—an increase of 8

percent (see graph).

House campaigns were largely

responsible for the jump in

fundraising. They raised $278.8

million, more than 24 percent more

than in the previous cycle. Republican House campaigns accounted for

much of that increase, raising 50

percent more than previously.

Senate fundraising reached

$168.9 million, only slightly more

than in the past cycle. However, it is

difficult to compare Senate elections

across cycles because different seats

are up for election each cycle.

Contributions from individuals

continued to represent the largest

single source of funds for House and

Senate campaigns.

House and Senate Finances

(in millions)

Disbursements

Receipts

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

1992 1994 1996

Sources of Receipts

Contributions from individuals 58.4%

Contributions from PACs and

other committees 24.1%

Contributions from the candidate 13.2%

Data in this article are based on

an August 5 news release on 18-

month House and Senate activity

featuring data from 1986 to 1996. ✦

18-Month Party Activity

By the end of June 1996, the

Democratic and Republican national

committees had raised and spent

substantially more for federal

elections than they had two years

ago. Even so, Democrats continued

to lag behind Republicans in funds

raised and spent for federal election

activity.

Federal Account Activity

National Party Committees

(in millions)

Jan. 93 – Jan. 95 –

Jun. 94 Jun. 96 Increase

Raised

Dem. $ 57.9 $102.3 77%

Rep. $119.8 $180.0 50%

Jan. 93 – Jan. 95 –

Jun. 94 Jun. 96 Increase

Spent

Dem. $ 53.2 $ 89.7 68%

Rep. $104.3 $162.4 56%

Nonfederal Account Receipts

National Party Committees

(in millions)

Republicans

Democrats

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

1992 1994 1996

How to Get Statistical Press

Releases

The news releases mentioned in

the articles above may be ordered

from the Public Records office: call

800/424-9530 (press 3). To receive

faxed copies, call the FEC’s

Flashfax service: 202/501-3413.

Request document 0530 for statistics on 18-month House and Senate

activity (not the complete news

release, however) and document

0531 for statistics on 18-month

national party activity (complete

release).

The news releases are also

available on the FEC’s World Wide

Web site (http://www.fec.gov)

under the “News Releases and

Media Advisories” menu option

(again, this is not the complete

House and Senate release). The

latest data are also available as

downloadable databases on the

FEC’s Web site; select “Financial

Information for Candidates, Parties

and PACs.” ✦

The Republicans also outpaced

the Democrats in soft money

activity—funds raised and spent for

nonfederal elections. The graph

below compares nonfederal receipts

at the 18-month point in three

election cycles.

The table and graph are based on

a comprehensive news release on

party activity, dated August 7.✦

New Party Guide

The FEC recently published a

revised edition of the Campaign

Guide for Party Committees.

Copies have been sent via first

class mail to treasurers of federally registered party committees

as well as to Record subscribers

who have indicated an interest in

party committee activity.

Others wishing to obtain a copy

should call the Information Division: 800/424-9530 (press 1) or

202/219-3420.
5

October 1996 Federal Election Commission RECORD

Advisory

Opinions

(continued)

AO 1996-28

Personal Use of Campaign

Funds by Former Member

Former Congressman Don Ritter

of Pennsylvania may convert

remaining campaign funds to

personal use because he served in

the House of Representatives in

January 1980 (i.e., was a

“grandfathered” or “qualified”

Member) but did not serve in the

103d Congress (which ended

January 1995) or later. The law

permits him to convert up the

amount of his committee’s excess

funds as of November 30 1989, less

outstanding debts owed as of that

date.1

 11 CFR 113.2(e).

Mr. Ritter wishes to convert to

personal use his committee’s current

cash balance of $26,400 plus

$11,000 still owed by a former

treasurer who is under a court order

to repay stolen funds. This total

($37,400) is well under the

committee’s November 1989

unobligated balance (about

$61,000).

Because the committee does not

owe any money and appears to be

existing simply to receive payments

from the former treasurer, it may

terminate its registration and cease

reporting. 11 CFR 102.3. In this

particular situation, the committee

may assign to Mr. Ritter the rights

to receive forthcoming payments

from the former treasurer, but the

termination report should explain

this arrangement.

