•

November 1983

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

1325 K Street NW Washington DC 20463 Volume 9, Number 

•

•

SPENDING LIMITS FOR PARTY COMMI'ITEES

IN WASHINGTON AND GEORGIA SPECIAL

ELECTIONS

National and state party committees may

make limited, coordinated expenditures on behalf

of their Congressional candidates in special elections to be held in both Washington and Georgia

on November 8, 1983. 2 U.S.C. S441a(d); 11 CFR

110.7. In Washington's special general election,

the national and state committees may each make

coordinated expenditures of up to $121,529.70 on

behalf of the party's Senate candidate. Any expenditures by the state party committee's subordinate committees (e.g., county, district or local committees) are SUbject to the state party's

limit.

The special election in Georgia is a runoff election, which is being held because no House candidate obtained a majority of the votes in the

October 18 special election. The national and

state committees are each subject to a single

$19,570 limit on spending for both the runoff

election and the October 18 election. Expenditures by subordinate com mittees of the state

party are SUbject to the state party's overall limit

for the elections.

Special coordinated party expenditures count neither as contributions to the candidate nor as

expenditures by the candidate or the candidate's

authorized committees. The expenditures must,

however, be reported; the party committee discloses them on Schedule F, FEC Form 3X. The

FEC has sent informational notices to party committees in both Washington and Georgia. For

further information, contact the Commission at

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

NEW CAMPAIGN GmDE FOR

NONCONNECTED COMMITTEES

The Commission recently published a

Campaign Guide for Nonconnected Political Committees. The Guide outlines the

rules applicable to committees which have

not been established by a candidate, a

party, a corporation or a labor organization. It examines contributions and expenditures, political communications and

support from a sponsoring organization.

The Guide also reproduces completed FEC

reporting forms and shows how to fill them

out.

Based on the Act and Commission Regulations, the Guide includes citations to

the election law, the regulations and selected advisory opinions. Copies of the

Campaign Guide for Nonconnected Committees are available free of charge by

contacting: Office of Public Communications, Federal Election Commission, 1325

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

call 202/523-4068 in Washington, D.C., or

toll free 800/424-9530.

GENERAL ELECTION REGULATIONS

PRESCRIBED

On OCtober 27, 1983, the Commission pr

scribed revised regulations governing the pub

financing of Presidential general election ca

paigns. II CFR Parts 9001-9007 and 9012. T

revised regulations contain clarifications based 

the Commission's experience in administering t

public funding of the 1980 general election. Th

also ensure that the rules governing general ele

tion campaigns are consistent with recent rev

sions to the FEC's primary matching fund regu

tions. Moreover, the revised rules add new pro

sions to cover aspects of the Presidential gener

election process not previously addressed in t

regulations.

continu
November 1983 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

Highlights of major modifications in the general

election regulations appeared on page 1 of the

September 1983 Record. The full text of the

proposed rules was published in the Federal Register on April 4, 1983 (48 Fed. Reg. 14532). Copies

of the new regulations may be obtained by writing

the FEers Public Communications Office, 1325 K

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463 or by calling: 202/523-4068 or toll free 800/424-9530.

Volume 9,Numbe

FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES

The item below identifies an FEC docum

that appeared in the Federal Register du

September 1983. Copies of the notice is avail

in the PUblic Records Office.

Notice Title

1983-26 11 CFR Part 114: Trade Associa

Solicitation Authorization: Transm

of Regulations to Congress (48 Fed.

48650, October 20, 1983)

STATUS OF FEC REGULATIONS SENT TO CONGRESS

Date Sent Federal Register Date Prescribed* *

Regulations* to Congress Publication by the Com mission

11 CFR 102.6 and 102.1'1 6/2/83 6/7 /83 8/22/83

Transfer of Funds; 48 Fed. Reg. 26296

Collecting Agents, Joint

Pundraising

11 CFR 114.3 and 114.4* * * 3/1/83 3/4/83

Com munieations by (withdrawn to 48 Fed. Reg. 9236;

Corporations and obtain further 4/22/83

Labor Organizations public com rnent, 48 Fed. Reg. 17567

4/22/83)

II CFR 114.8 (c)(2), 10/17/83 10/20/83

114.8(d)(2) and 48 Fed. Reg. 48650

II4.8(dX4)

Trade Association

SOlicitation Authorizations

II CFR 900 I et seq. 7/l/83 7/11/83 10/27/83

General Election Campaign 48 Fed. Reg. 31822

Fund

II CFR Part 9008 NA**** 7/21/83 7/21/83

Fund for Presidential 48 Fed. Reg. 33244

Nominating Conventions

*The chart is cumulative, listing all amendments to FEC Regulations proposed or prescribed

by the Commission since the publication of Title ll, Code of Federal Regulations (ll CPR) on

July I, 1983.

