March 1999 Federal Election Commission Volume 25, Number 3

Table of Contents

Conferences

1 FEC 1999-2000 Conference Series

Set to Start in April

10 FEC Conference Schedule

Regulations

1 Commission Sets Dates for Two

Public Hearings

2 FEC Seeks Comments on Petition

Urging Change to “Express

Advocacy” Rules

3 Status of FEC Regulations

3 Federal Register

Statistics

4 Party Committee Fundraising

Continues Climb

11 Year-End PAC Count Inches Up

5 Advisory Opinions

Audits

6 Perot ’96 Repayment Reduced

Compliance

7 MUR 4834

Information

7 Independent Audit Report on FEC

Submitted to Congress

8 FEC Conducts Monthly

Roundtable Sessions

8 FEC Faxline Menu

11 Index

Regulations

Commission Sets Dates for

Two Public Hearings

The FEC will hold a public

hearing on March 17 to receive

additional testimony and comments

about its proposed changes to the

rules governing who qualifies as a

member of a membership association. The following week, on March

24, the Commission will hold a

public hearing on its proposed

changes to rules governing the

public financing of Presidential

primary and general election

campaigns.

Both hearings will begin at 10

a.m. in the FEC’s 9th floor hearing

room in Washington, DC. The

address is 999 E Street, NW.

This is the second public hearing

regarding the Commission’s proposed member regulations. Since

the first hearing, the Commission

has published a second Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that

lays out a number of additional

revisions to the current regulations.

The second NPRM was published in

the December 16, 1998, Federal

Register (63 FR 69224), and a

summary of the changes appeared in

the January 1999 Record on page 10.

The public financing hearing will

address a number of proposed

changes to the Commission’s

(continued on page 2)

Conferences

FEC 1999-2000 Conference

Series Set to Start in April

During this year and next, the

FEC will sponsor a series of conferences on campaign finance. At each

conference, Commissioners and

FEC staff will conduct practical

workshops on various aspects of the

law.

The first conference, a Corporate

and Labor Conference scheduled for

April 22-23, will be held in Washington, DC, at the Hyatt Regency on

Capitol Hill. The $250 registration

fee covers the conference, materials,

breakfasts, lunches and refreshments. To register for this conference,

call 800/246-7277 or send an e-mail

to tsylvester@worldnet.att.net.

All registration forms and fees

must be postmarked by April 8. A

$10 fee will be added to all late

registrations.

For program information, call the

FEC’s Information Division at 800/

424-9530 (press 1) or 202/694-

1100.

A tentative schedule for 1999 and

2000 conferences appears on page

10. The Record will announce more

details about the events once plans

have been finalized. The information will also be posted on the

FEC’s web site—

http://www.fec.gov. ✦
Federal Election Commission RECORD March 1999

2

Federal Election Commission

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

800/424-9530

202/694-1100

202/501-3413 (FEC Faxline)

202/219-3336 (TDD for the

 hearing impaired)

800/877-8339 (FIRS)

Scott E. Thomas, Chairman

Darryl R. Wold, Vice Chairman

Lee Ann Elliott, Commissioner

David M. Mason, Commissioner

Danny L. McDonald,

 Commissioner

Karl J. Sandstrom, Commissioner

James A. Pehrkon, Acting Staff

 Director

Lawrence M. Noble, General

 Counsel

Published by the Information

 Division

Louise D. Wides, Director

Angela Rucker, Editor

http://www.fec.gov

Regulations

(continued from page 1)

regulations at 11 CFR Parts 9001

through 9039. The issues covered

include coordination between

publicly funded candidates and their

political parties, qualified campaign

expenses and procedures governing

audits and repayment determinations. The NPRM was published in

the December 16, 1998, Federal

Register (63 FR 69524), and a

summary of the changes was

included in an article in the January

1999 Record beginning on page 7.

To get a copy of the notices

regarding these rulemakings:

• Call the FEC’s Public Records

Office at 800/424-9530 and press 3

when prompted;

• Request documents 229 (member)

and/or 235 (public financing) from

FEC Faxline, an automated fax

service, at 202/501-3413; or

• Download PDF files containing

the notices at http://www.fec.gov

(click on “What’s New!”).

Anyone wishing to testify must

submit written comments and a

request to testify by March 1.

