• 

• 

• 

THE FEDERAL ELECTION 

COMMISSION 

1325 K Street N.W ., Washington, D.C. 20463 

Volume 5, Number 8 

PROPOSED REGULATIONS 

ON CANDIDATE DEBATES 

As part of its general planning and preparation for the 

1980 Presidential ·elections, the Commission sent proposed 

regulations governing the funding, sponsorship and structure of candidate debates to Congress on June 28, 1979. 

Because candidate debates are designed to educate and 

inform voters rather than influence elections, the proposed 

regulations provide that funds received and spent to sponsor nonpartisan debates are not considered contributions or 

expenditures under the Act. The proposed regulations 

would also permit unions cind corporations to use treasury 

funds to contribute to the sponsorship of nonpartisan 

debates, in much the same way that unions and corporations may use treasury funds for nonpartisan registration 

and get-out-the-vote activities. The proposed regulations 

stipulate that the debate sponsor must be a tax-exempt, 

nonprofit organization which has a . history of neither 

supporting nor endorsing candidates or political parties. 

The proposed regulations would require that the debates be 

structured in the following manner: 

General Election (Presidential, Senate or House): 

Debates involving candidates in the general el.ection 

follow a partY standard. For any given office, a sponsor 

of debates must invite all candidates nominated by all 

parties within a given type of party (major, minor or new 

party). For example, if a sponsor invites one general election candidate who is nominated by a major Party to partie· 

ipate in a debate, then the sponsor must invite the candidate nominated for the same office by all other major 

parties. If only one major party candidate agrees to participate, then the sponsor is required to invite all minor party 

candidates; if no major and only one minor party candidate 

agrees to participate, then the sponsor must invite all new 

party candidates. In any debate held for general election 

candidates, the sponsor has the discretion to include any 

minor party, new party, independent or write-in candidate . 

Primary Election (Presidential, Senate or House): 

For the primary election, the sponsor may choose one 

of the following options: 

Augus

1. Ballot standard: The sponsor of the debate mus

all candidates seeking party nomination for th

office who are qualified to appear on the bal

caucus or convention States, each recognized and 

candidate must be invited to participate. 

2. Parry tYPe standard: The sponsor must invite all 

dates for the same office nominated by all parties 

a given type of party (major, minor or new). 

3. Single party standard: The sponsor may restr

debate to candidates seeking nomination of one 

in a specified region. If this option is chosen, the s

must irivite candidates seeking the nomination b

of the other parties within the type of party 

minor and new) to a similarly restricted debat

example, if the sponsor holds a debate for all the 

lican candidates for a· specific Senate seat, the s

would have to invite all Democratic candidates 

same Senate seat to participate in a similarly res

debate. This option is available only when each p

the same. type has at least two candidates seeking 

nation to the same office. 

The proposed regulations were published, in their en

in the Federal Register.on.July 5, 1979. In accordanc

the Act, the proposed regulations will become ef

unless the House or Senate disapproves them within 

legislative days of their submission. 

COMMISSIONER HARRIS 

RECONFIRMED 

On June 19, 1979, the Senate reconfirmed C

sioner Thomas E. Harris for a six-year term on the F

Election Commission. Mr. Harris, who served as C

sion Chairman from 1977 to 1978, was originally app

to the Commission in 1975. When the F EC was re

tuted in 1976, he received a three-year appointment. 

Before serving on the Commission, Mr. Harris was As

General Counsel to the AFL-CIO in Washington, D.C

1955 to 1975. He had held that same position with th

from 1948 until it merged with the AFL in 1955. P

that, he was an attorney in private practice and with 
Government agencies, A native of Little Rock and a 1932 

graduate of the University of Arkansas, Mr. Harris is a 

1935 graduate of Columbia University Law School, where 

he was on the Law Review and was a Kent Scholar. After 

graduation, he clerked one year for Supreme Court Justice 

Harlan F. Stone. 

