Volume 10, Numbe

10 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES

4 ADVISORY OPINIONS

800 LINE

6 Annual Limit on Contributions

COMPLIANCE

9 Summary of MURs

COURTCAS~

8 New Litigation

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

7 New Presidential Computer Index

REPORTS

Primary Election Reports Due in 1984

continued on pp. 2

STATISTICS

11 1982 Party Activity

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SPECIAL ELECTIONS

Special Elections in Wisconsin

During 1984, reporting forms and additional inf

mation will be sent to all registered committe

Questions and requests for additional forms sho

be addressed to the Office of Public Communi

tions, Federal Election Commission, 1325 

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463; or c

202/523-4068 or toll free 800/424-9530.

PRIMARY ELECTION REPORTS

DURIN 1984

The chart on the following pages provid

filing dates for primary election reports d

during 1984. Note, however, that primary electi

dates are subject to change.

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

February 1984 1325 K Street NW Washington DC 20463

The principal campaign committees of candidates

participating in these special elections must file

the appropriate pre- and post-election reports.

All other political committees which support candidates in the special elections (and which do not

report on a monthly basis) must also follow the

reporting schedule detailed below. (Quarterly reports must also be filed, as approprtate.)

The FEC will send notices on reporting requirements and filing dates to individuals known to be

actively pursuing election to this House seat. All

other committees supporting candidates in the

special elections should contact the Commission

for more information on required reports. Call

202/523-4068 or toll free 800/424-9530.

SPECIAL ELECTIONS IN WISCONSIN

On February 21, Wisconsin will hold a special

primary election in its 4th Congressional District

to nominate candidates for the House seat left

vacant by the death of Clement J. Zablocki. A

special general election will be held on April 3.

eRO(Xrt Closing

Daleo! Mailing Filing

Books Date Date

Pre-primary 2/1/84 2/6/84 2/9/84

Pre-general 3/14/84 3/19/84 3/22/84

Post-general 4/23/84 5/3/84 5/3/84

•

•
February 1984 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 10, Numbe

PRIMARY ELECTION REPORTS 12-Day Pre-IDeetion Report

CONGRESSIONAL

M~Date(if

Date of Closing Date sent by registered Filing

State 01' Territory meetion of Books or eertified mail) Date

*Alabama September 4 August 15 August 20 August 23

Runoff September 25 September 5 September 10 September 1

*Alaska August 28 August 8 August 13 August 16

**American Samoa November 6 October 17 October 22 October 25

Arizona September 11 August 22 August 27 August 30

*Arkansas May 29 May 9 May 14 May 17

Runoff June 12 May 23 May 28 May 31

California June 5 May 16 May 21 May 24

*Colorado September 11 August 22 August 27 August 30

Conneeticut September 11 August 22 August 27 August 30

*Delaware September 8 August 19 August 24 August 27

Florida September 4 August 15 August 20 August 23

Runoff October 2 September 12 September 17 September 2

*Georgia August 14 July 25 JUly 30 August 2

Runoff September 4 August 15 August 20 August 23

**Guam September 1 August 12 August 17 August 20

Hawaii September 22 September 2 September 7 September 1

*Idaho May 22 May 2 May 7 May 10

*Illinois March 20 February 29 March 5 March 8

Indiana May 8 April 18 April 23 April 26

*Iowa June 5 May 16 May 21 May 24

-Kansas August 7 July 18 July 23 July 26

*Kentucky August 28 August 8 August 13 August 16

*Louisiana September 29 September 9 September 14 September 1

Runoff November 6 October 17 October 22 October 25

*Maine June 12 May 23 May 28 May 31

Maryland May 8 April 18 April 23 April 26

*Massachusetts September 18 August 29 September 3 September 6

*Michigan August 7 July 18 July 23 July 26

-Minnesota September II August 22 August 27 August 30

*Mississippi June 5 May 16 May 21 May 24

Runoff June 26 June 6 June 11 June 14

Missouri August 7 July 18 JUly 23 July 26

*States holding Senate elections.

**The District of Columbia and the U.S. territories of American Samoo, Guam and the Virgin Islands 

will each hold an election for Delegate to the U.S. House of Repre$entatives. Puerto Rico will hold an 

election for Resident Commissioner to the U.S. House of Representatiws. Candidates running in Puert

Rico's election will be selected through party conventtons rather than primaries.