Written comments and requests to

testify should be addressed to Susan

E. Propper, Assistant General

Counsel. Comments and requests to

testify may be submitted by:

• Mailing them to the Federal

Election Commission, 999 E

Street, NW, Washington, DC

20463;

• Faxing them to 202/219-3923,

with a copy mailed to the preceding address to ensure legibility; or

• E-mailing them to

members@fec.gov (for member

regulations) or

publicfund@fec.gov (for public

financing regulations). Electronic

submissions must include the

commenter’s full name, e-mail

address and postal mail address. ✦

FEC Seeks Comments on

Petition Urging Change to

“Express Advocacy” Rules

On January 28, the Commission

approved for public comment a

Notice of Availability on a

rulemaking petition that addresses

the definition of “express advocacy” found in the Commission’s

rules at 11 CFR 100.22. The

petition for rulemaking was submitted by James Bopp Jr. on behalf of

the Virginia Society for Human

Life. The deadline for comments is

March 5.

The petitioners urge the Commission to revise this definition to

conform with the decisions in Maine

Right to Life Committee (MRLC) v.

FEC and Right to Life of Dutchess

County v. FEC. In those cases,

district courts found that paragraph

100.22(b) was invalid because it

expanded the definition of express

advocacy beyond the Supreme

Court’s interpretation of it in

Buckley v. Valeo. In the MRLC case,

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

First Circuit upheld the lower court

ruling, and the U.S. Supreme Court

declined to hear the case on appeal.

The challenged paragraph defines

express advocacy as any communication that, when taken as a whole

and with limited reference to

external events, can only be interpreted by a reasonable person as

expressly advocating the election or

defeat of a clearly identified candidate or group of candidates. The

petitioners—and the courts in the

two cases mentioned above—argue

that the express advocacy standard

requires words specifically calling

for the election or defeat of a named

candidate, as expressed in Buckley

v. Valeo.

The express advocacy standard

determines whether certain communications qualify as independent

expenditures, whether independent

communications by corporations

and labor organizations are permitted and whether a communication

requires a disclaimer. The Notice of

Availability seeks comments on

whether the FEC should initiate a

rulemaking in response to the

petition. The Commission routinely

provides an opportunity for comments on rulemaking petitions

before the agency considers their

merits.

This particular petition is similar

to a petition filed by the James

Madison Center for Free Speech in

late 1997. The Commission declined

to open a rulemaking in response to

that petition. See the April 1998

Record, p. 6.

The notice, published in the

February 3 Federal Register (64 FR

5200), is available from the following sources:

• Public Records Office at 800/424-

9530 (press 3); and

• FEC Faxline at 202/501-3413

(request document 237).

Public comments must be submitted in either written or electronic

form to Susan E. Propper, Assistant

General Counsel. Written comments

should be mailed to the Federal

Election Commission, 999 E St.,
March 1999 Federal Election Commission RECORD

3

NW, Washington, DC 20463. Faxed

comments should be transmitted to

202/219-3923, with a copy mailed

to the preceding address to ensure

legibility. Comments also may be

sent by e-mail to

expressad@fec.gov. Electronic

submissions must include the

commenter’s full name, e-mail

address and postal mail address. ✦

Status of FEC Regulations

This table provides a status report on current projects. The Record will

periodically publish a list of regulations projects and their status.

Regulation Status

Definition of Express Advocacy

(11 CFR 100.22)

Notice of Availability on

Rulemaking Petition published.

Comments due March 5.

Definition of Member

(11 CFR 100.8 and 114.1)

Public Hearing scheduled for

March 17.

Party Committee Coordinated and

Independent Expenditures

(11 CFR 100.23, 109.1 and 110.7)

On hold.

Recordkeeping and Reporting

(11 CFR Parts 102, 104 and 108)

Draft Final Rules being revised

by FEC staff.

Soft Money (11 CFR Parts 100, 102,

104, 106, 110 and 114)

Recommendations for Final

Rules expected in Spring 1999.

Public Financing of Presidential

Primary & General Election Candidates

(11 CFR Parts 9001-9031)

Public Hearing scheduled for

March 24.

Definition of Personal Funds for

Contributors (11 CFR 110.10)

Draft Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking being drafted by

FEC staff.

Limited Liability Companies Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking comment deadline

was February 1.