The following list identifies all FEC documents which 

appeared in the Fede;al Register between June 11, 1979, 

and July 5, 1979: 

Notice Title 

Federal Register 

Publication Date Citation 

1979·7 Index of Multicandidate Political Committees; Notice of Publication 

and Availability 

1979-8 Public Records and 

Freedom of Information 

Act; Correction 

1979-9 Funding and Sponsorship 

of Candidate Debates 

REPORTS REQUIRED 

UNDER ETHICS ACT 

June 12, 1979 44 FR 33797 

June 27. 1979 44 FR 37491 

July 5, 1979 44 FR 39348 

The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 requires all Presi· 

dential and Vice Presidential candidates to file personal 

financial disclosure reports with the Federal Election 

Commission. Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates 

must file the Ethics Act report with the Commission within 

thirty days after becoming a candidate under the Act, and 

on or before May 15 of each successive year in which the 

individual continues to be a candidate. William Oldaker, 

FEC General Counsel, has been designated "agency ethics 

official." As requested by the Office of Government Ethics, 

he will review all reports filed with the Commission by· 

Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates for apparent 

compl.iance with the Federal Election Campaign Act. 

Certain F EC personnel, as Federal employees, are also 

required to file reports under the Ethics Act. Financial 

disclosure statements filed by Presidential and Vice Presi· 

dential candidates, as well as those of FEC personnel, are 

available to the public in the Commission's Office of 

Public Records. House and Senate candidates must file 

financial disclosure reports with the Clerk of the House or 

the Secretary of the Senate, as appropriate. The Commis· 

sian will provide the Clerk and the Secretary with a peri· 

odic listing of House and Senate candidates. 

The appropriate forms are not available from the FEC, but 

may be obtained from: 

Office of Government Ethics 

1900 E Street, N.W. 

Room 5315 

Washington, D.C. 20415 

Telephone: 202/632·7642 

·For additional information, contact the Office of Govern· 

ment Ethics at the number listed above. 

PRIMARY ELECTION 

MATCHING FUNDS 

On June 14, 1979, the Commission adopted an Audit 

Division recommendation that the accounting firm of Ernst 

and Ernst be engaged, on a consultant basis, to refine the 

aggregation sampling techniques used to verify contribu· 

tions submitted by Presidential candidates for public 

matching funds. A cumulative sampling technique, devel· 

oped by Ernst and Ernst, may be used to check a cam· 

paign's aggregation of multiple contributions from the same 

contributor to ·ensure that no single individual's contribu· 

tions are matched in excess of $250. 

CONVENTION FINANCING 

CERTIFICATION 

PROCEDURES 

On June 28, 1979, the Commission adopted procedures 

for the certification of public funds for national party 

committee nominating conventions (Directive 23). To 

establish eligibility to receive public funds for their conventions, national committees must submit letters of agreement, as required under the Act. The Audit Division and 

the Office of General Counsel will review all letters of 

agreement for compliance with the Act and Commission 

Regulations before recommending certification. 

FEC APPROVES 

FIRST CERTIFICATION 

In another action on June 28, 1979, the Commission 

certified the first payment of public funds for the 1980 

Presidential election. After reviewing a request from the 

Republican National Committee, the Commission certified 

to the Secretary of the Treasury that the Committee was 

entitled to an initial payment of $750,000 for its national 

nominating convention. 

The RECORD is published by the Federal Election Commission, 1325 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463. Com, 

missioners are: Robert 0. Tiernan, Chairman; Max L. Friedersdorf, Vice Chairman; Joan D. Aikens; Thomas E. Harris; 

John W. McGarry; Vernon W. Thomson; J.S. Kimmitt, Secretary of the Senate, Ex Officio; Edmund L. Henshaw, Jr., 

Clerk of the House of Representatives, Ex Officio. For more information, call 202/523-4068 or toll-free 800/424·9530. 

2 
• 

ADVISORY OPINION REQUESTS 

The following chart lists Advisory Opinion Requests 

(AOR's), with a brief description of the subject matter, 

the date the requests were made public and the number of 

pages of each request. The full text of each AOR is avail· 

able to the public in the Commission's Office of Public 

Records. 

Date No. of 

AOR Subject Made Public Pages 

1979·33 Reimbursement from union 6/13/79 3 

local's treasury funds to 

union's separate segregated 

political fund. 

1979-34 Preelection public funding 6/21/79 

payments for new party 

Presidential candidate, 

1979-35 Allocation of proceeds of 6/21/79 2 

joint fundraising effort conducted by Democratic 

Senatorial Campaign Committee and Democratic Senate 

candidates. 

