FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
 

• 

June1983 1325 K Street NW Washington DC 20463 Volume 9, Number6 

SPECIAL ELECTIONS IN CALIFORNIA 

AND ILLINOIS 

Beginning in June, special elections win be 

held in two states to fill vacant House seats. On 

June 21, California will hold a special election in 

its 5th Congressional District to fill the seat 

vacated by the death of Representative Phillip 

Burton. If no candidate obtains a majority of the 

votes, a special runoff election will be held on 

August 16. On July 26, Illinois will hold a special 

primary election in its 1st Congressional District 

to nominate candidates for the seat formerly held 

by Representative Harold Washington. A speeial 

general election will be held on August 23, 1983. 

The principal campaign committees of candidates 

participating in these special elections must file 

the appropriate pre- and post-election reports. 

Since the financial activity covered by these 

reports overlaps with the aetivity covered by the 

July semiannual report, the July semiannual reporting schedule has been modified as follows: 

California Special Elections: Semiannual Report 

If only one special election is held, the committees of candidates participating in the special 

election do not have to file a July semiannual 

report provided they file a post-special election 

report by July 21, 1983. The post-special election 

report must cover all financial activity since the 

pre-election report through July II. 

If both a special election and a runoff election are 

ttetdr 

Committees of candidates participating in 

the runoff election are not required to file a 

post-special election report. Instead, they 

must file a pre-runoff report, due by August 

4, 1983. Filed in lieu of the July semiannual 

report, the pre-runoff report must cover all 

financial activity since the pre-special election report through July 27. A post-runoff 

report must also be filed by September 15, 

which covers activity since the pre-runoff 

report through September 5. 

Committees of candidates not participating 

in the runoff election must file a sem iannual 

report by JUly 31, 1983, which covers activity 

since the pre-special election report through 

June 30, 1983. These committees are no

required to file a post-special election re

port. 

Illinois Special Elections: Semiannual Report 

Instead of filing a separate semiannual repor

by JUly 31, committees involved in the Illinoi

special elections may file a report by July 14

1983, which combines activity covered by both 

the July semiannual report and the pre-primary 

report. The combined report must include activ

ity from January I, 1983, or the date of registra

tion, whichever is later, through July 6, 1983. 

All other political committees which support can

didates in these special elections (and which do 

not report on a monthly basis) must also follow 

the appropriate reporting schedules. 

This article does not cover all filing dates appli

cable to these special elections. The FEC wil

send specific notices on reporting requirement

and filing dates to individuals known to be active

ly pursuing election to these House seats. Al

other committees supporting candidates in the 

special elections should contact the Commission 

for more information on required reports. Cal

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

FEC PRESCRIBES REGULATIONS 

ON NOTICES FOR POLmCAL ADS 

AND SOLICITATIONS 

On May 13, 1983, the Commission prescribed 

revised regulations governing the use of dis

claimer notices on political advertisements and 

solicitations. The revised regulations modify th

requirements for public political advertising 

which expressly advocates the election or defea

of a clearly identified federal candidate or which 

solicits contributions to influence federal elec

tions. II CFR Ll tl.Llfa), A copy of the new 

regulations is available, upon request, from the 

Public Communications Office. Call 202/523-4068 

or, toll free, 800/424-9530. 

continue
-----

June1983 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 9,Numbe

STATUS OF FEC REGULATIONS 

Regulations' 

11 CFR 100.1(a)(I)(i)(C), 

100.1(b)(I n, 100.8(b)(12), 

IIO.IO(b) and 9003.2(c)(3) 

Candidate's Use of Property 

in Which Spouse Has an Interest 

11 CFR 110.11 

.Disclaimer Notices 

11 CFR IIO.12(a)(2) - (a)(4) 

Annual Honoraria Limit 

11 CFR 114.3 and 114.4 

Communications by 

Corporations and 

Labor Organizations 

11 CFR 106 and 9031 - 9039 

Presidential Primary 

Matching Fund 

Date Sent 

to Congress 

4/21/83 

2/25/83 

NA 

3/1/&3 

(withdrawn to 

obtain further 

public comment, 

4/22/83) 

1/24/83 

Federal Register 

Publication 

4/21/83 

48 Fed. Reg. 19019 

3/2/83 

48 Fed. Reg. &&09 

4/&/&2 

41 Fed. Reg. 1509& 

3/4/&3 

48 Fed. Reg. 9236; 

4/22/83 . 