Date Issued: August 20, 1995;

Length: 4 pages. ✦

1 This is a limited, statutory exception to

the overall ban on the conversion of

campaign funds to anyone’s personal

use. See Pub. L. 101-194, §504(b), 103

Stat. 1755; see also 2 U.S.C. §439a and

11 CFR 113.1(g).

1 Because the Utah convention had the

power to nominate a candidate, it was

considered a separate election with a

separate contribution limit. A separate

limit also applied to the primary

election (held because no candidate

won sufficient votes at the convention)

and to the general election. See AO

1992-95.

AO 1996-29

In-Kind Contributions

Designated for More Than

One Election

The Chris Cannon for Congress

committee may accept an in-kind

contribution in excess of the $1,000

per-election limit if the contributor

designates the excess amount for a

different election and if the item

contributed has a long-term useful

life expectancy. The contributor

must, of course, provide a written,

signed designation at the time of the

contribution or submit a proper

redesignation within 60 days of the

committee’s receipt of the contribution. 11 CFR 110.1(b)(5)(ii).

In this case, the committee

received in-kind contributions of

used computer equipment from

three individuals. Although each

contribution exceeded the $1,000

limit, the contributors designated

their contributions among the three

elections within the Utah election

cycle: 1

 one person designated

$1,000 for the convention and $850

for the primary; a second gave

$782.48 for the convention, $1,000

for the primary and $67.52 for the

general election; the third designated $1,000 for the convention and

$300 for the primary.

Just as money contributions may

be “consumed” over a period of

time, the computer equipment will

be used through all three elections

and perform functions related to

each. (An independent appraisal

determined that the equipment had a

useful life of at least two years.) A

contribution of this type is distinguishable from an in-kind contribution that is used only for one

particular election, such as printing

or mailing costs related to a general

election fundraiser.

If the candidate had lost the

primary election, the committee, in

accordance with the treatment of

money contributions, would have

had to refund the amount designated

for the general election or obtain the

contributor’s redesignation of that

amount for the next election (i.e.,

the 1998 convention). AO 1992-15.

The Commission did not reach

the question of whether an in-kind

contribution could be designated for

the next election cycle if the candidate were still seeking election in

the current cycle.

Date Issued: August 23, 1996;

Length: 3 pages. ✦

AO 1996-33

Exchange of Contributions

Between Federal Candidate

and State Candidates

Thomas P. Colantuono, a Republican nominee for a U.S. House seat

in New Hampshire, may not contribute surplus campaign funds from his

state campaign committee to the

campaigns of state legislators with

the understanding that those campaigns would contribute roughly

equivalent amounts to Mr.

Colantuono’s federal campaign

committee. This arrangement would

amount to a prohibited transfer of

funds from Mr. Colantuono’s state

committee, through the state legislators’ committees, to his federal

committee. 11 CFR 110.3(d).

The state legislators could instead

make contributions from their

personal funds to the Colantuono

federal committee, but this arrangement could result in prohibited

contributions made by one person

(the Colantuono state committee) in

the name of another (the state

legislator). 2 U.S.C. §441f; 11 CFR

110.4(b). Specifically, if a legislator
Advisory Opinions

(continued from page 5)

Advisory Opinion Requests

Advisory opinion requests are

available for review and comment in

the Public Records Office.

AOR 1996-38

Formation of nonconnected committee by executive board members of

unincorporated association with ties

to an incorporated association

(American Seniors Housing Association; August 21, 1996; 6 pages

plus multiple attachments)

AOR 1996-39

Fund established to pay legal fees

arisng from challenges to

candidate’s ballot status (Heintz for

Congress, September 3, 1996,

1 page plus multiple attachments)

AOR 1996-40

Excess campaign funds donated to

educational organization established

by candidate (Congressman Mel

Hancock, September 10, 1996,

7 pages)

AOR 1996-41

Media corporation’s production and

broadcast of television programs

featuring federal candidates’

responses to specific questions

Election

Administration

Simplifying Election Forms

The Office of Election Administration has published a handbook on

how to make publications and forms

easier for the public to use. Written

for election officials, Simplifying

Election Forms and Materials gives

common sense advice on how to

improve government writing.

The report says that more and

more agencies are making their

materials “reader friendly” to bridge

the gap between the reading abilities

of the general public and the readability of most public materials. An

estimated 90 million Americans

have trouble understanding long,

complex and dense materials.

The report notes that many

Americans would have trouble with

the typical “electionese” in election

materials: “Bona Fide resident”;

“your right to vote is secured by”;

“the equivalent of an affidavit.”