Compliance Procedures

(11 CFR Part 111)

PwC report recommendations

being reviewed in conjunction

with drafting of final rules.*

Electronic Freedom of Information

Act Amendments (11 CFR Part 4)

Draft Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking approved by

Commission on February 25.

Allocation of Travel Expenses

(11 CFR 106.3)

Draft Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking being drafted by

FEC staff.

Definition of Major Purpose

(11 CFR 100.5)

On hold.

Loans to Political Committees by

Brokerage Firms

On hold.

Federal Register

 Federal Register notices are

available from the FEC’s Public

Records Office.

Notice 1999-2

Definition of “Express

Advocacy;” Notice of

Availability (64 FR 5200,

February 3, 1999)

Notice 1999-3

Definition of “Member” of a

Membership Association, Notice

of Public Hearing (64 FR 8270,

February 19, 1999)

Notice 1999-4

Public Financing of Presidential

Primary and General Election

Candidates, Notice of Public

Hearing ( 64 FR 8270, February

19, 1999)

* See article about PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) report on page 7.
Federal Election Commission RECORD March 1999

4

Statistics

Party Committee Fundraising

Continues Climb

Democratic and Republican party

committees reported raising $628

million between January 1, 1997,

and November 23, 1998. The total

represents a 41 percent increase

over the total amount raised during

the same reporting period of the last

mid-term election cycle, in 1994.

The figure includes both hard and

soft money.

Republican committees led the

fundraising race with $385 million

in receipts—$273.6 million in

federal contributions and $111.3

million in soft money donations.

The totals represent a 22 percent

increase in hard money receipts and

a 112 percent increase in soft money

receipts from 1994. Democratic

committees raised $243 million—

$153.4 million in federal contributions and $89.4 million in soft

money donations. The Democrats

posted a 27 percent increase in hard

money receipts and an 82 percent

increase in soft money donations

when compared to 1994.

 Republicans reported spending

$265.4 million in federal funds, up

$51 million from 1994; Democrats

reported spending $147.6 million,

up $32.3 million from 1994. Without counting soft money transfers

between party committees, the

Republicans reported $106.9 million

in nonfederal disbursements and the

Democrats reported $87.8 million.

This article and the accompanying graphs are based on data taken

from a January 26 news release. The

release is available at the following

places.

• FEC home page (http://

www.fec.gov; select “News

Releases and Media Advisories”)

• FEC Public Records and Press

offices (800/424-9530)

• FEC Faxline (202/501-3413,

document 609) ✦

Soft Money Disbursements by National Party Committees January 1, 1997 — November 23, 1998

$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

$60

$70

$80

Transfers to State Parties

Contributions to State/Local Candidates

Nonfederal Share of Joint (Federal/Nonfederal) Activity

Other disbursements (includes transfers to other national party operations,

building fund support, loan repayments and other nonfederal expenses)

DNC RNC DSCC NRSC DCCC NRCC

Millions

The Republican National Committee, National Republican Senatorial Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee spent $106.86

million in nonfederal disbursements through the post-general reporting

period. The Democratic National Committee, Democratic National Senatorial

Committee and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spent

$87.81 million in nonfederal disbursements for the same period.
March 1999 Federal Election Commission RECORD

5

Millions

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

Independent Expenditures

Coordinated Expenditures

Contributions

Other disbursements (includes administrative expenses, generic activity,

fundraising, loan repayments and other federal expenses)

Democrats Republicans

$0.28

$14.41

$3.61

$247.15

$1.49

$18.22

$2.80

$125.15

(Statistics continued on page 11)

Federal Disbursements by Party Committees

January 1, 1997 — November 23, 1998

Republican party committees spent $265.44 million from their federal accounts

through the post-general reporting period. Democratic party committees spent

$147.65 million from their federal accounts for the same period.

Advisory

Opinions

AO 1998-26

Loan Repayment by

Contested Election Entity to

Principal Campaign

Committee

The Louisiana Contested Election

Trust Fund, an entity established to

raise and spend funds to defend

against a challenge to Senator Mary

Landrieu’s 1996 Senate victory,

may repay Ms. Landrieu’s principal

campaign committee the remaining

$97,000 it had borrowed during

spring 1997.