48 Fed. Reg. 11561 

2/4/83 

4& Fed. Reg. 5224 

'The chart is cumulative, listing all amendments to the FEC Regulations proposed after the 

1981 edition of 11 CFR was published, including any technical amendments. 

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

them to Congress, provided neither the House nor the Senate disapproves them during this period. 

FEC WlTHDRAWS REGS ON 

CORPORATE/LABOR COMMUNICATIONS; 

SEEKS ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 

To permit further public comment on regulations governing corporate/labor communications, 

the Commission has decided to withdraw from 

Congressional consideration proposed changes to 

11 CFR Part 114. The Commission had transmitted the proposed revisions to Congress on 

V1arch 1, 1983.' Following this second com rnent 

period, the Com mission may resubmit revised 

regulations (Part 114) to Congress. 

In particular, the Commission seeks additional 

comments on revisions which would expand the 

'The full text of proposed changes to II CFR 

114.3, 114.4, 114.5, 114.7 and 114.8 were published in the Federal Register on March 4, 1983 

(48 Fed. Reg. 9236). A summary of the proposed 

changes appeared in the April 1983 Record. 

Date Prescribed" 

by the Commission 

5/13/83 

4/&1&2 

4/4/&3 

definition of "restricted class," as it pertains t

incorporated membership organizations and labo

organizations. Under the suggested revisions: 

An incorporated membership organization, 

trade association, cooperative or a corpor

tion without stock could address partisa

com munications to, and solicit contribution

for its separate segregated fund from, fam

ilies of its members, in addition to its mem

bers. 

A labor organization could make partisa

communications to, and solicit contribution

for its separate segregated fund from, i

executive and administrative personnel, a

well as its members and their families. 

Com ments or questions on these proposed rev

sions should be submitted to Ms. Susan E. Proppe

Assistant General Counsel, by May 23, 1983. M

Propper may be contacted at 202/523-4143 or b

writing to the Commission at 1325 K Stree

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463. 

2 
June 1983	 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 9, Numl::.er

• 

RULES SENT TO CONGRESS	 a legal right of access to or control over th

ON CANDIDATE'S USE OF PROPERTY	 funds. A third category of personal funds includ

IN WHICHSPOUSE HAS AN INTEREST	 income the candidate has earned from emplo

On April 22, 1983, the Commission trans­ ment. Moreover, since the term "equitable inte

mitted to Congress proposed rules governing a est" is commonly used in property law to defin

candidate's use of property jointly owned with a 

spouse or property in which the spouse has some 

other legal interest. These regulations will be 

prescribed 30 legislative days after their transmittal to Congress, provided neither the House 

nor the Senate disapproves them. The proposed 

rules address the following circumstances involving joint ownership of financial assets by a 

candidate and his/her spouse: 

Loans Requiring Spouse's Signature 

Current regulations view all loan endorsers 

and guarantors as contributors to the campaign. 

Thus, if a candidate's spouse is required to cosign 

a loan, he or she becomes a contributor to the 

campaign. Under the suggested revisions, a spouse 

who eosigns a loan would not be considered a 

contributor if the candidate's share of the assets 

used as collateral equaled or exceeded the amount 

of the loan used for the campaign. For example, 

Sam Jones obtains a $5,000 bank loan for his 

campaign by using, as collateral, property that is 

jointly owned with his wife..Jones and his wife 

• 

cosign the loan. If Jones' interest in the property 

is $5,000 or more, his wife would not be considered a contributor to the campaign. 

Candidate's Access to Jointly 

Owned Personal Assets 

Under the current regulations, a candloate 

may contribute an unlimited amount of "personal 

funds" to his or her campaign. Under the proposed 

rules, a candidate may also use, as personal funds, 

his or her portion of assets jointly owned with a 

spouse. In cases where the candidate's financial 

interest in jointly owned assets is not specified 

(e.g., a joint checking account or proceeds from 

the sale of jointly owned stock), the Commission 

will assume that the candidate's share of the 

assets is 50 percent of their total value. 