Among other pointers, the report

suggests using simpler words (e.g.,

“place” instead of “locality”),

shorter sentences and active voice.

The report also gives tips on designing more readable layouts.

The report includes before-andafter samples of the District of

Columbia’s voter registration form

as “living proof” that writing in

plain language does make a difference.

Simplifying Election Forms and

Materials is available free from the

Office of Election Administration.

Call 800/424-9530 (and press 4 at

the prompt) or 202/219-3670. ✦

reduced or eliminated his donation

to his own campaign and, instead,

contributed to Mr. Colantuono’s

federal campaign in anticipation of

receiving a reciprocal donation from

the Colantuono state committee, this

would indicate that the state committee donation was replacing the

amount the legislator would normally give to his own campaign,

thereby freeing him to make a

personal contribution to the federal

campaign. (New Hampshire state

legislators typically make substantial donations from their personal

funds to their own campaigns.) Date

Issued: August 23, 1996; Length: 4

pages. ✦

(A.H. Belo Corporation, September

16, 1996, 8 pages plus 17-page

attachment) ✦

Reports

(continued from page 1)

2 Individuals and other persons who are

not political committees are reminded

that when their independent expenditures exceed $250 in a calendar year,

they must file a report at the end of that

reporting period. 11 CFR 109.2.

• PACs and party committees filing

on a monthly schedule (the preelection report is filed in lieu of the

monthly report covering October

activity); and

• PACs and party committees filing

on a quarterly basis if the committee makes contributions or expenditures in connection with the

general election during the coverage dates for the report (below).

The pre-election report, which

covers activity from October 1

through October 16, is due October

24. If sent by registered or certified

mail, it must be postmarked by

October 21.

48-Hour Notices on Contributions

Committees of candidates running in the November general election must file a 48-hour notice if

they receive a contribution of

$1,000 or more (including contributions and loans from the candidate)

between October 17 and November 2. The committee must disclose

the contribution on FEC Form 6 or

in a statement containing the same

information. The notice must be

received by the federal and state

filing offices within 48 hours of the

committee’s receipt of the contribution.

Forty-eight hour notices (but not

other reports) may be faxed to the

federal filing office:

• FEC Fax: 202/219-0174

• Secretary of the Senate Fax:

202/224-1851.

24-Hour Reports

on Independent Expenditures

Political committees and other

persons 2

 planning to make indepen6

Federal Election Commission RECORD October 1996
dent expenditures to support or

oppose candidates in the November 5 general election are reminded

of the 24-hour reporting requirement. Under that requirement,

general-election independent

expenditures aggregating $1,000 or

more and made between October 17

and November 3 must be reported

with the appropriate federal and

state filing offices within 24-hours

after the expenditure is made. ✦

(continued on page 8)

Texas Special Elections

Texas has scheduled special

elections on November 5 based on

an order by the U.S. District Court

for the Southern District of Texas.

The court redrew the boundaries,

invalidated the results of primary

and runoff elections, and ordered

new elections in 13 U.S. Congressional districts in Texas: districts 3,

5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 18, 22, 24, 25, 26, 29

and 30. Vera v. Bush, No. H-94-

0277 (S.D. Tex. August 5, 1996).

The court’s directions resulted from

an earlier judicial determination that

three of those districts were “created

as a product of overt racial gerrymandering.”

If no candidate receives a majority of the votes in the November 5

special election, a special runoff

election will be held December 10,

1996.

The reporting requirements for

committees involved in these special

elections are shown in the accompanying tables. Additionally, this

article provides information on

contribution and coordinated party

expenditure limits.

If you have any questions after

reading this article, call the FEC at

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

Reporting by Candidate

Committees

Candidate committees are

required to register and to file

financial disclosure reports with the

FEC once their campaign activity

Reporting Dates for Texas Special Elections

1. If Only the 11/5 General Is Held1

Close Reg./Cert.

of Books 2 Mailing Date 3 Filing Date

October Quarterly September 30 October 15 October 15

Pre-General October 16 October 21 October 24

Post-General November 25 December 5 December 5

Year-End December 31 Jan. 31, ’97 Jan. 31, ’97

2. If Two Elections Held: Committees Involved in Both the 11/5 General

and the 12/10 Runoff 4

Close Reg./Cert.