The Trust Fund borrowed

$122,000 from The Friends of Mary

Landrieu Committee (Landrieu

Committee), Ms. Landrieu’s principal campaign committee for reelection in 2002, to defend against

the challenge to the results of the

1996 general election, brought by

her opponent, Woody Jenkins. The

Trust Fund has paid back part of the

loan, but still owes $97,000. It plans

to borrow that sum from a New

Orleans bank (where it has a

$150,000 line of credit secured by

Ms. Landrieu), repay the Landrieu

Committee and raise funds from

individuals to repay the bank.

Commission regulations define

“contribution” and “expenditure” to

include any gift, loan or payment of

money or anything of value for the

purpose of influencing a federal

election. But the regulations make

an exception for payments made

with respect to a vote recount or a

contested federal election. 11 CFR

100.7(a)(1), 100.8(a)(1),

100.7(b)(20) and 100.8(b)(20). In

these cases, donations may exceed

the contribution limits, but they still

cannot come from certain prohibited

sources—namely corporations,

national banks, labor organizations

or foreign nationals. 2 U.S.C.

§441a(a)(1)-(3).

(continued on page 6)
Federal Election Commission RECORD March 1999

6

Advisory Opinions

(continued from page 5)

When a candidate sets up a

separate entity to raise and spend

funds to defend against an election

challenge, the receipts and disbursements are not considered contributions or expenditures, and the entity

does not have to report as a political

committee. In this case, however,

the Trust Fund has registered and

files reports with the Commission.

Because the entity’s purpose is

limited to financing Ms. Landrieu’s

defense against the vote challenge,

the Trust Fund may accept donations in excess of the limits, but it

may not accept the above-cited

prohibited contributions.

As long as the Trust Fund has not

accepted and retained funds from

prohibited sources, the $97,000 loan

repayment is permissible as is the

acceptance of the repayment by the

Landrieu Committee. Because the

Landrieu Committee initially made

the loan from its pool of contributions and not from donations raised

expressly for funding the ’96

election challenge, it does not have

to segregate the loan repayment

receipts in a special account and

may use the funds to influence

federal elections.

The Trust Fund must be sure that

it does not use any funds that exceed

the contribution limits to make

contributions or expenditures in

connection with federal elections.

Date Issued: January 28, 1999;

Length: 4 pages. ✦

AO 1998-27

Status of State Party as State

Committee of Political Party

The Hawaii Green Party Coordinating Committee meets both of the

Commission’s requirements for

state committee status.

The Federal Election Campaign

Act (the Act) defines a state committee as “the organization which,

by virtue of the bylaws of a political

party, is responsible for the day-today operation of such political party

at the State level, as determined by

the Commission.” 2 U.S.C.

§431(15).

The definition of a state committee requires the existence of a

political party. A political party is

“an association, committee, or

organization which nominates a

candidate for election to any Federal

office whose name appears on the

election ballot as the candidate of

such association, committee, or

organization.” 2 U.S.C. §431(16).

In a number of advisory opinions,

the Commission has identified two

requirements necessary for state

political committee status. First, the

organization must have a state

affiliate agreement that “delineates

activities commensurate with the

day-to-day operation” of a party at a

state level. Second, the state affiliate

must gain ballot access for its

Presidential and other federal

candidates. See AOs 1998-24, 1998-

23, 1997-29, 1997-7, 1997-3 and

1996-51.

The Commission has made clear

that a state political party can

qualify as a state party committee

without an affiliation with any

national political party. The state

party’s candidate must qualify as a

candidate under FEC regulations in

order for the party to satisfy the

second requirement.

The Hawaii party meets both

requirements. In addressing the first

requirement, the party’s bylaws set

out a comprehensive organizational

structure for the party from the

statewide level down through local

levels. These bylaws do indeed

delineate activity commensurate

with the day-to-day functions and

operations of a political party on the

state level.

The second requirement of ballot

access for a federal candidate also

has been satisfied. The party’s 1992

federal candidate, Linda Martin,

attained ballot access and satisfied

FEC requirements for establishing

herself as a federal candidate under

2 U.S.C. §431(2). It makes no

difference that Ms. Martin was a

bona fide candidate more than six

years ago because the party continued to pursue its political objectives

through the 1997-1998 election

cycle, placing candidates on the

ballot for several local offices.

Date Issued: January 29, 1999;

Length: 4 pages. ✦

Advisory Opinion Requests

Advisory opinion requests are

available for review and comment in

the Public Records Office.