2
February 1984 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 10, Number 

PRIMARY ELECTION REPORTS 12-Day Pre-Election Report

• CONGRFS.'nONAL

Mailing Date (if

Date of Closing Date sent by registered F~

State or Tenitory Flection of Books 01' certified mail) Date

* Montana June 5 May 16 May 21 May 24

* Nebraska May 15 April 25 April 30 May 3

Nevada September 4 August 15 August 20 August 23

*New Hampshire September 11 August 22 August 27 August 30

*New Jersey June 5 May 16 May 21 May 24

*New Mexico June 5 May 16 May 21 May 24

New York September 11 August 22 August 27 August 30

* North Carolina May 8 April 18 April 23 April 26

Runoff June 5 May 16 May 21 May 24

North Dakota June 12 May 23 May 28 May 31

Ohio May 8 April 18 April 23 April 26

* Oklahoma August 28 August 8 August 13 August 16

Runoff September 18 August 29 September 3 September 6

* Oregon May 15 April 25 April 30 May 3

Pennsylvania April 10 March ·21 March 26 March 29

* Rhode Island September 11 August 22 August 27 August 30

• * South Carolina June 12 May 23 May 28 May 31

Runoff June 26 June 6 June 11 June 14

*South Dakota June 5 May 16 May 21 May 24

* Tennessee August 2 July 13 July 18 July 21

* Texas May 5 April 15 April 20 April 23

Runoff June 2 May 13 May 18 May 21

Utah August 21 August 1 August 6 August 9

Vermont September 11 August 22 August 27 August 30

* * Virgin Islands September 11 August 22 August 27 August 30

* Virginia June 12 May 23 May 28 May 31

Washington September 18 August 29 September 3 September 6

**Washington, D.C. May I April 11 April 16 April 19

* West Virginia June 5 May 16 May 21 May 24

Wisconsin September 11 August 22 August 27 August 30

* Wyoming September 11 August 22 August 27 August 30

•

"Btates holding Senate elections.

**The District of Columbia and the U.S. territories of American Samoa, Guam and the Virgin Islands

will each hold an election for Delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives. Puerto Rico will hold an

election for Resident Commissioner to the U.S. House of Representatives. Candidates running in Puerto

Rico's election will be selected through party conventions rather than primaries.

3
February 1984 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

ADVISORY OPINION REQUESTS

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

1983-45 Individual's eligibility for primary

matching funds as political party's Presidential candidate; matchability of contributions. (Date made public: December

14, 1983; Length: 3 pages, plus 2-page

supplement)

1983-46 Affiliation of state membership associations and their PACs with national membershipship association and its PAC;

state associations' financing of national

PAC fundraising activities. (Date made

public: December 23, 1983; Length: 2

pages, plus 17-page supplement)

1983-47 Individual's eligibility for primary

matching funds as Presidential candidate

of political party. (Date made public:

December 23, 1983; Length: 9 pages,

plus 33-page supplement)

1983-48 PAC formed by cable t.v, corporation;

PACts solicitation of personnel of partnerships affiliated with corporation.

(Date made public: December 28, 1983;

Length: 5 pages, plus 6-page supplement)

1984-1 Disposition of deceased Congressman's

campaign funds; refund of contribution

received after his death. (Date made

public: January 5, 1984; Length: 1 page)

1984-2 Candidate's use of contributor information contained in report filed by unauthorized candidate committee using his

name. (Date made public: January 9,

1984; Length: 1 page)

1984-3 Individual's use of political trust fund to

retire debts of his 1980 Presidential

campaign. (Date made public: January

17, 1984; Length: 3 pages, plus 12-page

supplement)

4

Volume 10, Numbe

ALTERNATE DffiPOsncrON

OF ADVISORY OPINION REQUEST

AOR 1983-36 (Services provided to Presid

tial candidate by individual who previou

helped unauthorized committee make in

pendent expenditures on behalf of the sa

candidate.) In a letter issued on January 

1984, the General Counsel informed the 

quester that the Commission had determin

that the situation presented in the requ

was hypothetical and therefore did not qu

fy as an advisory opinion request. 2 U.S

§437f and 11 CFR 112.l(b).

ADVISORY OPINIONS: SUMMARIfE

An Advisory Opinion (AO) issued by the Co

mission provides guidance with regard to 

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. Ot

persons may rely on the opinion if they 

involved in a specific activity which is indist

guishable in all material aspects from the activ

discussed in the AO. Those seeking guidance 

their own activity, however, should consult 

full text of an AO and not rely only on 

sum mary given here.

AO 1983-25: Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements for Media.Costs

Paid by Publicly Funded

Presidential campaign

Mondale for President, Inc. (the Committee) m

report its payments to a media consulting firm 

expenditures without having to itemize separat

the firm's payments to other persons for servi

and goods used in the performance of its contr

with the Committee. Consultants '84, Inc. W

handle the predominate portion of the Comm

tee's media campaign during the primaries (e

media production and the purchase of televis

and radio time and newspaper space).