of Books 2 Mailing Date 3 Filing Date

October Quarterly September 30 October 15 October 15

Pre-General October 16 October 21 October 24

Pre-Runoff November 20 November 25 November 29

Post-Runoff/Year-End5 December 31 Jan. 9, ’97 Jan. 9, ’97

3. If Two Elections Held: Candidate Committees 6

 Involved in the

11/5 Election Only

Close Reg./Cert.

of Books 2 Mailing Date 3 Filing Date

October Quarterly September 30 October 15 October 15

Pre-General October 16 October 21 October 24

Year-End December 31 Jan. 31, ’97 Jan. 31, ’97

4. Monthly Filers

Close Reg./Cert.

of Books 2 Mailing Date 3 Filing Date

Monthly Report September 30 October 20 October 20

Pre-General October 16 October 21 October 24

Post-General November 25 December 5 December 5

Year-End December 31 Jan. 31, ’97 Jan. 31, ’97

1 PACs and party committees filing on a monthly schedule should follow Table 4.

2 The close of books is the end of the reporting period. The period begins with the

day after 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 activity that occurred before

the committee registered and, if applicable, before the individual became a candidate.

3 Reports sent by registered or certified mail are considered to be filed on time if

they are postmarked by this date.

4 Monthly filers follow Table 4.

5 Committees should file a consolidated post-runoff/year-end report by the filing date

for the post-runoff report.

6 PACs and party committees that file on a quarterly schedule and that have no

special runoff activity to disclose are required to file a post-general election report

for the 11/5 election. Therefore, PACs and party committees that must disclose pregeneral activity but do not have any 12/10 runoff activity to disclose must follow the

reporting schedule in Table 1.

7

October 1996 Federal Election Commission RECORD
Missouri Special Election Reporting

Committees involved in Missouri’s November 5 special general election in

the 8th Congressional District to fill the seat held by the late Congressman Bill

Emerson must follow the reporting schedule below:

Close of Certified Filing

 Books Mail Date Date

Pre-General Report Oct. 16 Oct. 21 Oct. 24

Post-General Report Nov. 25 Dec. 5 Dec. 5

These filing dates are the same as those for the regularly scheduled general

election on November 5. See “Reports Due in October,” page 1.

Reports

(continued from page 7)

exceeds $5,000 in either contributions or expenditures. 2 U.S.C.

§431(2). See the Campaign Guide

for Congressional Candidates and

Committees.

Once the $5,000 threshold is

reached, a principal campaign

committee of a candidate running in

a special election must file the

required reports as shown in the

tables on page 7.

Principal campaign committees

are reminded that they must file 48-

hour notices on contributions of

$1,000 or more received between

the 20th day and 48 hours before the

day of an election.

Reporting by Party Committees

and PACs

Quarterly Filers. Party committees and PACs filing on a quarterly

(rather than monthly) basis are

required to file pre- and post-special

election reports if they make

previously undisclosed contributions

or expenditures in connection with a

special election by the close-ofbooks date shown in the tables on

page 7.

Monthly Filers. Party committees

and PACs filing monthly continue

to follow the normal election-year

reporting schedule (Table 4). They

are not required to file pre- and

post-election reports for the December 10 runoff. PACs may also have

to file 24-hour reports (see below).

Twenty-Four-Hour Reports on

Independent Expenditures. All

PACs and persons 1 making independent expenditures may have to

file 24-hour reports. This report is

required if the committee or person

makes independent expenditures

aggregating $1,000 or more between

the 20th day and 24 hours before the

date of an election. The report must

be filed with the appropriate federal

and state offices within 24 hours

after the expenditure is made.

Contribution and Expenditure

Limits

Briefly summarized below are

several decisions the Commission

made with respect to the Texas

special election limits in Advisory

Opinion 1996-36, approved September 19. (The Record will provide a

more detailed summary in the next

issue.)

Separate Contribution Limit for

November 5 Election. There is a

separate contribution limit for the

November 5 special general election. This limit applies to contributions made after August 5 (the date

of the court decision).

Separate Contribution Limit for

December 10 Runoff. If a December

10 runoff is held in a district, a

candidate participating in the runoff

has a separate contribution limit for

that election.

Candidates may accept contributions for a possible runoff election

before the November 5 general

election if: (1) the campaign sets up

a separate account or appropriate

accounting system to track such

contributions; (2) the contributions

are designated in writing for the

runoff; and (3) the contributions are

returned to the contributors if the

candidate does not participate in the

runoff.