AOR 1999-1

Use of campaign funds to pay salary

to candidate (Mark Greene, January

19, 1999; 8 pages)

AOR 1999-2

Use of corporate treasury funds to

provide meals to employees attending candidate forums (Premera Blue

Cross, January 21, 1999; 3 pages) ✦

Audits

Perot ’96 Repayment

Reduced

The FEC has determined that

Perot ’96 must repay the U.S.

Treasury $1,706,915 it received in

public funding during the 1996

Presidential election. This figure is

approximately $600,000 less than

the Commission’s original repayment determination.

After challenging the

Commission’s original repayment

determination of $2,310,127, Perot

’96 received an oral hearing before

the Commission. The committee

challenged the repayment determination on two bases. First, because

the committee was unable to

terminate in April 1998, as it had
March 1999 Federal Election Commission RECORD

7

expected, it needed more funds to

pay winding-down costs. Second,

the committee argued that

$1,447,000 in litigation expenses

were qualified campaign expenses

and should be reflected in its

Statement of Net Outstanding

Qualified Campaign Expenses.

The Commission allowed the

additional funds for winding-down

costs, but again rejected Perot ’96’s

claim that its litigation expenses

were qualified campaign expenses.

See the February 1998 Record, p. 1.

The Commission found that the

litigation expenses—for two lawsuits filed by the committee—were

not incurred in furtherance of the

1996 general election and were not

incurred prior to the close of the

expenditure report period. 11 CFR

9002.11(a)(1) and (2). The lawsuits

challenged the Commission on

Presidential Debates and the Republican and Democratic national

committees. See these Record

issues: November 1996, p. 1, and

June 1998, p. 3. ✦

Compliance

MUR 4834

Facilitating Impermissible

Contribution Results in Civil

Penalty

Howard Glicken has paid a

$40,000 civil penalty for knowingly

and willfully soliciting a $20,000

contribution from a foreign national

and causing a foreign contribution

to be falsely made in the name of a

U.S. citizen.

Mr. Glicken solicited the contribution from Thomas Kramer in

April 1993 and knew at the time that

Mr. Kramer was a German national

and that foreign nationals are

prohibited from making contributions in elections in the United

States. Mr. Glicken told Mr. Kramer

that he should have someone else

write the check to the DSCC and

then reimburse that person. Subsequently, Mr. Glicken was present

when Mr. Kramer asked his secretary to write a $20,000 contribution

check, which the DSCC received a

few days after it was made. Mr.

Glicken knew that Mr. Kramer

reimbursed his secretary for the full

amount of the check.

It is unlawful for a foreign

national to make contributions in

connection with any election, either

directly or through another person.

Further, it is unlawful for any

person to solicit, accept or receive a

contribution from a foreign national.

2 U.S.C. §441e. It is also unlawful

for any person to make a contribution in the name of another. 2

U.S.C. §441f. In this case, Mr.

Glicken solicited a contribution

from a foreign national to the DSCC

and caused a contribution to be

made to the DSCC in the name of

another, both in knowing and willful

violation of the Federal Election

Campaign Act (the Act).

This compliance matter was

referred to the FEC by the Department of Justice. The Commission

entered into a conciliation agreement with Mr. Glicken after finding

reason to believe that he had violated the Act. ✦

Information

Independent Audit Report

On FEC Submitted to

Congress

An independent audit of the FEC,

conducted over the past eight

months by PricewaterhouseCoopers,

LLP (PwC), determined that the

Commission executes its duties

“...without partisan bias,” and

addressed the necessity for Congress

to authorize mandatory electronic

filing of campaign reports. The audit

was requested by Congress in 1997.

Findings

In the report’s Executive Summary, the PwC auditors state: “The

FEC is basically a competently

managed organization with a skilled

and motivated staff, although it has

its shortcomings. The ability of the

FEC to adapt to the changing

election environment, however, has

been hindered by the FECA [Federal

Election Campaign Act] statute

itself, escalating campaign finance

disclosure and compliance

workloads, and an organizational

culture that has attempted incremental change in a deadline-driven

environment stretched by limited

resources.”

Among specific FEC strengths,

the independent audit report mentions that:

• Disclosure and compliance

activities are executed without a

partisan bias. The report gives an

“unqualified yes” to the question:

“Are FEC programs conducted in a

non-partisan, ethical, and independent manner?”