1979-36 Revolving account a'rrangeme.nt 6/26/79 6 

between committee and its 

direct mail fundraiser . 

1979-37 Donations to defray. Federal 7/6/79 2 

officeholders legal expenses. 

1979·38 Solicitation of administrative 7/9/79 

and executive personnel of 

corporation's licensees by 

corporation's separate segregated fund. 

ADVISORY OPINIONS: SUMMARIES 

Designated aS AO's, Advisory Opinions discuss the 

application of the Act or Commission Regulations to 

specific factual situations. Any qualified person requesting 

an Advisory Opinion who in good faith acts in accordance 

with the opinion will not be subject to any sanctions under 

the Act. The opinion may also be relied upon by any other 

person involved in a specific transaction which is indistinguishable in all material aspects from the activity discussed 

in the Advisory Opinion. Those seeking guidance for 

their own activity should consult the full text of an 

Advisory Opinion and not rely only on the summary given 

here. 

AO 1979-15: Solicitation in 

Trade Association's Magazine 

The Independent Insurance Agents of America, Inc. (IIAA) 

may not publish a solicitation for its separate segregated 

fund, the National Agents Political Action Committee 

(NAPAC), in IIAA's magazine. IIAA is a federation of trade 

associations comprised of individual and corporate members. Approximately 50.6 percent of the magazine's total 

circulation is to personnel of corporate members which 

have not given IIAA the prior solicitation approval required 

3 

by 1l CF R 114.8. Although IIAA proposed publis

with the solicitation, an explicit caveat stating that co

butions .from nonsolicitable persons would be screened 

returned, the plan is not permissible because: 

1. Circulation to nonsolicitable persons (56 percent) i

incidental. Of the nonsolicitable group, 5.5 pe

could never be solicited; the remaining 50.6 perce

not currently solicitable, but could be if their corp

agencies granted prior solicitation approval to I

2. IIAA's proposal indicates that if a contribution fro

individual in the presently nonsolicitable class 

received s-imultaneously with corporate solicit

approval, that contribution would not be returned. 

practice does not conform with Commission Regula

which require prior and not simultaneous approva

CFR 114.8). 

3. The proposed solicitation requests contributions 

the families of individual members of IIAA. While 

mission Regulations permit the solicitation of famili

personnel of corporate members who have given 

solicitation approval, families of individual (nonc

rate) members may not be solicited. 

Commissioners Joan D. Aikens and Max L. Frieder

filed a dissenting opinion. (Date Issued: July 16, 

Length, including the dissenting opinion: 8 pages) 

AO 1979-16: Temporary Fundraising 

Through Trust Arrangement 

A single political committee may temporarily solicit 

bers of both the National Association of Women's 

Children's Apparel Salesmen Guild (NAWCAS) and 

National Association of Men's and Boy's Apparel C

Inc. (NAMBAC) prior to the contemplated merger of 

two sponsoring corporations. Until the merger is- 

pleted, funds will be collected, segregated and held b

NAWCAS/NAMBAC Political Action Trust, whic

currently registered as a multicandidate political com

tee. The proposed arrangement is permissible since 

corporations could currently establish their own sep

segregated funds, and then consolidate both funds 

completion of the merger. 

Approval of the arrangement is conditioned on the cor

tions' com pi iance with the following procedures 

restrictions, which they have proposed: 

1. Each corporation will solicit its own indivJdual mem

pay its own administrative and fundraising expense

fully segregate all collected funds until the mer

completed; at that time, the two funds will be m

into a single Tnulticandidate committee. 

2. Prior to completion of the merger, the Trust will n

the collected funds to contribute to any candida

campaign, or to make any other contributions o

penditures as defined by the Act. 

The Commission emphasized that the Trust, as a curr

registered political committee, is subject to all provisio

the Act. (Date Issued: June 14, 1979; Length: 3 pages
AO 1979·17: Sponsorship of 

Credit Card Program 

The Republican National Committee (the RNC) may not 

accept funds or services from national or State chartered 

banks in return for the RNC's endorsement of the, banks' 

credit card programs (except in specifically permissible 

circumstances described at the end of this opinion). Under 

the 3 options suggested by the RNC, bank funds would be 

considered prohibited contributions - not as the RNC 

suggests. a commercial exch~nge between th~ RNC and the 

banks. 