In disclosing the payments as opera ting expen

tures, the Committee must provide an adequ

description of their purpose as, for example, "m

dia buy" or "media production" expenses. (For f

reporting requirements, see 2 U.S.C. §434(b)(5)

and 11 CFR 104.3(b).)

To fulfill its recordkeeping requirements, 

Committee must retain the media firm's invoi

and the canceled checks issued to the firm 

payment of the Committee's bills. Under 

terms of the contract, the media firm, in tu

has agreed to maintain, and make available 

audit, records of all production and placem
5

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

D.C. 20463. Commissioners are: Lee Ann Elliott, Chairman; Thomas E. Harris, Vice Chairman;

Joan D. Aikens; Danny Lee McDonald; John Warren McGarry; Frank P. Reiche; William F.

Hildenbrand, Secretary of the Senate, Ex: OfficIo; Benjamin J. Guthrie, Clerk of the House of

Representatives, Ex: Officio. For more information, call 202/523-4068 or toll-free 800/424-9530.

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 10, Number 

The Commission did not address the applicabili

of U.S. Senate rules to Campaign America's spo

sorship of the ad because they are beyond th

Commission's jurisdiction. Nor did the Commi

sion address the issue of whether Campaign A

merica's payments would be considered contr

butions to the Kansas Republican Party. (Da

issued: January 5, 1984; Length: 3 pages)

AO 1983-40: PAC Funding of Nonpolitical

Ad for Senator

Campaign America, a multicandidate politic

committee of which Senator Robert Dole (R-Kan

sas) is the honorary chairman, may pay for a

advertisement on Senator Dole's behalf, whic

will appear in a statewide directory of Republica

elected officials. (The Kansas Republican Part

will publish the directory during 1984.) Campaig

America's payments for the ad will not be con

sidered a contribution to Senator Dole's 198

reelection campaign because the ad is intended t

support Senator Dole's activities as a feder

officeholder rather than to influence his reele

tion campaign. The ad will include a "non-polit

cal" greeting from Senator Dole, his picture and 

listing of his Senate offices in Kansas. Moreove

the ad will identify Senator Dole as an incumbe

rather than as a candidate. 2 U.S.C. S439a; 

CFR 113.1 and 113.2. While Campaign Americ

must report the payments for the ad as disburs

ments, the ad does not have to include a state

ment identifying Campaign America as its spon

sor. Statements of authorization or sponsorsh

are required only for ads that solicit contribution

or expressly advocate the election or defeat of 

candidate. 2 U.S.C. §434(b)(6XB)(V); 11 CF

104.3(b)(3)(ix).

continue

AO 1983-42: Transfer of Funds from PAC's

Federal Account

to State Account

A local union of the Allied Building Inspector

may transfer funds from its PAC's federal fund, 

registered political committee which exclusivel

supports federal candidates, to its state fund. Th

PAC proposed making the transfer because fund

in the federal account exceed the amount neede

to support federal candidates.

February 1984

The Commission based its approval of these reporting and recordkeeping procedures on the assumption that Consultants '84 is a vendor of

media services. In support of this view, the Commission cited the following facts:

The media firm had a legal existence separate and distinct from the Committee; its

principals were not members of the Mondale

campaign staff.

The Committee was conducting arms-length

contract negotiations with the media firm.

The media firm expected to have three or

four other campaign media contracts as well

as contracts with businesses; the Committee

had no interest in these contracts.

costs billed to the Committee. See 11 CFR9033. I(b)(D.

Commissioner Frank P. Reiche filed a dissent

with which Commissioner Thomas E. Harris concurred. Commissioners Joan D. Aikens, Lee Ann

Elliott, Danny L. McDonald and John Warren

McGarry filed a response to the dissent. (Date

issued: December 22, 1983; Length: 13 pages,

including dissent and response)

AO 1983-38: PAC Information Artiele

Published in Company Newsletter

E.l. du Pont de Nemours and Company (Dupont)

may publish an article announcing the organization of its separate segregated fund, the DuPont

Good Government Fund (the fund), in a company

newspaper distributed only to DuPont employees

and retirees. DuPont's article (two versions proposed) would not be considered an improper solicitation of the company's nonsolicitable personnel

(Le., employees who are not stockholders or executive or administrative personnel) because the

article does not praise employees for making

contributions, encourage their participation in the

fund or facilitate the making of contributions to

the fund. Neither does the article inform readers

that DuPont will accept unsolicited contributions

from nonsolicitable persons. Rather, the article

provides only factual information about the fund

and the legal requirements that apply to its

activities. See also AOs 1979-66, 1980-65 and

1982-65. (Date issued: December 16, 1983;

Length: 3 pages)

•

•

•
February 1984 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

Under the Act and F EC Regulations, transfers

may be made without limit between affiliated

committees (e.g., campaign accounts). Moreover . ' SInce the Act's contribution limits are placed only

on contributions to political committees (i.e.,

committees that make expenditures to influence

federal elections) and the state account is not a

registered political committee, the contribution

limits would not apply to transfers made to the

state account. 11 CFR 100.5(g)(2) and 102.6(a).