March 12 Primary Winners. The

August 5 court decision placed

March 12 primary winners in a new

electoral situation in which they

were no longer party nominees. As a

result, they had a separate contribution limit for the now defunct

campaign (from March 13 through

August 5). However, they are not

permitted to collect contributions

after August 5 to retire net debts

outstanding from the defunct

election period.

Primary winners have a separate

limit for the November 5 special

election campaign (from August 6

through November 5) and, if they

participate in a runoff, a separate

limit for the runoff.

Transfers of Surplus Funds.

Candidates who have surplus funds

remaining from the March 12

primary or from the defunct March

13-to-August 5 campaign may

transfer them to their November 5

special election accounts without the

contributions counting against the

limits for that race.

March 12 Primary Nonparticipants or Losers. Candidates in the

special elections who did not

participate in the March 12 primary,

or who were defeated in that primary, may not accept contributions

for the defunct general election

since they were never candidates for

that election. They may, however,

accept contributions made after

August 5 for their special general

election campaigns. They also have

a separate limit for the December 10

1 Individuals and other persons who are

not political committees are reminded

that, when their independent expenditures exceed $250 in a calendar year,

they must file a report at the end of that

reporting period.

8

Federal Election Commission RECORD October 1996
Compliance

Nonfilers

The candidate committees listed

below failed to file required campaign finance disclosure reports.

The list is based on recent FEC

news releases. The FEC is required

by law to publicize the names of

nonfiling candidate committees.

2 U.S.C. §438(a)(7). The agency

pursues enforcement actions against

nonfilers on a case-by-case basis. ✦

Candidate Office Sought Report Not Filed

Broun, Paul Senate GA July Quarterly

Brown, Corrine House FL/03 Pre-Primary

Brown, Kenneth D. House GA/04 July Quarterly

Brown, Robert Paul House FL/23 Pre-Primary

Bryant, James S. Senate OK July Quarterly

Collins, Barbara-Rose House MI/15 Pre-Primary

Diaz-Balart, Lincoln House FL/21 Pre-Primary

Duke, David Senate LA Pre-Primary 1

Diggs, Douglass J. House MI/15 Pre-Primary

Gentry, Raymond Davis, Jr. House FL/05 Pre-Primary

Griffin, James House CT/06 Pre-Convention

Gryska, Paul V. House MA/09 Pre-Primary

Florez, Vida Zoe House AZ/02 July Quarterly

Franks, Gary A. House CT/05 Pre-Convention

Katsorhis, Kerry John House NY/18 Pre-Primary

Kennedy, Joseph P., II House MA/08 Pre-Primary

Kinnamon, Larry E., Jr. House MO/06 Pre-Primary2

McKasy, Bert J. Senate MN Pre-Primary

Moore, John R. House MO/03 Pre-Primary2

Moreno, Monti A. Senate MN July Quarterly

O’Toole, John A. House CT/05 July Quarterly

Owens, Major Robert O. House NY/11 July Quarterly

Pre-Primary

Oxford, William C. House GA/06 July Quarterly

Seal, Robert House NV/02 Pre-Primary

Taliaferro, Phyllis House NY/11 July Quarterly

Tenpas, Douglas B. Senate MN July Quarterly

Tsakanikas, Peter James House FL/19 Pre-Primary

1 The campaign submitted Summary and Detailed Summary pages without supporting schedules.

2 These committees filed July quarterly reports, which included part of the 12-day

pre-primary.

9

October 1996 Federal Election Commission RECORD

Federal Register

Federal Register notices are

available from the FEC’s Public

Records Office.

Notice 1996-14

11 CFR Part 110: Coordinated

Party Expenditures; Final Rule;

Technical Amendment (61 FR

40961, August 7, 1996)

Notice 1996-15

Rulemaking Petition: Democratic

Senatorial Campaign Committee

and Democratic Congressional

Campaign Committee; Notice of

Availability (61 FR 41036,

August 7, 1996)

Notice 1996-16

11 CFR Part 104: Electronic

Filing of Reports by Political

Committees; Final Rules;

Transmittal to Congress (61 FR

42371, August 15, 1996)

Notice 1996-17

Filing Dates for Missouri Special

Election (61 FR 45426, August

29, 1996)

Notice 1996-17

Filing Dates for Texas Special

Elections (61 FR 50298,

September 25, 1996)

runoff if they participate in that

election.