The proposed rules also clarify the definition of 

"personal funds," Under the new regulations, the 

term "personal funds" includes a) funds to which 

the candidate has legal title, and b) funds in which 

the candidate has an equitable interest. In both of 

these cases, as a prerequisite to claiming these 

assets as personal funds, the candidate must have 

an individual's interest in property to which he 

she does not have legal title, the proposed regul

tions use this term instead of "right of benefici

enjoyment," 

The proposed rules affect the followmg sectio

of Commission Regulations: II CFR 100.7(a)(I)

(C)-(E), 100.7(b)(II), 100.8(b)(l2), 110.10(b

1I0.10(b)(I), 110.IO(b)(3) and 9003.2(c)(3). The fu

text of the proposed rules was published in th

Federal Register on April 27, 1983 (48 Fed. Re

19019). Copies of the notice may be obtained 

writing the FEC's Public Communications Offic

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

by calling: 202/523-4068 or toll free 800/42

9530. 

ADVISORY OPINION REQUESTS 

The following chart lists recent requests f

advisory opinions (AORs). The full text of ea

AOR is available to the public in the Commi

sion's Office of Public Records. 

AOR	 SUbject 

1983-13	 Escrow account established by uni

PAC for testamentary bequest. (Da

made public: April 20, 1983; Length: 

pages, plus s-page supplement) 

1983-14	 Use of excess funds from 1982 Congre

sional campaign. (Date made publ

April 26, 1983; Length: I page) 

1983-15	 State public funds deposited in sta

par-ty's feder-al account. (Date ma

publics May 5, 1983; Length: 2 pages) 

continue

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. Foe more information, call 202/523-4068 or toll-free 800/424-9530.

3 
June 1983 FEDERAL ELECTIOI\J COMMISSION Volume 9, Number6 

ALTERNATE DISPOSITION Under the Primary Matching Fund Act, PresidenOF ADVISORY OPINION REQUEST tial primary candidates who seek eligibility for 

matching funds must certify that they have not 

AOR 1983-7 was withdrawn by its requester and will not spend more than $50,000 in personal 

on April 14, 1983. funds. II CFR 9035.2(a). This is true regardless of 

ADVISORY OPINIONS: SUMMARIES 

An Advisory Opinion (AO) issued by the Commission provides guidance with regard to the 

specific situation described in the AOR. Any 

qualified person who has requested an AO and 

acts in accordance with the opinion will not be 

subject to any sanctions under the Act. Other 

persons may rely on the opinion if they are 

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

discussed in the AO. Those seeking guidance for 

their own activity, however, should consult the 

full text of an AO and not rely only on the 

summary given here. 

AO 1983-8: Building Fund Established 

to Purchase Office Space 

for National Party Committee 

Thc National Republican Senatorial Committee 

(NR3C), a national committee of the Republican 

party, has established a fund (the building fund) to 

defray the costs of purchasing office space for 

NRSC. As long as NRSC uses donations to the 

building fund solely for this purpose, the funds are 

specifically exempt from the Act's definition of 

"contribution." 2 U.S.C. §431(8)(B)(viii). If NRSC 

uses donations to the building fund for any other 

purpose (i.e., to pay costs of administering the 

building property), these donations would not be 

exempt; they would be considered contributions 

made to defray NRSC's operating expenditures. 

As such, they would be subject to the limits and 

prohibitions of the Act. 

The Commission was unable to reach a decision by 

an affirmative vote of four Commissioners concerning the disclosure of donations to the building 

fund. (Date issued: May 3, 1983; Length: 3 pages) 

AO 1983-9: Primary Matching Fund Eligibility 

for Candidate Whose Personal Loan 

for Testing the Waters 

May Exceed $50,000 

Judge Charles E. Curry, who is testing the waters 

for a Presidential candidacy, may loan his exploratory committee more than $50,000 in personal 

funds and still be eligible for primary matching 

funds if he later becomes a candidate. He may 

whether the candidate loans the funds or contributes them to his campaign. On the other hand, 

before becoming a candidate, an individual may 

lawfully make unlimited disbursements, using 

funds from any source, to test the waters for a 

potential candidacy. These payments are not considered "expenditures" subject to the Act's requirements. II CFR 100.8(b)(l). However, once an 

individual becomes a candidate, these disbursements (including those made from the candidate's 

personal loan) retroactively become campaign 

"expenditures" subject to the Act's limitations. 