In reporting the transactions, the PAC must itemize each transfer of funds from the federal account to the state account. See 2 U.S.C. §434

(b)(S)(C) and II CFR 104.3(b)(l)(ii).

The Commission did not address the application of

state laws to the transfers. The Commission noted, however, that the Federal Election Campaign

Act would not preempt or supersede any applicable state law which limited or prohibited the

transfers. (Date issued: January 5, 1984; Length: 2

pages)

AO 1983-44 Commereial Use of Candidate

Information on FBe Reports

Cass Communications, lne., a firm that facilitates

na tiona1 advertising in college newspapers, may

use the names and addresses of federal candidates

liste<;l on FEC campaign finance reports to solicit

candidates as potential advertising clients. Altho.ug~ Section 438(a)(4) of the Act places restrictions on the use of information contained in

F EC campaign finance reports, the purpose of the

provision is to protect contributors -- not candidates -- from having their names used for contribution solicitations or for commercial purposes

(e.g., list brokering).

The Commission relied on previous opinions which

concluded that information on candidates contained in FEC reports could be used for commercial purposes, such as soliciting subscriptions from

candidates for periodicals covering campaign

a~tivity. See AO's 1980-78 and 1981-38. Commisstoner .Frank P. Reiche filed a concurring opinion.

~Date .Issued: January 6, 1984; Length: 4 pages,

including concurrmg opinion)

Volume 10, Numbe

OVERALL ANNUAL IJMIT ON

CONTRmUTIONSFROMINDnnnUALS

The Public Communications Office freque

ly receives questions concerning the overall 

nual limit that the election law places on con

butions which an individual may make to can

dates for federal office and to the political co

mittees which support them. This article respo

to those questions.

What is the maximum amount that an individ

may contribute to all federal candidates and p

tical committees during a calendar year?

An individual may contribute up to $25,

per year to all federal candidates and to 

political com mittees which support them. 

U.S.C. S441a(a)(3); 11 CFR 110.5. (For procedu

on allocating contributions to the annual lim

see below.) Moreover, within this annual limit 

total contributions, an individual may not exc

the specific limits that the election law p

scribes for contributions: to a national party co

mittee, to a committee authorized by a candid

and to any other type of political committee. (

2 U.S.C. §§441a(a)(I)-(a)(3) and 11 CFR 110

110.3. A special chart on contribution limits a

appears in the F EC's Campaign Guide series 

the FEC's information brochure.)

If, during 1983, an individual contributed to 

candidate's 1984 primary or general election ca

paign, does the contribution count against 

contributor's annual limit for 1983 or for 1984?

The contribution counts against the contri

tor's overall annual limit for 1984. Contributi

to a. candidate's campaign count against the li

applicable to the year in which the election 

held, regardless of when the contribution is ma

11 CFR 110.5(b)(I).

If an individual makes a contribution in 1984 

retire a candidate's 1982 campaign debts, does 

contribution count against his/her overall ann

limit for 1984 or 1982?

The contribution counts against the indiv

ual'~ overall annual limit for 1982. For examp

during 1982, Joe Smith contributed $800 

~amantha Jones' primary campaign. During 19

In order to help Ms. Jones retire debts remain

from the 1982 primary campaign, Smith contr

utes an additional $200 to the primary campaig

*Contributions designated to retire a can

date's campaign debts are also SUbject to 

donor's $1,000 limit for that particular elect

(e.g., a primary, runoff or general election). 

CFR 110.l(g)(2).

6
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

•

•

•

February 1984

Both contributions count against Smith's overall

annual contribution limit for 1982, even though

the first contribution was made in 1982 and the

second contribution, in 1984. 11 CPR 110.5(b)(l).

If a multieandidate political committee uses contributions made by an individual during 1983 to

support candidates running for office in 1984, do

those contributions count against the contributor's

overall limit for 1983 or for 1984?