**The Commission may prescribe its regulations 30 legislative days after it has transmitted

them to Congress.

***The Commission approved proposed revisions to these regulations on October 20, 1983. They

will soon be resubmitted to Congress.

****Since these technical, conforming amendments were not a substantive role representing an 

PEC policy decision, they were not submitted for Congressional review but became effective upon

publication in the Federal Register on July 21, 1983.

2
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

•

•

November 1983

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

1983-32 Lottery cash prizes awarded to contributors to PAC of membership organization; solicitation information distributed with prize. (Date made publics

October 3, 1983; Length: 2 pages)

1983-33 Travel agency services provided to delegates of major party Presidential nominating convention; partial donation of

travel com missions to party's national

committee. (Date made publici October

4, 1983; Length: 8 pages)

1983-34 Funds (containing donations from professional corpora tions and local PACs)

transferred from candidate's 1982 state

Senate campaign to his 1984 U.S. Senate

campaign. (Date made public: October

6, 1983; Length: 2 pages, plus 6-page

supplement)

1983-35 Eligibility of employees as stockholders

for purposes of PAC solicitations. (Date

made publics October 13, 1983; Length: 3

pages, plus 28-page supplement)

1983-36 Services provided to Presidential candidate by individual who previously helped

unauthorized committee make independent expenditures on behalf of the same

candidate. (Date made publics October

14, 1983; Length: 2 pages)

Volume 9, Number 

ADVISORY OPINIONS: SUMMARIES

An Advisory Opinion (AO) issued by the Co

mission provides guidance with regard to t

specific situation described in the AOR. A

qualified person who has requested an AD a

acts in accordance with the opinion will not 

subject to any sanctions under the Act. Oth

persons may rely on the opinion if they a

involved in a specific activity which is indist

guishable in all material aspects from the activ

discussed in the AD. Those seeking guidance 

their own activity, however, should consult 

full text of an AD and not rely only on 

sum mary given here.

AO 1983-13: PAC Contributions by

Testamentary Bequest

The National Maritime Union Political and Leg

lative Organization Watch (PLOW), the separ

segregated fund of the National Maritime Un

(NMU), may accept a bequest of approximat

$20,500 to be distributed to its general accoun

annual increments of $5,000. The bequest w

contained in the will of a deceased member 

NMU. PLOW may establish a special intere

bearing escrow account for the purpose of hold

the balance of the bequest and distributing it 

PLOW's general account in annual incremen

provided:

PLOW does not pledge or otherwise oblig

funds in the escrow account to augment ot

PLOW or NMU funds;

PLOW adds any interest earned on the escr

account to the account's total funds, to 

distributed in annual increments not exce

ing $5,000; and

PLOW follows the reporting procedures 

scribed below.

Since the deceased member's estate is conside

his alter ego for purposes of making contributi

to PLOW, the estate is SUbject to the sa

contribution limits and prohibitions that the me

ber would have been. This means that no m

than $5,000 of the bequest may be contributed 

PLOW each year.

Reporting Procedures

In reporting distributions from the spec

escrow account to the general account, PLO

must comply with the following rules:

continu

•

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

D.C. 20463. Commissioners are: Danny Lee McDonald, Chairman; Lee Ann Elliott, Vice Chairman;

Joan D. Aikens; Thomas E. Harris; 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.

3
November 1983 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 9, Numbe

It must amend its Statement of Organization

to disclose the special escrow account as a

PLOW bank account.

PLOW must report the balance in the escrow

account (including any interest earned) as a

debt or obligation owed to PLOW. The funds

should be reported on line 9 of FEC Form 3X

and on Schedule D. The bank and the escrow

account should be identified as a "debtor" to

PLOW, and a brief description of the escrow

"debt" should be disclosed on Schedule D.

As funds are withdrawn from the escrow

account and deposited in PLOW's general

account, PLOW must report the transaction

as a contribution from the estate, using line

I Ha) of Form 3X and Schedule A. A corresponding reduction in the total debt should

also be reported on line 9 (and Schedule D)

of Form 3X.