• The FEC “...places a premium on

facilitating voluntary compliance,

and the regulated community

values the products and services

designed and employed by the

FEC to enhance this voluntary

compliance.”

Recommendations

With regard to the future, the

PwC audit report states:

• “The Congress and the FEC need

to initiate actions that will eventually allow the FEC to shift some

resources from its disclosure

activities to its compliance programs by the following means:

develop a comprehensive, mandatory electronic data filing system

for the major filers in conjunction

with a significant business process

reengineering throughout the FEC;

(continued on page 8)
Federal Election Commission RECORD March 1999

8

Information

(continued from page 7)

redesign disclosure processes

(using industry standard software)

and realign organizational units to

improve processing time, accuracy,

and cost.”

• The FEC should be authorized to

move “...non-deliberate and

straightforward reporting violations, such as failure to meet

reporting deadlines, away from the

enforcement process and into an

administrative fine system to allow

enforcement resources to handle

more significant violations.”

“The FEC faces an increasing and

volatile workload with the year

2000 election cycle that features a

non-incumbent Presidential election.

...Depending on the number of

Presidential candidate committees,

the size of the enforcement caseload

and the Commission desire to

increase case activation rates,

additional compliance resources in

FY2000 may be warranted above

normal inflation adjusted levels.

FY2000 appropriations should be

conditioned on the agency’s continued progress in implementing

opportunities to increase productivity in its disclosure and compliance

programs.”

FEC Response

The official response of the

Commission, published as Section 6

of the report, draws attention to

PwC’s recognition of FEC accomplishments, the influence of outside

factors on FEC operations and the

need for legislative change in order

to accomplish some of the PwC

recommendations. Additionally, the

FEC’s formal response summarizes

and endorses the basic themes of

PwC’s recommendations.

The report is available at the

General Accounting Office’s web

site (http://www.gao.gov/

special.pubs/publist.htm) and from

the FEC’s Public Records Office by

calling 800/424-9530 (press 3) or

202/694-1120. ✦

FEC Conducts Monthly Roundtable Sessions

The FEC has begun conducting monthly roundtable sessions for the

regulated community at its offices in Washington. The roundtable sessions,

limited to 10 participants per session, focus on a range of topics. See the

chart below for dates and topics.

Registration is $25 and will be accepted on a first-come, first-served basis.

Please call the FEC before registering to be sure that openings remain in the

session of your choice. Prepayment is required. The registration form is

available at the FEC’s web site (http://www.fec.gov) and from Faxline, the

FEC’s automated fax system (202/501-3413, request document 590). For

more information, call 800/424-9530 (press 1) or 202/694-1100. ✦

FEC Faxline Menu

FEC Faxline 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.

Federal Election Commission

411. Complete Menu of All Material

Available

501. The FEC and the Federal

Campaign Finance Law

502. La Ley Federal relativa al

Financiamiento de las Campañas

503. Federal and State Campaign

Finance Laws

504. Compliance with Laws Outside

the FEC’s Jurisdiction

505. Biographies of Commissioners

and Officers

506. Telephone Directory

507. Table of Organization

508. Index for 1997 Record

Newsletter

509. Free Publications

510. Personnel Vacancy

Announcements

511. Freedom of Information Act

Requesters’ Guide

512. Legal Opportunities at the FEC

513. 1998 Legislative Recommendation

Disclosure

521. Guide to Researching Public

Records

522. Accessibility of Public Records

Office

523. Federal/State Records Offices

524. Using FEC Campaign Finance

Information

525. State Computer Access to FEC

Data

526. Direct Access Program (DAP)

527. Sale and Use of Campaign

Information

528. Combined Federal/State

Disclosure Directory 1998 on

Disk

529. Selected Political Party Organizations and Addresses

530. Internet Access to the FEC

531. Downloadable Databases via the

Internet

Date Subject Intended Audience

April 7

9:30 -11 a.m.

FEC Rules on Use of

the Internet to Raise

Funds

(Code #499)

•

•

•

Candidates

Political Party Staff

Nonconnected PACs

May 5

9:30 -11 a.m.

Fundraising Through

Payroll Deductions and

Combined Dues/PAC

Solicitations

(Code #599)

•

•

Corporate/Labor/

Trade PAC Staff

Lawyers, Accountants

and Consultants to

Above PACs

Filled!