The contributions count against the individual's overall annual limit for 1983. Contributions

made to a political committee (not authorized by

a candidate) count against the annual limit for the

year in which the contribution is actually made,

as long as the contribution is not earmarked for

any particular candidate. For example, an undesignated $20,000 contribution which Joe Smith

made to his party's national committee during

1983 counts against his overall annual limit for

1983, even though the party may eventually use

some of the funds to support candidates running

for office in 1984. 11 CFR 1l0.5(b)(2).

If, in contributing to a multicandidate committee

in 1983, an individual earmarked hislher contribution for a particular candidate's 1984 primary or

general election campaign, would the contribution

count against the individual's overall annual limit

for 1983 or for 1984?

The contribution would count against the

individual's overall annual limit for 1984. If a

donor earmarks his/her contribution to a political

committee for a particular candidate, the contribution counts against the donor's overall limit for

the year in which the candidate runs for office.

Does the overall annual limit apply to contributions whieh an individual gives to a political

committee which plans to make independent expenditures during 1984?

Yes. 11 CFR 110.5(c).

Does the overall annual limit apply to the contributions which an individual makes to either a

delegate or a delegate committee* to help

finance the selection of one or more delegates to

a national nominating convention?

Yes. 11 CFR 110.5(d).

*For detailed information on financing the

selection of delegates to the national nominating

conventions of political parties, see Commission

Regulations at 11 CFR llO.S(d) and 114. In addition, a detailed summary of FEC rules pertaining

to the financing of convention delegates was

published on p, 1 of the December 1983 issue of

the FEC Record.

7

Volume 10, Number 

PUBLIC APPEARANCFS

2/4 Texas Medical Association

1984 Leadership Conference

Austin, Texas

Chairman Lee Ann Elliott

2/1

°Oregon Medical Association

Portland, Oregon

Chairman Lee Ann Elliott

2/14 National City Christian Church

Conference

Understanding Election '84

Washington, D.C.

Chairman Lee Ann Elliott

Commissioner Joan D. Aikens

2/16 Federal Bar Association

1984 Federal Campaign Law Conference

Washington, D.C.

Charles N. Steele, General Counsel

NEW PRF3DENTIAL COMPUTER INDEX

In November 1983, the Commission intr

duced a new computer index that provides 

concise summary of the financial activity of m

jor Presidential campaigns. The 1984 President

Campaign Summary Report extracts informati

from reports filed by Presidential campaigns a

adjusts numbers to reflect actual amounts rais

and spent. For example, the index provides u

dated figures on total contributions from indi

duals, minus any refunds made to those cont

butors, and total expenditures, minus any refun

or rebates. Although researchers may still ref

to the Presidential reports for information 

specific contributors and vendors, they no long

have to leaf through reports, calculating offse

to gross totals.

The new index also includes information report

by Presidential campaigns on:

Total primary matching funds received 

each campaign;

Amount spent by each campaign on legal a

accounting services exempt from the ca

paign's overall national spending limit; and

continu
February 1984 FEDERAL ELECTIOI\J COMMISSION

Total campaign expenditures of each campaign which are subject to the overall na tional spending limit.

Computer print-outs of the new Presidential index may be reviewed in the Commission's Public

Records Office, located on the first floor of the

Commission. The print-outs are available free of

charge. For more information, contact the Public

Records Office, 1325 K Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20463 or call toll-free 800-424-9530 or

locally 523-4181.

NEW LITIGATION

FEC v. Edward M. Kennedy!

Kennedy For President Committee

On December 21, 1983, the FEC filed suit

against Senator Edward M. Kennedy, a candidate

for the Presidency in 1980, and the Kennedy for

President Committee, Senator Kennedy's principal

campaign committee for the 1980 primaries. The

Commission's suit was precipitated by the Kennedy campaign's failure to repay primary matching funds (amounting to $55,500.33) which, on

April 14, 1983, the FEC had determined the

campaign must repay. 26 U.S.C. §§9040{b) and (c).

On May 13, 1983, the Kennedy campaign had filed

a petition with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

District of Columbia Circuit seeking the court's

review of the FEC's repayment determination.

(Kenne for President Committee v. FEC; Civil

Action No. 83-1521 However, the Kennedy campaign had not applied for a stay of the FEC's

determination pending the appeals court's review

of the determination.

The FEC therefore asked the district court to:

Declare that the defendants violated 26

U.S.C. §9038(b) and former 11 CFR 9038.2(e)

(1979)* by failing to make the repayment

determined by the Commission;

Declare that the defendants are jointly and

severally liable for the $55,500.33 repayment; and

*Under Commission Regulations, primary

matching [und recipients are required to make

repayments to the U.S. Treasury within 20 days of

receiving notice of the FEC's final repayment

determination. See 11 CFR 9038.2(d)(2) (formerly

9038.2(e».