$25,000 Annual Limit. Contributions from individuals made for the

March 12 primary and for the

defunct campaign count against the

individual’s $25,000 aggregate

contribution limit for 1996 (as do

contributions for the November 5

and December 10 special elections).

Coordinated Party Expenditure

Limits. The national committee and

the state committee of a political

party each have a coordinated party

spending limit of $30,910 for the

November 5 special general election. Coordinated party expenditures

made before August 6 do not have

to be attributed to this limit. There is

no separate coordinated party

expenditure limit for the December

10 runoff. ✦

MUR Information Available

On Line

Listings of newly released FEC

enforcement cases (MURs or

Matters Under Review) are available on the agency’s World Wide

Web site: http://www.fec.gov. Click

on “News Releases, Media Advisories” and look for lists of compliance cases.

The MUR press releases are also

available from the FEC’s Public

Disclosure Division.

The Record will no longer

publish MUR lists to save printing

and mailing costs. It will continue,

however, to publish occasional

summaries of selected closed

MURs. ✦
10

Federal Election Commission RECORD October 1996

Flashfax Menu

Flashfax documents may be ordered

24 hours a day, 7 days a week, by

calling 202/501-3413 on a touch tone

phone. You will be asked for the

numbers of the documents you want,

your fax number and your telephone

number. The documents will be faxed

shortly thereafter.

Disclosure

301. Guide to Researching Public

Records

302. Accessibility of Public Records

Office

303. Federal/State Records Offices

304. Using FEC Campaign Finance

Information

305. State Computer Access to FEC

Data

306. Direct Access Program (DAP)

307. Sale and Use of Campaign

Information

308. Combined Federal/State Disclosure Directory 1996 on Disk

309. Selected Political Party Organizations and Addresses

310. Internet Access to the FEC

311. Downloadable Databases via the

Internet

Limitations

315. Contributions

316. Coordinated Party Expenditure

Limits

317. Advances: Contribution Limits

and Reporting

318. Volunteer Activity

319. Independent Expenditures

320. Local Party Activity

321. Corporate/Labor Facilities

322. Trade Associations

323. Foreign Nationals

324. The $25,000 Annual Contribution

Limit

325. Personal Use of Campaign Funds

Public Funding

330. Public Funding of Presidential

Elections

331. The $3 Tax Checkoff

332. 1993 Changes to Checkoff

333. Recipients of Public Funding

334. Presidential Fund Tax Checkoff

Status

335. Presidential Spending Limits

Compliance

340. Candidate Registration

Information

341. Committee Treasurers

342. Political Ads and Solicitations

343. 10 Questions from Candidates

344. Filing a Complaint

345. 1996 Reporting Dates

346. 1996 Congressional Primary Dates

347. 1996 Special Election Reporting

Dates

Federal Election Commission

401. The FEC and the Federal Campaign Finance Law

402. La Ley Federal relativa al Financiamiento de las Campañas

403. Federal and State Campaign

Finance Laws

404. Compliance with Laws Outside

the FEC’s Jurisdiction

405. Biographies of Commissioners

and Officers

406. Telephone Directory

407. Table of Organization

408. Index for 1995 Record Newsletter

409. Free Publications

410. Personnel Vacancy Announcements

411. Complete Menu of All Material

Available

Clearinghouse on Election

Administration

424. List of Reports Available

425. Voting Accessibility for the

Elderly and Handicapped Act

426. National Voter Registration Act

Regulations

427. National Voter Registration Act

of 1993

428. The Electoral College

429. Organizational Structure of the

American Election System

430. Primary Functions of an Electoral

System

Money in Politics Statistics

525. 1991-2 Political Money

526. 1995 Year-End PAC Count

527. 1993-4 Congressional

528. 1993-4 National Party

529. 1993-4 PAC Finances

530. 1995-6 Congressional

531. 1995-6 National Party

532. 1995-6 PAC Finances

1996 Presidential Election

550. 1996 Presidential Primary Dates

551. Selected 1996 Campaign Names

and Addresses

552. Selected 1996 Campaign Finance

Figures

553. 1996 Matching Fund Certifications and Convention Fund

Payments

Regulations (11 CFR Parts 100-201)