Under an "affinity group" plan proposed by the RNC, the 

banks would solicit the RNC's membership, using RNC 

membership lists, and a letter signed by the Chairman of, 

the RNC. The banks would expect to increase their card 

holders; in return, the RNC would be compensated under 

one of the following options: 

Option A: The RNC would receive no direct compensation, 

but periodically it would have the exclusive right to include 

RNC educational/promotional materials with regular 

monthly statements s,ent to Republican sponsored card 

holders by the bank. 

Option 8: The RNC would receive a direct payment of 

$2.50 for each card issued as a result of the RNC solicita· 

tion letter, and would have periodic use of the monthly 

statement described above. 

Option C: The RNC would receive direct payment, on a 

monthly basis, of a percentage of the total sales volume, or 

a percentage of the finance charge balance on Republican 

·credit .card accounts; it would also have. periodic use of 

monthly statements. 

There is no explicit exception under 2 U.S.C. §441 b which 

would permit a political party to view payments from 

a corporation or national bank (not made as loans in the 

ordinary course of business) as consideration for services 

rendered, rather than as political contributions. Therefore, 

such payments or valuable services (e.g., use of the monthly 

statement to mail RNC political materials without charge) 

would constitute contributions. National banks are pro· 

hibited from making contributions or expenditures , in 

connection with any election (11 CFR 114.2(a)), while 

State banks (chartered as corporations under State law) are 

prohibited from maki.ng any contributions or expendi~ures 

in connection with Federalelections (11 CFR 114.2(b)). 

Since the contributions (payments and services) would be 

made by prohibited sources, the plan as proposed by the 

RNC would not be permissible. 

The RNC may, however, receive bank funds under options 

A, B or C, if they are separately accounted for and deposit· 

ed in separate bank accounts maintained exclusively for the 

activities described below: 

1. The R NC may accept funds from national banks and 

corporations for the construction or purchase of an 

office facility not acquired to influence a Federal 

election. Although such funds are considered receipts 

rather than contributions, they must be reported. 

2 U.S.C. §431(e)(5)(H). 

4 

,2. The RNC could accept funds from incorporated-State 

banks if the funds were deposited in separate segregated 

bank accounts and used exclusively in connection with 

non-Federal elections. Contributions from national 

banks would not be permissible, since that prohibition 

extends to non-Federal as well as Federal elections. 

Similarly, Option A, which does not include a direct 

payment, is nevertheless impermissible for national 

banks, although incorporated State banks may mail RNC 

materials pertaining exclusively to non·Federal elections. 

Under the Act, national banks may not do so even if the 

mailings are limited to non-Federal elections. 

The Commission expressed no opinion as to the applicabil· 

ity of the Internal Revenue Code or State law to the pro· 

posed plan. commissioners Joan D. Aikens and Max L 

Friedersdorf filed a dissenting opinion. (Date Issued: Jul; 

16, 1979; Length, including the dissenting opinion: 14 

pages) 

AO 1979-22: Legal Services Provided 

to Presidential Candidate Cl>mmittee 

Certain legal services provided to the Carter/Mondale Presi· 

dential Committee (the Committee) by Timothy G. Smith 

do not count as either contributions or expenditures as long 

as the Committee follows certain conditions, as indicated 

below. According to a letter of understanding between the 

Committee and Mr. Smith's regular employer, Rogers and 

Wells (the Firm), Mr. Smith receives one·third of his com· 

pensation from the Firm; the Committee pays the rest of 

his compensation for services he renders involving "primarily FECA compliance and campaign public financing mat· 

ters;'" in addition to "some other legal and political duties." 

1. Compliance with the Act: Committee payments for legal 

services which Mr. Smith provides solely to ensure the 

Committee's compliance with the Act are exempt from 

the definitions of "contribution and expenditure." 2 

U.S.C. § §431(e)(4) and (f)(4)(J). Hence, they are not 

subject to the Cl>mmittee's overall expenditure limita· 

tions. Nevertheless, all such payments to Mr. Smith and 

his support staff for these services must be reported. 