Under these circumstances, Commission Regulations permit a campaign com mittee to achieve 

compliance with the Act by returning, within 10 

days after the individual becomes a candidate, 

any unlawful funds that the committee received 

during the testing-the-waters period. II CFR 

101.3. Therefore, if the exploratory committee 

returns that portion of the loan exceeding $50,000 

within 10 days, Judge Curry may become eligible 

for matching funds, assuming he is other-wise 

eligible. 

If his committee meets this requirement, Judge 

Curry should expressly state, in the certifications 

submitted to establish matching fund eligibility, 

that he had at one time exceeded the $50,000 

spending limit. He should also explain the details 

of his committee's reimbursement of his personal 

loan. (Date issued: May 3, 1983; Length: 4 pages) 

MONDALE, CRANSTON ELIGIBLE 

FOR PRIMARY MATCHING FUNDS 

On April 14, 1983, the Commission determined that Democratic Presidential candidates 

Walter F. Mondale and Alan Cranston were eligible to receive federal matching funds for their 

1984 primary campaigns. Under the election law, 

Presidential candidates may begin seeking eligibility for primary matching funds after January I, 

1983. However, the U.S. Treasury may not make 

actual payments before January I, 1984. The 

maximum amount of matching funds an eligible 

candidate may receive during 1984 is equal to half 

establish eligibility provided that, within 10 days the overall spending limit established by law for 

after he becomes a candidate, his campaign com­ each publicly funded Presidential primary candimittee repays that portion of the loan which date ($10 million, plus a cost-of-living adjustexceeds $50,000. ment). 

4
 
June 1983	 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 9, Number 6 

• 

The Commission's determination followed a 

thorough review by the Audit Division of the 

threshold submissions made by the two candidates 

during January 1983. To establish eligibility for 

matching	 funds, a Presidential primary candidate 

must raise in excess of $5,000 from individuals in 

each. of at least 20 different states. Although 

individual contributors may give up to $1,000 to 

the candidate, only $250 may be matched with 

public funds. As a prerequisite to being elizible 

for primary matching funds, the candidate :;'ust 

agree to comply with the election law and Commission Regulations. 

FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES 

The items below identify FEC documents 

that appeared in the Federal Register during April 

and VIay 1983. Copies of these notices are available in the Public Records Office. 

Notice	 Title 

• 

1983-10 II CFR 114.3 and 114.4: Nonpartisan 

Communications by Corporations and 

Labor Organizations; Withdrawal of 

Regulations From Congress (48 Fed. 

Reg. 17566, April 22,1983) -­

1983-11	 II CFR 114.3 and 114.4: Nonpartisan 

Communications by Corporations and 

Labor Organizations; Second Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (48 Fed. Reg. 

17567, April 22,1983) -­

1983-12	 II CFR 100.7(a)(J)(i)(C), 100.7(b)(JI), 

I 00.8(b)(J 2), II 0.1O(b) and 9003.2(c)(3): 

Candidate's Use of Property in Which 

Spouse Has an Interest; Final Rule, 

Transmittal of Regulations to Congress 

(48 Fed. Reg. 19019, April 27,1983) 

1983-13	 Filing Dates for California Special 

Election (48 Fed. Reg. 20136, 'VIay 4, 

1983) 

1983-14	 Disclaimer Notices: Final Rule, Announcement of Effective Date (48 Fed. 

Reg. 21553, May 13, 1983) -­

1983-15	 Filing Dates for Illinois Special Election 

• 

(48 Fed. Reg. 22991, May 23, 1983) 

5 

PAC CONTRIBUTIONS UP 51 PERCENT 

FOR 1982 RACES 

Contributions made by political action com

mittees (P ACs)* to 1982 Congressional campaign

totaled $83.1 million, a 50.5 percent increase ove

the $55.2 million contributed by PACs to 198

Congressional races. 