Waiting List

Only
March 1999 Federal Election Commission RECORD

9

532. Electronic Filing Took Kit

533. State Campaign Finance and

Lobbying Data on the Internet

Limitations

546. Contributions

547. Coordinated Party Expenditure

Limits

548. Advances: Contribution Limits

and Reporting

549. Volunteer Activity

550. Independent Expenditures

551. Local Party Activity

552. Corporate Communications/

Facilities

553. Trade Associations

554. Foreign Nationals

555. The $25,000 Annual Contribution Limit

556. Personal Use of Campaign

Funds

557. Delegate Activity

558. Partnerships

Public Funding

566. Public Funding of Presidential

Elections

567. The $3 Tax Checkoff

568. 1993 Changes to Checkoff

569. Recipients of Public Funding

570. Presidential Fund Income Tax

Checkoff Status

571. Presidential Spending Limits

Compliance

581. Candidate Registration

582. Committee Treasurers

583. Special Notices on Political Ads

and Solicitations

584. 10 Questions from Candidates

585. Filing a Complaint

586. 1998 Reporting Dates

587. 1998 Congressional Primary

Dates

588. 1998 Special Election Reporting

Dates

589. 1998 FEC Regional Conference

Schedule

590. FEC Monthly Roundtables

Money in Politics Statistics

601. 1991-2 Political Money

602. 1998 Year-End PAC Count

603. 1993-4 Congressional

604. 1993-4 National Party

605. 1993-4 PAC Finances

606. 1995-6 Congressional

607. 1995-6 National Party

608. 1995-6 PAC Finances

609. 1997-8 National Party

610. 1997-8 Congressional

611. 1997-8 PAC Finances

(continued on page 10)

1996 Presidential

651. 1996 Presidential Primary Dates

652. Selected 1996 Campaign Names

and Addresses

653. Selected 1996 Campaign

Finance Figures

654. 1996 Public Funding Certifications and Payments

655. 1996 Presidential General

Election Ballots

656. 1996 Presidential General

Election Results

Office of Election Administration

701. List of Reports Available

702. Voting Accessibility for the

Elderly and Handicapped Act

703. National Voter Registration Act

Regulations

704. National Voter Registration Act

of 1993

705. The Electoral College

706. Organizational Structure of the

American Election System

707. Primary Functions of an Election

System

Forms

801. Form 1, Statement of Organization

802. Form 2, Statement of Candidacy

803. Form 3 and 3Z, Report for an

Authorized Committee

804. Form 3X, Report for Other Than

an Authorized Committee

805. Form 5, Report of Independent

Expenditures

806. Form 6, 48-Hour Notice of

Contributions/Loans Received

807. Form 7, Report of Communication Costs

808. Form 8, Debt Settlement Plan

809. Form 1M, Notification of

Multicandidate Status

Schedules

825. Schedule A, Itemized Receipts

826. Schedule B, Itemized Disbursements

827. Schedules C and C-1, Loans

828. Schedule D, Debts and Obligations

829. Schedule E, Itemized Independent Expenditures

830. Schedule F, Itemized Coordinated Expenditures

831. Schedules H1 – H4, Allocation

832. Schedule I, Aggregate Page

Nonfederal Accounts

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
Federal Election Commission RECORD March 1999

10

Information

(continued from page 9)

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. Electronic Filing of Reports by

Political Committees

228. Coordinated and Independent

Expenditures by Party Committees

229. Definition of “Member” of a

Membership Association

230. Prohibited and Excessive

Contributions; “Soft Money”

231. Recordkeeping and Reporting

232. Express Advocacy

233. Qualified Nonprofit Corporations

234. Electronic Filing of Reports by

Presidential Candidates

235. Public Financing of Presidential

Primary and General Election

Candidates

236. Treatment of Limited Liability

Companies under the Federal

Election Campaign Act

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

9801-25. AOs 1998-1 through 1998-25

9701-29. AOs 1997-1 through 1997-29

9601-52. AOs 1996-1 through 1996-52

9501-49. AOs 1995-1 through 1995-49

9401-40. AOs 1994-1 through 1994-40

9301-25. AOs 1993-1 through 1993-25

9201-44. AOs 1992-1 through 1992-44

9101-40. AOs 1991-1 through 1991-40

9001-40. AOs 1990-1 through 1990-40

Type Place Date

Corporate and Labor Conference Washington, DC April 22-23,

1998

Membership and Trade Association

Conference

Washington, DC May-June

1998

Partnership Conference Washington, DC July 1999

Regional Conference

(Includes candidate, corporate/labor

and party workshops)