2. Other Legal Services: With regard to Committee pay· 

ments far other le,gal and political duties performed by 

Mr. Smith an behalf of the Committee, the compensa· 

tion schedule established by Smith and the Firm pre· 

eludes the Firm from making an in-kind contribution to 

the Committee. However, the Cl>mmittee must periodi· 

cally reevaluate the schedule to ensure that it continues 

to accurately reflect the relative amounts of time Mr. 

Smith devotes to the Firm and the Committee. Commit· 

tee payments for any "other legal and political duties" 

which are not rendered for compliance purposes are 

reportable expenditures under the Act and are subject to 

the Committee's overall expenditure limitations. 

3. Reimbursement Schedule: Expenses which are incurred 

by the Firm as a result of Mr. Smith's work on behalf of 

the Committee (e.g., occasional use of telephone, 

support staff and other Firm resources) muSt;'be reim· 

bursed by the committee in accordance with a predetermined schedule which reflects the actual cost of the 

goods and services provided. Amounts paid by the 
• 

Committee to the Firm for such reimbursement would 

be reportable expenditures subject to the Committee's 

overall expenditure limitations. However, if use of Firm 

resources was incident to legal and accounting services to 

assure compliance with the Act, reimbursements would 

be reportable but not subject to expenditure limitations. 

(Date Issued: June 19, 1979; Length: 6 pages) 

AO 1979·23: Reporting Debt 

Payments 

The Neil Wallace for Congress Committee (the Committee) 

must report its payment to extinguish a Committee debt on 

both Schedule C (as retirement of the debt) and Schedule B 

(as an expenditure), of FEC Form 3. Tlie Act requires 

continuous reporting of all debts and obligations until they 

are extinguished. 2 U.S.C. §434(b)(12). (Date Issued: June 

7, 1979; Length: 2 pages) 

AO 1979-25: Payment of 

Intern Expenses 

The Wisconsin Education Association Council (the Council) 

may pay the expenses of teacher interns working in the 

mobile district office of Congressman Les Aspin. The 

teacher interns will not participate in any political activity 

connected with Congressman Aspin's reelection. They will, 

however, assist constituents who visit his office and otherwise support his activities as a Federal officeholder. Therefore, since the nature of the interns' work is constituent 

service rather than political electioneering, Council payment of intern expenses would not constitute "contribu~ 

tions" under the Act. 

Council payments would, however, constitute "funds 

donated" to support the activities of a Federal office· 

holder. Such funds must be disclosed on a special report as 

receipts (from the Council) and corresponding disburse· 

ments (to the interns). 1.1 CF R 113.4. 

The Commission expressed no opinion on the possible 

application of House Rules to this situation. (Date Issued: 

June 19, 1979; Length: 3 pages) 

AO 1979-26: "Testing-the-Waters" 

Congressman Charles Grassley is not considered a candidate 

with reporting obligations under the Act, provided that all 

funds raised and spent by his Exploratory Committee (the 

Committee) are used exclusively for "testing-the-waters." 

The sole function of the Committee, which is registered 

with the Commission, is to determine the feasibility of 

Mr. Grassley's candidacy for the Senate from the State of 

Iowa. Under the Act, funds used solely to determine 

political support for a potential candidacy are not consi· 

dered contributions or expenditures, unless the individual 

subsequently becomes a candidate. 11 CFR 100.4(b)(1) 

and 100.7(b)(2). The Committee's activity, therefore, does 

not trigger 1980 Senate candidate status or the registration 

and reporting requirements of the Act. Consequently,· 

Congressman Grassley need not file a F EC Form 2 as a 

1980 Seriate candidate, and the Committee may terminate 

its registration with the Commission if its activities are 

limited to "testing-the-waters" for a possible 1980 Senate 

candidacy. (Date Issued: June 18, 1979; Length: 3 pages) 

5 

AO 1979·27: Administrative Expenses of 

Separate Segregated Fund 

The Associated Milk Producers, Inc. (AMPI), a corpo

tion without capital stock, may use general treasury fun

to pay the administrative expenses of its separate segrega

fund, the Committee for Thorough Agricultural Educat

(C-TAPE). 2 U.S.C. §441b(b)(2)(C). (Date Issued: June 

1979; Length : 2 pages) 

ADVISORY OPINION 

REQUESTS WITHDRAWN 

Since May 1979, the following Advisory Opinion 

quests were withdrawn by their requesters: 