Information released by the FEC on April 29

1983, also showed a variation in PAC contributio

patterns between the two election cycles. Durin

1981-82, PACs increased the proportion of thei

contributions to Democr-atic candidates funning 

for Congress. Of the total amount PACs contrib

uted to 1982 Congressional races 0.e' 7 primar

and general election races), 54.3 percent (or $45.1 

million) went to Democratic candidates, while 

45.7 percent (or $38 million) went to Republica

candidates. By contrast, Democratic candidates i

1980 Congressional races received 52.3 percen

(or $28.9 million) of total PAC contributions 

while Republicans received 47.5 percent (or $26.2 

million). 

During the current election cycle, PAC contribu

tions made to incumbents, rather than challeng

ers, increased by an even wider margin. Durin

the 1981-82 election cycle, incumbents cam

paigning for reelection in 1982 received 65.9 per

cent of all PAC contributions made to Congres

sional candidates (or $54.8 million), While chal

lengers received 19.3 percent (or $16 million). Th

remaining 14.8 percent (or $12.3 million) went t

open-seat races. By contrast, during the 1979-8

election cycle, Congressional candidates wh

were incumbents received 60.7 percent of PAC 

money (or $33.5 million), while challengers re

ceived 26.3 percent (or $14.5 million). The re

maining 13 percent (or $7.2 million) went t

open-seat races. 

Total funds raised and spent by PACs also varie

between the two election cycles. PACs raised 

total of $199.3 million during 1981-82. During th

1979-80 electron cycle, which included a Presi

dential election as well as Congressional races 

they raised $137.7 million. During the 1981-8

cycle, PACs made disbursements totaling $190.

continued 

*PAC is a popular term used to define 

political committee that has not been authorize

by a candidate or political party. The term in

cludes separate segregated funds sponsored b

corporations and labor organizations, as well a

poli~ica! committees without any sponsoring or

gamzatwn. 
June 1983 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 9, Numoor

million, ending the period with a cash-on-hand 

balance of $31.4 million. They had outstanding 

debts totaling $5.1 million. PACs spent a total of 

$131.1 million during the 1979-80 election cycle, 

with a remaining cash balance of $22 million. 

Outstanding debts totaled $2.3 million. 

Charts I and IT list those PACs which have raised 

the most money and made the most contributions 

to federal candidates during the 1981-82 election 

cycle. Chart III summarizes total financial activity of PACs during the period. 

More detailed information may be obtained from 

the four-volume interim study, FEC Reports on 

Financial Activity, 1981-82, Interim Report No. 

4: Party and Non-Party Political Committees. 

The study may be purchased ($5.00 per volume) 

from the FEC's Public Records Office, 1325 K 

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463. Checks 

should be made payable to the FEC. 

CHART I 

TOP 10 PAC MONEY RAISERS 

AmOlmtRaised 

Political Action Committee 1/81 - 12/82 

National Conservative Political 

Action Committee 

National Congressional Club 

Realtors Political Action Committee 

(National Association of Realtors)" 

Fund for a Conservative Majority 

American Medical Association 

Political Action Committee (AMA) 

National Committee for an 

Effective Congress 

Citizens for the Republic 

Committee for the Survival of a 

Free Congress 

Fund for a Democratic Majority 

Committee for the Future of America, 

Inc. 

$9,990,931 

9,742,494 

2,991,732 

2,945,874 

2,466,425 

2,430,886 

2,415,720 

2,359,477 

2,307,605 

2,190,264 

*The connected organizations (i.e., sponsors) 

of separate segregated frmds are indicated in 

parentheses. 

CHARTD 

TOP 10 PAC CONTRIBUTORS TO 

ALL PEDERAL CANDIDATES* 

Amount Contribute

Political Action Committee 1/81 - 12/8

Realtors Political Action Committee $2,115,13

(National Association of Realtors)» * 

American Medical Political Action 

Committee (AMA) 

UAW Voluntary Community Action 

Program (United Auto Workers) 

Machinists Non-Partisan Political 

League (International Association 

of Machinists & Aerospace Workers) 

National Education Association PAC 

(National Education Association) 

Build Political Action Committee 

(National Association of Home 

Builders) 

Committee for Thorough Agricultural 

Political Education (Associated 

Milk Producers, Inc.) 