Chicago, IL September

1999

Regional Conference

(Includes candidate, corporate/labor

and party workshops)

San Francisco, CA November

1999

Candidate Conference Washington, DC February

2000

Regional Conference

(Includes candidate, corporate/labor

and party workshops)

Miami, FL March 2000

Corporate and Labor Conference Washington, DC May 2000

Membership and Trade Association

Conference

Washington, DC June 2000

FEC Conference Schedule
March 1999 Federal Election Commission RECORD

11

Index

The first number in each citation

refers to the “number” (month) of

the 1999 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

1998-22: Application of expenditure

definition and disclaimer requirements to web site containing

express advocacy, 1:16

1998-23: Status as state committee

of political party, 1:16

1998-26: Candidate committee’s

acceptance of loan repayment

from contested election trust fund

Statistics

(continued from page 5)

Trade/ Corp. w/o

Member/ Coop- Capital NonCorporate Labor Health erative Stock connected 1 Total

Dec. ’91 1,738 338 742 57 136 1,083 4,094

Jul. ’92 1,731 344 759 56 144 1,091 4,125

Dec. ’92 1,735 347 770 56 142 1,145 4,195

Jul. ’93 1,715 338 767 55 139 1,011 4,025

Dec. ’93 1,789 337 761 56 146 1,121 4,210

Jul. ’94 1,666 336 777 53 138 963 3,933

Dec. ’94 1,660 333 792 53 136 980 3,954

Jul. ’95 1,670 334 804 43 129 1,002 3,982

Dec. ’95 1,674 334 815 44 129 1,020 4,016

Jul. ’96 1,645 332 829 43 126 1,058 4,033

Dec. ’96 1,642 332 838 41 123 1,103 4,079

Jul. ’972 1,602 332 826 41 118 953 3,875

Dec. ’97 1,597 322 825 42 117 931 3,844

Jul. ’98 1,565 325 820 43 112 897 3,762

Dec. ’98 1,567 321 821 39 115 935 3,798

1 Nonconnected PACs must use their own funds to pay fundraising and administrative expenses, while the other categories of PACs have corporate or labor “connected organizations” that are permitted to pay those expenses for their PACs. On

the other hand, nonconnected PACs may solicit contributions from the general

public, while solicitations by corporate and labor PACs are restricted.

2

 During the first six months of 1997, 227 PACs were administratively terminated

because of inactivity.

Year-End PAC Count

Inches Up

The FEC’s semi-annual PAC

count shows that the number of

PACs has increased slightly since

the last count in July 1998. The

table at right shows the midyear and

year-end PAC figures since 1991.

To see a complete PAC tabulation dating back to 1974, visit the

FEC’s web site—

http://www.fec.gov—or request a

copy of the FEC’s February 12 new

release from either the Public

Records or Press offices by calling

800/424-9530. ✦

that contains funds loaned to it by

candidate, 3:5

1998-27: Status as state committee

of political party, 3:6

Compliance

MUR 4750: Excessive contributions, 1:13

MUR 4751: Excessive and improper

transfer of nonfederal funds,

excessive contributions, corporate

contributions, 2:2

MUR 4796: Corporate contributions, contributions in the names

of others, 1:13

MUR 4834: Foreign national

contribution, contribution in the

name of another, 3:7

Court Cases

_____ v. FEC

– Judd, 1:3

– Mariani, 2:1

– RNC (98-5263), 1:2

Other

– Burris v. Russell, 1:3

– Cincinnati v. Kruse, 1:3

Regulations

Definition of “Member” of Membership Association, 1:10; 3:1

Express Advocacy, 3:2

Limited Liability Companies, 1:11

Public Financing of Presidential

Primary and General Election

Candidates, 1:7; 3:1

Soft money, 1:12

Status of, 3:3

Reports

Electronic filing, 1:6; 2:1

Reports due in 1999, 1:4

Special Election, Georgia, 2:3

Statistics

Congressional, 2:4

PAC, 3:11

Party, 3:4

Midyear and Year-End PAC Counts, December

1991 — December 1998
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 March 1999