8

Volume 10, Numbe

Order defendants to pay the $55,500.33 

the U.S. Treasury, together with interest 

the repayment since May 5, 1983, the date 

which the repayment was due.

U.S. District Court for the District of Columb

Civil Action No. 83-3820, December 21, 1983.

Orloski v. F EC

On November 22, 1983, Richard B. Orlo

filed a new suit against the FEC in the U

District Court for the District of Columbia. 

Orloski claimed that the F EC's October 14 d

missal of the administrative complaint he 

filed on June 6 was "arbitrary and capricious 

contrary to law." (Richard B. Orloski v. FE

Civil Action No. 83-3513) Pursuant to 2 U.S

S437g(a)(8), Mr. Orloski asked the court to reve

the F EC's October 14 decision to dismiss 

complaint. He also asked that his administrat

complaint be remanded to the F EC for furt

proceedings.

In an earlier suit, filed with the district cour

January 1983, Mr. Orloski had petitioned 

district court to review and reverse the FE

decision to dismiss his September 1982 admin

trative complaint. (Civil Action No. 83-0026) 

that complaint, Mr. Orloski had alleged tha

picnic organized by a group of senior citizens w

a political event on behalf of a candidate, a

that, as such, the group was required to regis

as a political committee. Mr. Orloski had a

alleged that, in sponsoring the picnic, the gro

had accepted prohibited corporate contribution

After filing his first suit with the district cou

Mr. Orloski discovered grounds for new fact

allegations regarding his complaint. Both Mr. 

loski and the FEC agreed that these new 

legations should not be reviewed. by the co

before the F EC had an opportunity to revi

them in order to determine whether they est

lished reason to believe that the election law h

been violated. 2 U.S.C. S437g(a)(J) and (2).

Accordingly, on May 27, 1983, the district co

issued an order and stipulation, allowing Mr. O

loski to file a second complaint with the F EC. T

new complaint, filed on June 6, 1983, contain

the new allegations. The FEe, in turn, conside

Mr. Orloski's new complaint and, on October 

1983, once again, found no reason to believe t

the respondents named. in the complaint had v

lated the election law. As a result of the F E

action, Mr. Orloski decided to file his new s

against the Commission.
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

SUMMARY OF MURs

The Act gives the F EC exclusive jurisdiction

for its civil enforcement. Potential violations are

assigned case numbers by the Office of General

Counsel and become "Matters Under Review"

(MURs). All MUR investigations are kept confidential by the Commission, as required by the

Act. (For a summary of compliance procedures,

see 2 U.S.C. §§437g and 437(d)(a) and II CFR

Part i n.)

Volume 10, Number 

An advertising firm had made prohibited co

porate contributions to the Senate campaig

by providing services at less than the fa

market cost, which benefited the campaig

(in violation of 2 U.S.C. §441b(a».

Senate campaign's Acceptance of EXcessive In

Kind Contributions. The General Counsel recom

mended that the Commission take no furthe

action with regard to the Senate campaign

knowing acceptance of excessive contribution

which resulted from the unauthorized committee

media spending. The General Counsel found tha

the Senate campaign had not been aware of plan

to form the unauthorized committee. Nor had an

of the Senate candidate's campaign staff worke

for the unauthorized committee while employe

by the candidate's campaign.

On January 27, 1981, the Commission found rea

son to believe that the respondents had violate

these provisions of the election law and initiate

an investigation of the matter.

Media Firm's Prohibited Corporate Contribution

to the Senate candidate's campaign. The Gener

Counsel's Office found no evidence to support th

allegation that the media firm had made prohib

ited corporate contributions to the Senate cam

paign by charging the campaign less than th

continue

General Counsel's Report

EXcessive In-Kind Contributions. Sectio

I09.l(b)(4)(i)(B) of Commission Regulations pre

sumes that a committee's expenditures on beha

of a candidate are not independent if they ar

made by or through any person who has also bee

acting as an agent of the candidate's campaign

The founder of the unauthorized committee ha

been El fundraiser for the candidate's campaign

Evidence indicated that, during the period he wa

planning the formation of the unauthorized com

mittee (which later made the alleged independen

expenditures), the founder, still functioning in h

role as a fund~aising agent, attended a campaig

strategy meetmg where proposed campaign film

footage was viewed. Even if the unauthorize

committee was formed after the founder had le

the candidate's campaign, the founder made th

alleged independent expenditures only after h

had obtained important information about th

campaign. ThUS, the General Counsel concluded

the unauthorized committee's expenditures re

sulted from the founder's contact with the cam

paign and were not independent. The Gener

Counsel therefore recommended that the Com

mission find probable cause to believe that th

unauthorized committee had made excessive in

kind contributions.