·· AO 1978-71 

•· AO 1979·4 

·· AO 1979·20 

SUMMARY OF MUR'S 

In June, the Record began to summarize the files 

selected compliance cases which have been closed and 

on the public record. Compliance matters stem fr

possible violations of the Act, which come to the Comm

sion's attention either through formal complaints origin

ing outside the Commission or by the FEC's own monit

ing procedures. The Federal Election Campaign Act 

1971, as amended (the Act) gives the FEC exclusive 

mary jurisdiction for the civil enforcement of the A

Potential violations are assigned case numbers by 

Office of General Counsel and become "Matters Un

Review" (MUR's). All MUR investigations are kept co

dential by the Commission, as required by the Act. 

MU R's may be closed at any one of several points dur

the enforcement process, including when the Commissi

Determines that no violation of the Act has occurred; 

Determines that there is no reason to believe, no reas

able cause to believe or no probable cause to believ

violation of the Act has occurred; 

- Enters into a conciliation agreement with the respo

ent; 

- Finds probable cause to believe a violation has occur

and decides to file suit; or 

Decides at any point during the enforcement proces

take no further action. 

After the MU R is closed and released by the Office 

General Counsel, the Commission makes the MUR 

available to the public. This file contains the complaint, 

findings of the General Counsel's Office and the Comm 

sian's actions with regard to the case, including the full t

of any conciliation agreement. The Commission's acti

are not necessarily based on, or in agreement with, 

General Counsel's analysis. continu
Selection of MUR's for summary will be made only from 

MUR's closed after January 1, 1979. The Record article 

will not summarize every stage in the compliance process. 

Rather, the summary will provide only enough background 

to make clear the Commission's final determination. The 

full text of these MUR's and those which were closed 

between 1976 and 1978 are available for review and purchase in the Commission's Public Records Office. 

MUR 503: Disclosure 

Violations 

On November 21, 1978, the Commission entered into a 

conciliation agreement .with .a multicandidate committee 

which had been in violation of 2 U.S.C. §434(a), §434(b) 

(9) and (13) and 2 U.S.C. §434(b)(2). 

Complaint: During an audit of the Committee, the Audit 

Division discovered that: · 

1. The Committee had failed to identify as independent 

expenditures almost $40,000 in expenditures made on 

behalf of a Federal candidate during the 1976 campaign, 

a violation of §434(b)(9) and (13). (On September 9, 

1977, the Committee filed the required Schedule E's 

reflecting the independent nature of the expenditures 

and the identity of the candidate on whose behalf 

they were made.) 

2. The Committee had failed to make reasonable best 

efforts to report the occupations and principal places 

of business of 53.5 percent of its itemizable contributors, a violation of §434(b)(2). 

General Counsel Reports: Upon notification that the Commission had found reason to believe the Committee was in 

violation of the Act, the Treasurer of the Committee 

assured the Commission, on three separate occasions, that 

the required information on contributors was being collected. The missing information was not provided. Furthermore, the Committee had been cited for nonfiler violations 

because it had failed to file five consecutive monthly 

reports and a year-end report in a timely fashion, a violation of §434(a). Therefore, the General Counsel recommended that the.Commission merge the nonfjler violations 

with the violations in this MU R, and find reasonable cause 

to believe the Committee was in violation of the Act. 

Commission Determinations: On November 21, 1978, the 

Commission and the Committee entered into a conciliation 

agreement which included the nonfiler violations. In accordance with the terms of the agreement, the Committee 

CHANGE OF ADDRESS 

filed all m1ssmg monthly reports, submitted an amende

report concerning the occupations and places of business o

contributors and paid a civil penalty. The MU R file wa

closed on J~nuary 5, 1979. 

MUR 891·: Contributions by 

National Banks 

On April 4, 1979, the Commission entered in.to a concilia

tion agreement with a national bank which had been 

violation of 2 U.S.C. §441b(a). 