American Bankers Association 

BANKPAC (American Bankers 

Association) 

Automobile and Truck Dealers Election 

Action Committee (Automobile Dealers 

Association) 

AFL-CIO COPE Political Contributions 

Committee (AFL-CIO) 

* Contribution figures do not include totals fo

independent expenditures for or against candi

dates. For example, the three political commit

tees making the largest independent expenditure

were the National Conservative Political Actio

Committee ($3,177,210), the Frmd for a Conserva

tive Majority ($390,170) and Citizens Organize

to Replace Kennedy ($349,199). See the May 198

Record, page 5. 

**The connected organizations (i.e., sponsors

of separate segregated frmds are indicated in 

parentheses. 

6 

1,737,09

1,623,94

1,444,95

1,183,21

1,005,62

962,45

947,46

917,295 

906,425 
June 1983 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 9,Numte

• CHART III 

FINANCIAL ACTIVITY OF PAGS, 1/1/81 - 12/31/82 

• Receipts· 

IE1I Disbursements" 

o Contributions·· 

[J Cash-on-Hand 

Labor Non-Con- Trade/Mem- Coopera- CorporaOrgani- nected bership/ tives tions 

zations Organi- Health Or- w/o 

zations ganizations Stock 

Total Number 1,555 415 928 668 50 III

of 

Committees·· • 

Number of 1,310 288 41l 520 45 77 

Committees 

Making 

Contributions 

.Receipts and disbursements do not include funds transferred between affiliated committees. 

• ·Includes contributions to committees of: 1982 House and Senate candidates; and all federal 

candidates (for House, Senate and Presidency) campaigning in future elections or retiring debts of 

former campaigns. 

• ••·Includes total number of PACs active in federal elections at any time between January I, 

1981, and December 31, 1982. Since some committees have terminated, this figure does not 

represent all committees active as of December 31, 1982. 

7
 
June 1983 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 9, Number 6 

CAMPAIGN RECEIPTSOF 1982 CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES 

RUNNING IN GENERAL ELECTIONS 

1/1/81 - 12/31/82 

Receipts 

...-+- Other Receipts-­ 

Winners PAC Contributions

200 

Incumbents 

Democrats 

....---, Republicans 150 

Losers
 

100
 

Challengers
 

Open Seat 

50 

Others 

-Includes receipts for primary and general election campaigns of general election candidates. 

- -Other campaign receipts include, for example, contributions from individuals, contributions 

from candidates to their own campaigns, contributions from other campaigns, transfers among 

authorized committees of the same candidate, loans, refunds, and interest income earned on 

investments. 

WINNERS LEAD IN FUND RAISING 

AND SPENDING FOR 1982 

CONGRESSIONAL RACES 

Campaigns waged by 471 successful candidates for U.S. Senate and House seats accounted 

for a significant portion of the total money raised 

and spent by all 1982 Congressional campaigns. 

The same successful candidates received 70 percent (or $58.2 million) of all political action 

committee (PAC) contributions. 

According to a study released by the FEC on May 

2, 1983, 33 candidates who won election to the 

Senate in 1982 raised a total of $71.3 million, of 

which 21.9 percent came from PACs, and spent 

$68.8 million to finance their primary and general 

election campaigns." By contrast, their opponents 

in the general election raised a total of $45.9 

million, of which 13.2 percent came from PACs, 

and spent $45.5 million. 

The 438 candidates who won House races raised a 

total of $124.4 million, more than a third of which 

*Figures for total receipts and disbursements 

are inflated because they include funds transferred between the authorized committees of the 

same candidate. 

came from PACs, and spent $115.9 million. By 

contrast, candidates opposing House winners in 

the general election raised a total of $60.7 million, 24.8 percent of which came from PACs, and 

spent $60 million. 