9

February 1984

This article does not summarize every stage in

the compliance process. Rather, the summaries

provide only enough background to make clear the

Commission's final determination. Note that the

Commission's actions are not necessarily based

on, or in agreement with, the General Counsel's

analysis. The full text of these MURs is available

for review and purchase in the Com mission's

Public Records Office.

MUR 12'12: Independent Expenditures Alleged

To Be In-Kind Contributions

On May 12, 1983, the Commission entered into a

conciliation agreement with a political committee

not authorized by any candidate (the unauthorized

committee), which had violated the election law

by making excessive in-kind contributions to a

Senate candidate's 1980 primary campaign (the

Senate campaign). The unauthorized committee

had reported certain media disbursements as "independent expenditures" for the defeat of the

Senate candidate's opponent. The Commission

determined that the unauthorized committee's

media expenditures had not been made independently of the Senate campaign because the founder

of the unauthorized committee had also acted as

a fundraiser for the campaign.

Complaint

On August 7, 1980, the Senate candidate's

opponent in the primary campaign filed a complaint naming three respondents: the Senate candidate and his principal campaign committee; the

founder of the unauthorized committee and the

committee; and an advertising firm. The complainant alleged that:

The unauthorized committee's media expenditures on behalf of the Senate campaign

(totaling $21,050.39) constituted excessive

in-kind contributions to the campaign (in

•

violation of 2 U.S.C. §44Ia(a)(l)(A»;

-- The Senate campaign had knowingly accepted

the excessive in-kind contributions (in violation of 2 U.S.C. §441a(f); and

•

•
February 1984 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

"usual and normal" fee for its services. The General Counsel therefore recommended that the

Commission find no probable Cause to believe that

the media firm had violated the Act's ban on

corporate contributions. 2 U.S.C. §44Ib(a).

Commission Determination

On December 1, 1982, the Commission found:

Probable cause to believe that the unauthorized committee had made excessive in-kind

contributions to the Senate campaign in violation of 2 U.S.C. §44Ia(a)(I)(A); and

No probable cause to believe that the media

firm had made prohibited corporate contributions to the Senate campaign in violation of 2

U.S.C. §44Ib(a).

The Commission voted to take no further action

with regard to the Senate campaign's acceptance

of excessive contributions from the unauthorized

committee.

On May 12, 1983, the Commission entered into a

conciliation agreement with the unauthorized

committee in which the committee agreed to pay.

a civil penalty of $2,500 to the U.S. Treasurer and

not to undertake any activity in violation of the

Act.

MUR 1495: Prohibited Use of Information

on Campaign Finance Reports

On March 24, 1983, the Commission entered into

a conciliation agreement with the principal campaign committee of a House candidate. The committee had violated 2 U.S.C. S438(a)(4) by using

information copied from reports and statements

filed with the FEC for the purpose of soliciting

political contributions from individuals.

Complaint

On October 20, 1982, the Commission reeeived a complaint from the treasurer of the

principal campaign committee of a Congressional

candidate (Candidate A), alleging that the candidate's opponent, Candidate B, and the opponent's

principal campaign committee had violated 2

U.S.C. S438(a)(4). That provision prohibits the use

of information copied from reports and statements filed with the FEC for solicitation or

commercial purposes, other than the solicitation

of political committees.

General Counsel's Report

Candidate A's treasurer based his allegation

on the discovery that Candidate B's campaign

committee had mailed a fundraising letter to a

fictitious name listed on the report of Candidate

A's committee. On any given report, a political

committee may include the names of up to 10

fictitious contributors (referred to as pseudonyms)

in order to protect the committee from the illegal

use of contributors' names and addresses.

10

Volume 10, Numbe

In an affidavit to the Commission, Candidate 

campaign committee explained that, in compil

a mailing list for a fundraising letter, one of 

volunteers had consulted reports that Candid

A's campaign had filed with the FEC. Candid

B's committee stated that when this improper 

was discovered (prior to the mailing), the comm

tee had tried to purge its mailing list of th

names and addresses copied from the compla

ant's reports. The committee admitted to hav

failed in this attempt. In a separate affidavit, 

respondent Congressman (Candidate B) sta

that he was unaware of the erroneous use of F

reports and the subsequent attempt of his o

committee to correct the error. The Gene

Counsel recommended that the Commission f

reason to believe that the respondent commit

had violated 2 U.S.C. §438 (a)(4) and no reason 

believe that the Congressman had violated 

Act. On January 11, 1983, the Commission 

proved these recommendations.