Complaint: This investigation began after the Comptrolle

· of the Currency -informed the Commission that a nationa

bank examiner had discovered a number of apparent viola

tions of the Act during a recent bank examination. Th

ensuing Commission investigation revealed that the nation

bank had made payments totaling $415 to five local pol

tical organizations and ·candidates' committees for ticket

to political dinners. The Act prohibits national banks from 

making contributions or expenditures in connection wit

any election to any political office (§441b(a)). Since pay

ments to political organizations and committees are includ

ed in the definition of "contribution or expenditure/' th

bank's purchase o.f the tickets constituted a violatiOn o

§441b(a). Upon notification that the Commission ha

found reason to believe it was in violation of the Act, th

bank admitted that the violations had occurred, but denie

it had knowingly and willfully violated the Act. At th

Commission's suggestion, the bank tried to obtain refund

of the illegal contributions. Two of the five recipient com

mittees were defunct; the other three claimed insufficien

funds to provide the bank with the requested refunds. 

General Counsel Reports: The General Counsel recom

mended that the Commissiof'! find reasonable cause t

believe that the bank had violated the Act, and assess a civ

penalty as part of the conciliation agreement. With regar

to the recipient committees, the General Counsel pointe

out that the illegal contributions had been made more tha

a year before the Commission investigation, and had bee

distributed among the five groups in amounts ranging from 

$40 to $200. Therefore, rather than pursuing them, th

General Counsel recommended that they be notified tha

any committee's acceptance of a contribution from 

national bank constitutes a violation of the Act. 

Commission Determination: On March 7, 1979, the Com

mission found reasonable cause to believe the bank ha

violated the Act. On April 4, 1979, the Commission and th

Record subscribers, 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. 

NOTE: Registered candidates and committees are automatically sent the Record and do not have this subscription 

number on their mailing labels. Any change of address by a registered entity must, by law, be made in writing as an· 

amendment to FEC Form 1 {Statement of Organization for a Political Committee) or FEC Form 2 {Statement of 

Candidate), and be placed on the public record. 

6 
• 

bank entered into a conciliation agreement which provided 

that the bank would pay a civil penalty. The officers of the 

recipient committees were notified that the Act prohibits 

national banks from making political contributions in any 

election, and prohibits candidates and political committees 

from accepting such contributions. 

FEC PUBLISHES NAMES 

OF NON FILERS 

On June 12, ·1979, the FEC published the names of 409 

nonfilers who failed to file the required April 10 quarterly 

campaign finance report. Nonfilers included Federal candi· 

dates, their principal. campaign committees and other 

political committees from 46 States, the District of Colum· 

bia and the Virgin Islands. Exemptions from filing quarterly 

reports are granted only if the candidate or political com· 

mittee notifies the Commission on FEC Form 3a (postcard) 

or by letter that it hBs not exceeded the quarterly reporting 

threshold. (For a discussion of reporting thresholds, see the 

Record, July 1979, p. i.) .Quarterly reports or a3a postcard 

are also required of all candidates except those who have 

received a personal reporting waiver. 

FEC v. SERVICE STATION DEALERS PAC 

AND THOMAS ANDERSON 

On May 7, 1979, the Commission and the Service 

Station Dealers PAC agreed to a consent judgment issued 

by the U.S. District Court tor the Eastern District of 

Pennsylvania. The Commission had filed suit on September 

22, 1978, alleging that the defendant had violated the Act 

by: 

Not maintaining a detailed and exact account of the 

committee's contributions and expenditures, as required 

by 2 u.s. c. §432; 

Not filing a Statement of Organization, as required by 2 

u.s.c. §433; 

Not filing periodic disclosure reports for three years and 

not disclosing the information required on those reports, 

as required by 2 U.S.C. §434; 

Making excessive contributions to the Green for Senate 

Committee in violation of 2 U.S.C. §441 a; and 

Not reporting the original source and the intended recipient of the funds contributed to the Green for Senate 

Committee, as required by 2 U.S.C. §441a. 

The defendant assured the Court of its intention to comply 

with the Act in the future. The Court levied a civil penalty 

of $2,500 and retained jurisdiction over the case for three 

years to ensure compliance with the judgment. 