During the 1981-82 election cycle, total spending 

by Congressional campaigns (i.e., 283 Senate candidates and 1,956 House candidates) increased 

significantly. Congressional campaigns spent a 

total of $343.9 million, an increase of approximately 44 percent over total spending in 1980 

Congressional races and an almost 80 percent 

increase over 1978 spending. Campaign costs for 

House races alone have risen 50 percent since 

1980 and 86.7 percent since 1978. Spending on 

Senate cam paigns has increased 35.5 percent 

since 1980 and 63.6 percent since 1978. 

The chart above details receipts of 1982 Congressional candidates running in general elections. 

More detailed information may be obtained from 

FEC Reports on Financial Activity, 1981-82, Interim Report No.3: U.S. Senate and House Cam­

~. Copies of the study may be purchased for 

$5.00 from the FEC's Public Records Office, 1325 

should 

K Street, 

be made 

N.W., 

payable 

Washington, 

to the 

D.C. 20463. 

FEC. 

Checks 

8 
June 1983 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 9, Number6 

• 

The Public Communications Office frequently receives questions about partnerships: What 

special rules apply to contributions from partnerships? How does my committee report partnership 

contributions? Maya partnership establish a political committee? This article answers those questions and covers other aspects of participation by 

partnerships in federal elections. It is written 

both for partnerships and for committees that 

receive support from partnerships. 

PARTNERSHIPS 

Under the Federal Election Campaign Act 

and Commission Regulations, a partnership may 

participate in federal elections in three ways. 

First, depending on the status of the individual 

partners, a partnership may contribute directly to 

candidate committees and other political committees. Second, it may establish a political committee which makes contributions to influence elections. And third, it may provide certain free legal 

and accounting services to political committees. 

• 

L MAKE DIRECf CONTRIBUTIONS 

Contribution Limits 

Because a partnership is defined as a "personIf 

(II CFR 100.10), it may make contributions to 

influence federal elections, but its contributions 

are limited. A partnership may contribute up to 

$1,000 per election to a candidate for federal 

office and up to $5,000 annually to a political 

committee other than a candidate committee. 

Additionally, a contribution from a partnership 

counts proportionately against each contributing 

partner's personal limit. An individual partner, 

like a partnership, may contribute up to $1,000 

per candidate, per election, and up to $5,000 

annually to other political committees; an individual must also limit total federal contributions 

to $25,000 per year. II CFR llO.l(a), (c), and (e) 

and 110.5. 

Note, however, that certain partnerships and 

partners are prohibited from making any contributions. See "Prohibited Partnership Contributions," 

below. 

Allocating Contributions Among Partners 

A portion of a partnership contribution must 

be allocated to each contributing partner.* If all 

partners within the organization participate in th

political contribution, the partnership may allo

cate the contribution among the partners ac

cordinz to their share of the profits. However, i

a . . the partnership allocates contributtons on anothe

basis agreed to by the partners or if it attribute

contributions only to certain partners, the fol

lowing rules must be observed: 

-- The contributing partners' respective profit

must be reduced (or their losses increased) b

the amount of the contribution attributed to 

them; and 

The profits (or losses) of only the contrib

uting partners must be affected. II CFR 

llO.l(e)(J) and (2); AO 1980-132. 

Whatever the allocation method used, the portio

of the contribution allocated to each partner mus

not exceed the individual's contribution limit. I

CFR llO.l(e)(3). 

Prohibited Partnership Contributions 

Partnerships That Are Professional Corporations

A partnership that is a professional corporation i

prohibited from making any contributions becaus

contributions from corporations are unlawful. I

CFR 114.2 and 114.7(d). 

However, an individual member of such a partner

ship may contribute a check drawn on his or he

nonrepayable corporate drawing account since th

check represents a contribution from the individ

ual, rather than the corporation. AOs 1978-42

1979-19 and 1981-4. 

Partnerships with Corporate Members. Becaus

contributions from corporations are prohibited, 

partnership with corporate members may not at

tribute any portion of a contribution to the corpo

rate partners. II CFR 114.2; AOs 1980-132 an

1982-63. A partnership composed entirely of cor

porate partners may not make any contributions

AOs 1981-54 and 1981-56. 

Partnerships with Foreign National Members

Similarly, because contributions from foreign na 

tionals are prohibited, a partnership may no

attribute any portion of a contribution to a part

ner who is a foreign national II CFR llO.4(a). 