Commission Determination

On March 24, 1983, the Commission ente

into a conciliation agreement with the respond

committee in which the committee agreed:

1. It had violated 2 U.S.C. S438(a)(4), wh

prohibits political committees from solicit

contributions from individuals whose nam

are copied from campaign finance repo

and

2. To pay a civil penalty of $250.

FEDERAL RFX}ISTER NOTICES

The item below identifies an FEC docume

that appeared in the Federal Register on Janua

10, 1984. Copies of the notice are available in t

Public Records Office.

Notice Title

1984-1 Filing Dates for Wisconsin Special P

mary and General Elections (49 Fe

Reg. 1284, January 10, 1984)

1984-2 II CFR Parts 100 and 101: Paymen

Received for Testing-the-Water Acti

ties: Advanced Notice of Proposed Ru

making (49 Fed. Reg. 1995, January 

1984) -
FEDERAL ELECTIOI\J COMMISSION

"'These limited expenditures are separate

from contribUtions made by national and state

party committees to candidates and therefore do

not count against contribution limits. They are,

however, SUbject to separate expenditure limits.

•

See 2 U.S.C. Section 441a(d) and 11 CFR 110.7.

"'*Receipt figures have been adjusted for

transfers between certain committees of the

sa me political party.

Volume 10, Number 

CHANGE OF ADDRE;S

Political Committees

Registered political committees are

automatically sent the Record. Any change

of address by a registered committee must,

by law, be made in writing as an amendment to FEe Form 1 (Statement of Organization) and filed with the Clerk of the

House, the Secretary of the Senate, or the

F EC, as appropriate.

Other Subscribers

Record subscribers (who are not political committees), when calling or mailing in

a change of address, are asked to provide

the follOWing information:

1. Name of person to whom the Record is

sent.

2. Old address.

3. New address.

4. Subscription number. The subscr-iption

number is located in the upper left

hand corner of the mailing label, It

consists of three letters and five numbers. Without this number, there is no

guarantee that your subscription can

be located on the computer.

More detailed information on party activity m

be obtained form the four-volu me study, F E

Reports on Financial Activity: 1981-82, :FIi

Re ort: Part and Non-Part Political Comm

tees. The study may be purchased 5.00 p

volume) from the FEC's Public Records Offic

1325 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 2046

Checks should be made payable to the F EC.

The receipt figures for the two major parti

showed a variation in their sources of support. F

example, PAC contributions amounted to 7.9 pe

cent (or $3.1 million) of Democratic party com

mittees' total receipts ($39.3 million). PAC co

tributions to Republican party committees, on t

other hand, constituted only .6 percent (or $1

million) of their total receipts ($215 million).

February 1984

RepUblican party committees began the 1981-82

election cycle with $6.7 million cash on hand.

They raised an additional $215 million·· and had

a cash-an-hand balance of $7.5 million at the

close of December 1982. Their debts totaled $5.3

million. By contrast, Democratic party committees started the cycle with $2.5 million cash on

hand. After raising a total of $39.3 million, their

remaining cash-orr-hand balance was $1.5 million,

and their debts at the end of 1982 totaled $4.1

million.

The FEC study also showed a significant increase

in spending by both parties during the 1981-82

election cycle. Total spending by Republican party committees represented a 32 percent increase

over their spending during the 1979-80 Presidential election cycle, and a 150 percent increase

over 1977-78. Democratic party committees, on

the other hand, spent only 14.5 percent more

during the 1981-82 election cycle than they had

during 1979-80. However, when compared to the

1917-78 figures, Democratic spending during

1981-82 increased by 49 pereen t.

FINANCIAL ACTIVITY OF

PARTY COMMITrEES

During the 1981-82 election cycle, Republican party committees at the national, state and

local levels spent more than five times as much as

their Democratic counterparts and contributed

three times more funds to federal candidates.

Information released by the FEC during December

1983 showed that, of the $214 million they spent,

Republican party committees contributed 2.6 percent ($5.6 million) to federal candidates. They

also made special coordinated party expendituress on behalf of their candidates in the general

election, which amounted to 6.7 percent (or $14.3

million) of the total they spent. By contrast, of

the $40.1 million the Democratic party spent, 4.5

percent (or $1.8 million) was contributed to federal candidates. The Democratic party committees

made special coordinated expenditures amounting

to 8.2 percent (or $3.3 million) of their total

disbursements.

•

•

11
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

1325KStreet,N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20463

Official Business

12

FirstClass Mail

Postage & FeesPaid

FEC

Washington, D.C.

PermitNo.G-31