100. Part 100, Scope and Definitions

1007. Part 100.7, Contribution

1008. Part 100.8, Expenditure

101. Part 101, Candidate Status and

Designations

102. Part 102, Registration, Organization and Recordkeeping by

Political Committees

1021. Part 102.17, Joint Fundraising

by Committees Other Than

SSFs

103. Part 103, Campaign Depositories

104. Part 104, Reports by Political

Committees

1047. Part 104.7, Best Efforts

105. Part 105, Document Filing

106. Part 106, Allocations of Candidate

and Committee Activities

107. Part 107, Presidential Nominating

Convention, Registration and

Reports

108. Part 108, Filing Copies of Reports

and Statements with State Offices

109. Part 109, Independent Expenditures

110. Part 110, Contribution and

Expenditure Limitations and

Prohibitions

1101. Part 110.1, Contributions by

Persons Other Than Multicandidate Political Committees

1102. Part 110.2, Contributions by

Multicandidate Committees

1103. Part 110.3, Contribution

Limitations for Affiliated

Committees and Political Party

Committees; Transfers

1104. Part 110.4, Prohibited Contributions

1105. Part 110.5, Annual Contribution Limitation for Individuals

1106. Part 110.6, Earmarked

Contributions

1107. Part 110.7, Party Committee

Expenditure Limitations

1108. Part 110.8, Presidential

Candidate Expenditure

Limitations

1109. Part 110.9, Miscellaneous

Provisions

1110. Part 110.10, Expenditures by

Candidates

1111. Part 110.11, Communications;

Advertising

1112. Part 110.12, Candidate

Appearances on Public

Educational Institution

Premises
11

October 1996 Federal Election Commission RECORD

1113. Part 110.13, Nonpartisan

Candidate Debates

1114. Part 110.14, Contributions to

and Expenditures by Delegates

and Delegate Committees

111. Part 111, Compliance Procedure

112. Part 112, Advisory Opinions

113. Part 113, Excess Campaign Funds

and Funds Donated to Support

Federal Officeholder Activities

114. Part 114, Corporate and Labor

Organization Activity

115. Part 115, Federal Contractors

116. Part 116, Debts Owed by Candidates and Political Committees

200. Part 200, Petitions for Rulemaking

201. Part 201, Ex Parte Communications

Recent Actions on Regulations,

Including Explanations

and Justifications

227. Presidential Nominating Conventions

228. Public Financing of Presidential

Primary and General Election

Campaigns

229. Candidate Debates and News

Stories

230. Electronic Filing of Reports by

Political Committees

231. DSCC and DCCC Rulemaking

Petition

Forms

361. Form 1, Statement of Organization

362. Form 2, Statement of Candidacy

363. Form 3 and 3Z, Report for an

Authorized Committee

364. Form 3X, Report for Other Than

an Authorized Committee

365. Form 5, Report of Independent

Expenditures

366. Form 6, 48-Hour Notice of

Contributions/Loans Received

367. Form 7, Report of Communication

Costs

368. Form 8, Debt Settlement Plan

369. Form 1M, Notification of Multicandidate Status

Schedules

370. Schedule A, Itemized Receipts

371. Schedule B, Itemized Disbursements

372. Schedules C and C-1, Loans

373. Schedule D, Debts and Obligations

374. Schedule E, Itemized Independent

Expenditures

375. Schedule F, Itemized Coordinated

Expenditures

376. Schedules H1 – H4, Allocation

377. Schedule I, Aggregate Page

Nonfederal Accounts

U.S. Code (Title 2)

431. Section 431 442. Section 442

432. Section 432 451. Section 451

433. Section 433 452. Section 452

434. Section 434 453. Section 453

437. Section 437 454. Section 454

4377. Section 437g 455. Section 455

438. Section 438

439. Section 439

441. Section 441

4411. Section 441a

4412. Section 441b

4413. Section 441c

4414. Section 441d

4415. Section 441e

4416. Section 441f

Advisory Opinions

601-33. AOs 1996-1 through 1996-33

700. Brochure

701-49. AOs 1995-1 through 1995-49

801-40. AOs 1994-1 through 1994-40

901-25. AOs 1993-1 through 1993-25

Index

The first number in each citation

refers to the “number” (month) of

the 1996 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

1995-38: Corporate vendor and

nonconnected PAC with common

officer, 1:14

1995-40: Disaffiliation of PACs, 3:7

1995-41: Preemption of state

disclosure requirements, 2:3

1995-42: Using campaign funds to

pay child-care expenses, 2:3

1995-43: Refunding legal fees to

candidate committee, 3:8

1995-44: Presidential primary

candidate excused from filing 48-

hour notices, 3:8

(continued)