The Commission cautioned that its conclusions in

this opinion applied only to the specific issue

raised in this request, namely, contributions made

by specific testamentary bequest and distributed

through the decedent's estate. Commissioner

Thomas E. Harris filed a dissenting opinion. Commissioner Frank P. Reiche filed a concurring opinion. (Date .issuedi September 26, 1983; Length: 8

pages, including concurring and dissenting opinions)

AO 1983-21: Trust Fund Established by

Congressman for Legal Fees Arising

From Non-FECA Proceedings

Donations to and disbursements from a trust fund

established by Congressman Gerry E. Studds

(D- Mass.) to defray legal expenses arising from

proceedings unrelated to the Federal Election

Campaign Act (FECA) would not be considered

"contributions" or "expenditures" under the FECA.

Accordingly, donations to the trust fund would not

be subject to the prohibitions and limits the Act

places on contributions. Nor would any of the

trust fund's receipts and disbursements have to be

reported. However, upon dissolution of the trust

fund, no residual funds could be transferred to

Congressman Studds' campaign committee or any

other political committee.

The Commission expressed no opinion on the application of House rules, tax laws or any other

state or federal laws to the trust fund because

they are beyond the FEC's jurisdiction. (Date

issued: September 20, 1983; Length: 2 pages)

4

AO 1983-22: Reimbursement of PAC's

Parent

Administrative

Corporation

Expenses by 

The Northwest Central Pipeline Corpora

(Northwest) may reimburse its separate se

gated fund, the Northwest Central Pipeline C

poration Political Action Committee (the C

mittee), for costs incurred by the Committee 

having bank checks printed. The Commi

should report its payment for the printing char

as an "operating expenditure" on line 19 of F

Form 3X. The corporation's reimbursement of 

charges should be reported by the Committee 

an "other receipt" on line 17 of FEC Form 3X.

The election law specifically exempts a sepa

segregated fund's administrative expenses f

the definition of "expenditure" when they are p

directly by the corporation sponsoring the fu

Under new Commission Regulations, effec

August 22, 1983, however, a corporation may 

reimburse its separate segregated fund for 

fund's administrative expenses. The reimbu

ment must occur no later than 30 days after 

separa te segrega ted fund pays the expenses. 

CFR 102.6(c)(2)(ii) and 114.5(b)(3).

Although Northwest's proposed reimbursemen

the Committee did not meet the 30-day deadl

the Commission nevertheless permitted the 

imbursement because: a) the Committee s

mitted its request for an advisory opinion wi

30 days of receiving a bank statement listing 

printing Charge, and b) the new regulations p

mitting the Committee's reimbursement for 

charge became effective during this period. (D

issued: September 20, 1983; Length: 2 pages)

AO 1983-23: Reception Facility and Events

Sponsored by Corporation

at Presidential Nominating

Conventions

During the summer of 1984, the LTV Corpora

(LTV) plans to sponsor a reception facility n

the site of the Republican National Conventio

Dallas, Texas. In addition, LTV and the publi

of a weekly news magazine plan to cospon

cocktail party receptions at both the Republi

and Democratic National Conventions. Attend

at these events will include convention delega

party officials, federal and sta te elected offic

and the press. Payments LTV makes to fina

these events would constitute neither "con

butions" nor "expenditures" under the Act, p

vided:

LTV makes no attempt to influence the o

come of either Presidential nominating c

vention; 

The purpose of these events is neither 

solicit contributions to, nor to advocate 

contin
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

•

•

•

November 1983

election or defeat of, any candidate for federal office;

The events do not serve the r~lrpose of defraying any delegate's subsistence expenses

during the convention; and

LTV exercises full control over the proposed

convention-related activities. (Date issued:

October 6, 1983; Length: 3 pages)

AO 1983-24: Sponsorship of Reception

for Contributors to

Membership Association PAC

Either the American Association for Respiratory

Therapy (AART) or its separate segregated fund,

the American Association for Respiratory Therapy Political Action Committee (the Committee),

may pay for a cocktail reception the Committee

will host in conjunction with AART's annual meeting. The "thank you" reception is being held for

members of AART who have made SUbstantial

contributions to the Committee. The Committee

may sponsor the reception because the election

law permits a separate segregated fund to expend

its funds for any lawful purpose consistent with

the Act and Commission Regulations, See AOs

1983-4 and 1979-42. Alternatively, AART may

finance the reception because the election law

specifically exempts from the definitions of "contribution" and "expenditure" payments made by an

incorporated membership organization to establish, administer and solicit contributions to its

separate segregated fund. 2 U.S.C. §441b(b)(2)(C).