AUDITS RELEASED 

TO THE PUBLIC 

The Federal Election Campaign Act requires the C

mission to periodically conduct audits and field inv

gations with respect .to reports and statements filed un

the Act. The Commission is also required to cond

audits of all campaigns of Presidential candidates w

receive public funds. Once an audit is completed 

an audit report has been discussed in open session 

the Commission, the interim audit report is made a

able to the public through the Office of Public Rec

and the Press Office. An audit report becomes a f

report only after it has been approved by the Commiss

Upon approval, the final report replaces the interim re

as the final public document. In the list below, int

reports are designated by an asterisk (*). If no aste

appears, the report has been approved by the Commis

and is a final report. The following is a chronological li

of audits released between May 7, 1979, and July 5,19

7 

Audit Report 

1. Ohio Republican Finance Committee 

2. Ohio Democratic Party Federal 

Campaign Account 

3. Nevada Republican State Central 

Committee/Federal Account 

4. Kansas Democratic. State Committee 

5. Delaware Democratic Party 1976 

Statewide Voter Registration Task .Force 

6. Vermont State Democratic Federal 

Campaign Committee 

7. 1976 Democratic Presidential Campaign 

Committee 

B. Vermont Republican Federal Elections 

Committee 

9. Business· industry Political Action 

Committee 

10. AFL·CIO COPE PAC 

11. Udall '76 Committee 

12. Harris for President Committee 

13. Shriver for President Committee 

*14. Federal Campaign Committee of Nevada 

*Interim Report 

Date M

Availa

5/1

5/1

5/1

5/1

5/1

5/3

6

6/

6/

6/

6/

6/

6/

6/
INDEX TO 

MUL TICANDIDATE COMMITTEES 

On June 12, 1979, the Federal Election Commission 

published a notice in the Federal Register on the availability of. a comprehensive Index of Multicandidate Political 

Committees. A multicandidate committee is permitted to 

contribute up to $5,000 to each Federal candidate during 

an election. Contributions made by any political committee 

affiliated with a multicandidate committee count against 

that multicandidate committee's $5,000 limit. To qualify as 

a multicandidate committee, under the Act, a political 

committee must be registered for at least six. months, have 

received contributions from more than 50 persOns and, 

except in the case of State party organizations, have made 

contributions to five or more candidates for Federal office. 

The Index, which includes the date upon which a committee qualified as a multicandidate committee, may be used 

to verify a contributing committee's status as a multicandidate committee qualified to make contributions up to 

$5,000. 

Copies of the Index are available for $5 per copy in advance 

by writing to the Office of Public Records at the Commission, or by calling 202/523-4181 or toll-free 800/424-9530. 

NOTE: Any information copied from reports or statements may not be sold or utilized by any person 

for the purpose of soliciting contributions or for 

any other commercial purpose. 2 U.S.C. 

§438(a)(4). 

CLEARINGHOUSE 

DIRECTORY OF ELECTION 

OFFICIALS AVAILABLE 

The Clearinghouse recently announced that an updated 

directory of election officials has been published and is 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

1325 K STREET, NW 

WASHINGTON, DC 20463 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

available for purchase. The Election Directory '79 consi

of two parts: Part I lists each State's election offices a

functions, and election officials and their duties; Part 

identifies all election personnel for both the Federal a

State levels of government, as well as contacts at the Bure

of Census and Department of Justice. The Clearinghou

revises and updates the Directory annually. Any correctio

or suggestions should be addressed to the Clearinghouse 

the FEC. Call 202/523-4183 or toll-free 800/424-9530. 

purchase copies of the Directory, send a check or mon

order for $4.75 payable to: 

Superintendent of Documents 

Stock Number 052-006-00002-3 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 

FEC PUBLIC APPEARANCES 

In keeping with the objective of making information available to the public, the Federal Election 

Commission regularly accepts invitations for its 

representatives to address public gatherings on the 

subject of campaign finance laws and the Commission 

itself. This regular column lists scheduled Commission appearances, detailing the name of the sponsoring organization, the location of the event and the 

Commission's representative. 

8/19-21 Clearinghouse Regional Seminar 

8/20 

Far West Regional Workshop 

Conference on Election Administration 

Woodlake Inn 

Sacramento, California 

Gary Greenhalgh, Director, 

National Clearinghouse 

FEC Campaign Finance Seminar 

Workshops: Reporting Requirements 

Separate Segregated Funds 

State Capitol 

Sacramento, California 

F EC Commissioners and Staff 

we T 3 

FIRST CLASS MAIL 

POSTAGE & FEES PAID 

FEC 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

PERMIT NO. G·31