1995-45: Qualified campaign

expenses for ballot access, 3:9

1995-46: Purchase of candidate’s

book by his campaign, 3:9

1995-47: Use of campaign funds for

travel to party’s Presidential

nominating convention, 5:7

1995-48: Preemption of Georgia law

limiting receipt of contributions,

3:10

1995-49: Status of a state affiliate of

national party committee, 6:6

1996-1: Corporate partisan communications, 5:7

1996-2: Providing free on-line

accounts to candidates, 6:6

1996-3: Determining political

committee status, 6:7

1996-4: Public funding shortfalls

and bridge loans, 5:8

1996-5: Returning illegal contributions, 5:9

1996-7: Public funding certifications, 5:9

1996-8: Local party committees and

building funds, 7:6

1996-9: Building a library center

with excess campaign funds, 6:7

1996-10: Corporate employees as

stockholders, 7:7

1996-11: Incumbent appearances at

convention of membership

organization, 7:9

1996-12: Criteria for qualified

campaign expenses, 7:10

1996-13: Property owned by limited

liability company used for

campaign events, 8:6

1996-14: Use of excess campaign

funds for moving expenses, 7:11

1996-15: Discarding envelopes used

to mail reports to state, 7:11

1996-16: Defining a news entity, 7:11

1996-17: Cars provided as official

vehicles of convention, 7:12

1996-18: Conduit accounts, 8:7

1996-19: Use of campaign funds for

travel to Presidential nominating

convention: wife and children, 8:8

1996-20: Use of campaign funds for

travel to Presidential nominating

convention: chief of staff, 8:8

1996-21: Membership organization

communications, 8:9
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300

Bulk Rate Mail

Postage and Fees Paid

Federal Election Commission

Permit Number G-31

Printed on recycled paper

Federal Election Commission RECORD October 1996

Index

(continued from page 11)

1996-22: Public funding for nonmajor party candidates, 8:10

1994-23: Disaffiliation of reorganized corporations and their

PACs, 9:4

1996-24: Use of campaign funds for

certain legal expenses, 8:10

1996-26: Corporation as collecting

agent for PAC of affiliated

association, 9:5

1996-27: Qualifying as state party

committee, 9:6

1996-28: Personal use of campaign

funds by former Member, 10:5

1996-29: In-kind contributions

designated for more than one

election, 10:5

1996-33: Exchange of contributions

between federal candidate and

state candidates, 10:5

Court Cases

FEC v. _____

– Christian Action Network, 10:1

– Christian Coalition, 9:1

– Colorado Republican Federal

Campaign Committee, 8:1

– DSCC (95-2881), 1:5

– GOPAC, 4:1

– Hartnett, 4:12

– Kalogianis, 10:2

– Legi-Tech, 4:9

– McCallum, 9:2

– Murray, 8:5

– National Right to Work, 4:11

– Parisi, 3:6

– Wofford, 6:4

_____ v. FEC

– Albanese, 5:4

– Buchanan, 6:4

– Center for Responsive Politics, 1:3

– Chamber of Commerce, 1:2

– Clifton, 5:6; 7:1; 9:3

– Common Cause (94-02104), 5:5

– DCCC (1:96CV00764), 6:4

– DSCC (95-0349), 7:5

– Grover, 7:6

– Hooker, 3:7

– Jordan, 4:12

– ME Right to Life Committee, 1:3; 4:9

– MN Citizens Concerned for Life,

3:6; 6:3

– RNC (94-1017), 4:10; 9:3

– Reilly, 8:5

– Stockman, 2:9l; 10:2

– Whitmore, 3:6

On Appeal?, 5:6; 7:6; 9:3

Reports

Electronic filing system, 2:2

Point of entry change for House

candidates, 2:1

Reporting reminders, 4:3; 6:1;10:1

Schedule for 1996, 1:5

Special elections, 2:5; 3:2; 7:16;

10:7; 10:8

800 Line

Ballot access payments, 2:8

Bundling by individuals, 8:2

Conventions, permissible corporate

and labor activity, 2:7

– correction, 9:4

Filing tips, 5:1

Last- minute independent expenditures: 48 hour notices, 9:3