Although no contributions will be SOlicited at the

reception, the reception is sufficiently related to

the Com mittee's fundraising activities to qualify

as an exempt fundraising expenditure by AART.

11 CFR 114.Hb); AO 1980-50.

However, corporations which supply equipment

used in respiratory therapy may not finance the

reception. Since these corporations are not members of AART and are not otherwise connected

with AART, the election law prohibits them from

using their treasury funds for such expenditures.

The Commission noted that, under its regulations,

members of Congress may attend the reception in

conjunction with their appearances at the AART

annual meeting. 11 CFR 114.3(c)(2) and 114.7(h).

(Date issued: October 6, 1983; Length: 3 pages)

5

Volume 9, Number 

SENATOR GLENN ELIGIBLE FOR

PRlMARY MATCHING FUNDS

On October 6, 1983, the Commission d

termined that Senator John Glenn, a Democra

candidate for President, was eligible to recei

federal matching funds for his 1984 primary ca

paign. (For a complete explanation of the eli

bility requirements, consult 26 U.S.C. §9033 a

Commission Regulations at 11 CFR 9033 a

9036.1.)

Under the election law, Presidential candida

may begin seeking eligibility for primary matc

ing funds after January I, 1983. However, 

U.S. Treasury may not make actual payme

before January I, 1984. The maximum amount 

matching funds an eligible candidate may rece

during 1984 for the primary elections is equal 

ha,ll the overall spending limit established by l

for each publicly funded Presidential primary ca

didate ($10 million, plus a cost-of-living adju

ment).

(

PEC CERTIFIES ADDmONAL'FUNDS TO

ANDERSON'S 1980 PRIMARY CAMPAIGN

On September 29, 1983, the Commission c

tified an additional $44,485.65 in public funds 

John B. Anderson's 1980 primary campaign. T

certification brought the total received by 

campaign for the 1980 election to $2,320,809.48

Based on repayment determinations* it had ma

with regard to President Reagan's publicly fund

primary campaign, the Commission ruled on A

gust 23, 1983, that it had previously required M

Anderson's pri mary ea mpaign to repay an 

cessive amount of public funds to the U.S. Tre

ury. Following this decision, the Commission 

calculated the Anderson campaign's financ

position and determined that the campaign w

entitled to additional funds. For further deta

see FEC Agenda Document No. 82-120, availa

for review in the Commission's Public Reco

Office.

*The Commission may require publicly fun

ed Presidential campaigns to repay pUblic funds 

the U.S. Treasury under certain circumstanc

See Il CFR 9033.l(aX5), 9038.2 and 9038.3. Pu

lic funding recipients may, however, appeal a

FEC repayment determination by following 

review procedures spelled out in the Commissio

Regulations. See II CFR 9038.2(b) and (c).
November 1983 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

PUBLIC APPEARANCES

11/2-4 Law, Youth and Citizenship

Program

Seventh Annual Law-Related

Education Conference

Lake Kiamesha, New York

Larry Boyle, Public Affairs

Specialist

11/14 Georgetown University Law

Center

Guest Lecturer Program

Washington, D.C.

Thomas Josefiak, Special Deputy

to the Secretary of the Senate

Douglas Patton, Special Deputy to

the Clerk of the House of Representatives

Charles N. Steele, General

Counsel

12/2 -4 Democratic National Com mittee

Democratic National Training

Academy

Washington, D.C.

Walter Moore, Executive

Assistant to Chairman

Danny L. McDonald

Volume 9,Numbe

out members under the laws of Virginia.) Th

fore, the appeals court did not consider the 

trict court's finding that NRWC's violation of 

election law was knowing and willful or the 

trict court's orders that NRWC must: a) ref

the money received from the unlawful solic

tions and b) pay a $10,000 civil penalty. Rather

determining that the district court had erred 

its ruling, the appeals court found that:

NRWC was entitled to treat those pers

solicited by NRWC as "members" of the c

poration for purposes of 2 U.S.C. §441

(4)(C);

The interests served by S44lb were not 

thered by restricting NRWC's use of c

porate funds; and

The district court's definition of the t

"member," as used in S441b(b)(4)(C), was 

"narrow that it necessarily infringes on a

ciational rights,"

In its December 13 ruling on the case, the 

preme Court had unanimously reversed the 

peals court's decision and determined that 

267,123 persons solicited by NRWC were not 

"members" under any "reasonable interpretati

of 2 U.S.C. §44Ib(b)(4)(C). The Court rejec

NRWC's argument that the term "member" 

unconstitutionally vague. The Court also rejec

as "meritless" NRWC's contention that the C

mission's actions in the administrative proce

ings against NRWC were "misleading" or "a

trary."

FEC v. NATIONAL RIGHT TO

WORK COMMITTEE

On December 13, 1982, the Supreme Court

issued its decision in FEC v. National Right to

Work Committee (NRWC).· The Court then remanded the case to the appeals court to consider,

among other things, "the...imposition of a $10,000

civil penalty" on NRWC for unlawful solicitations

to its separate segregated fund. On September 2,

1983, the appeals court found that "the penalties

imposed by the district court are unwarranted."

In an earlier decision in the same case, the

appeals court had reversed a judgment of the

district court that NRWC had unlawfully solicited

funds to its separate segregated fund from persons who were not "members" of NRWC within

the meaning of 2 U.S.C. §441b(b)(4)(C). (NRWC is

a nonprofit, nonstoek corporation organized with-

"For a summary of the Supreme Court's

decision in FEC v. NRWC, see p, 3 of the February 1983 Record.

6

In considering the case on remand, the app

court reversed the district court's orders c

cerning the money refund and civil penalty, ba

its decision on: "(I) the ambiguities in the statu

(2) the failure of the FEC to provide any guida

whatsoever...; and (3) our own prior doubts ab

the applicability of a state law standard" wh

the appeals courts found, indicated that NRW

violations were not "deliberate." The court 

found that NRWC's first solicitation, conduc

on May 7, 1976, four days before the 1976 ame

ments to the election law became effective, 

permitted by former 18 U.S.C. §610. The co

observed that, on its face, Section 610 "expre

exempted from the definition of 'contribution 

expenditure' the 'establishment, administrat

and solicitation of contributions to a separ

segregated fund to be utilized for political p

poses by a corporation or labor organizatio

Consequently, the court found that the first 

licitation involved "no violation and certainly 

knowing and willful violation" of the election la

On October 17, 1983, the Commission petitio

the appeals court for a rehearing of the cou

decision. The Com mission also suggested a 

hearing before the court's full panel of judges. 
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

•

•

November 1983

FEC CO-HOSTS THREE REGIONAL

CONFERENCES

During September and October 1983, the

Commission sponsored three regional conferences,

one in the Midwest, one in the Northeast and one

in the Southeast, in cooperation with state and

local election officials. The 36 workshops conducted at each conference focused on the financing of federal elections and on the adrninistra tion

of elections a t the Iocal, state and federal levels.

Six hundred and twenty attendees participated in

the Midwest Regional Conference, held in Itasca,

Illinois, a suburb of Chicago. Five hundred and

forty persons a ttended the Northeast Regional

Conference held in Albany, New York. Five hundred and forty attendees particlpa ted in the

Southeast Regional Conference, held in Charleston, South Carolina. Conference participants included: na tiona I., sta te and local party officials;

staff representatives of Congressional campaigns;

representstives from corpora te, labor, trade assoCHANGE OF ADDRESS

Volume 9, Number 

ciation and special interest PAC·s;* state a

local election officials; foreign election officia

and students of election law.

Two more conferences will be held in Novemb

and December. The schedule for the remaini

conferences is:

Southwest Regional Conference, Tulsa, Ok

homa, November 13-15; and

Far West Regional Conference, Los Angel

California, December 4-6.

For more information on the conferences, cont

the FEC's Public Communications Office 

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

*PAC is a popuLar term used to define 

political committee that has not been authoriz

by a candidate or political party. The term 

cludes separate segregated fW1ds sponsored 

corporations and labor organizations, as well 

political committees without any sponsoring 

ganization.

•

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 FEC Form I

(Statement of Organization) and filed with the Clerk of the House, the Secretary of the Senate, or

the FEC, 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 subscription 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•

7
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

1325 KStreet, N.W.

Washington, D.C.20463

Official Business

8

First Class Mail

Postage & Fees Paid

FEC

Washington, D.C.

Permit No. G-31