Partnerships with Federal Government Contracts

A partnership which is negotiating a contract wit

the federal government or which has not com

pleted performance of such a contract is prohib

ited from making contributions. Nevertheless, a

individual partner in such a firm may make con

• 

tributions from personal funds (rather than from 

funds drawn on the partnership's account). II CFR 

*A portion of a contribution drawn on a part­115.4.
 

nership account may not be attributed to the
 

spouse of a partner, unless the spouse is also a
 

member of the partnership. AO 1980-67. 

9 
June 1983 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 9, Numbe

Reporting Partnership Contributions 

A political committee that receives a contribution from a partnership should report it as 

described below. (The partnership has no reporting 

obligation although it provides necessary information to the recipient political committee.) 

Contributions from Individuals/Persons: Total. 

The committee must include a partnership contribution in the total figure reported for "contributions from individuals/persons other than 

political committees" (line I Ha» on the Detailed 

Summary Page of the appropriate reporting form 

(FEC Form 3 or 3X). 

Itemization. If a partnership contribution exceeds 

$200 or aggregates in excess of $200 during a 

calendar year, the committee must itemize the 

contribution on a Schedule A used for "contributions from individuals/persons other than political 

committees," 

Additionally, if an individual partner's share of 

the contribution exceeds $200 when combined 

with other contributions received from that partner, the committee must disclose, as a memo 

entry,* itemized information on the partner 

(name, address, occupation, date of the contribution, the partner's share of the contribution and 

the aggregate year-to-date total of contributions 

made by the partner). 

Contribution Plans 

A partnership may set up an internal plan to 

facilitate making contributions to candidates. For 

specific details, see AOs 1980-72, 1981-50, 1982­

13 and 1982-63. 

D. ESTABLISH A COMMfITEE 

Noneonnected Political Committees 

In addition to making direct contributions, a 

partnership may participate in federal elections 

by establishing a nonconnected political committee.** A nonconnected committee is a political 

committee which supports candidates for federal 

office, but which is not established or administered by any candidate, party committee, corporation or labor organization. Nonconnected political committees are frequently called PACs (political action committees) but should not be con­

"A memo entry is supplemental information 

on a reporting schedule. The dollar amount in a 

memo entry is not incorporot'td into the total 

figure for that schedule. 

fused with another kind of PAC: a separate segr

gated fund, which is a political committee estab

lished by a corporation or labor organization.
 

rate 

Unlike 

segregated 

the corporate 

fund (SSF), which may pay for 

or labor sponsor of a sep

th

administrative and solicitation costs of its SSF, 

partnership is limited in the support it may giv

to its nonconnected committee. Support provide

by the partnership (for example, office space an

phones) is considered a contribution. Contribu

tions to the committee are limited to $5,000 pe

calendar year. II CFR 1I0.Hc). Like any contr

bution a partnership makes, a contribution to i

nonconnected committee must be allocate

among the partners, as explained above. 

The various types of contributions a partnershi

may provide to its nonconnected committee ar

explained below. 

Contributions of Money 

A partnership may make contributions to i

nonconnected committee from its treasury funds

(The partnership may not, however, serve as 

conduit for contributions that would otherwise b

prohibited under the Federal Election Campaig

Aet.) Contributions of money count against th

partnership's yearly $5,000 limit, per committee

and must be reported by the committee. 1I CF

1I0.Hc). 

In-Kind Contributions 

when it pays for some 

A partnership makes 

of the 

in-kind 

day-to-day 

contribution

costs o

operating the committee. For example, the par

nership may pay for the committee's rent, offic

equipment and supplies, utilities, telephone serv

ice or fundraising expenses. The partnership ma

also provide personnel to help run the committee

All of the partnership's payments for goods, serv

ices and staff time are considered reportable in

kind contributions" and are subject to the sam

$5,000 limit as contributions of money. II CFR 

100.7(a)(I)(iii); AO 1982-63. (Certain legal an

accounting services, however, are not considere

contributions to a committee. See below.) 

Loans 

A partnership may loan money to its non

connected committee. A loan is considered 

contribution and counts against the $5,000 contri

bution limit to the extent of the outstandin

balance of the loan. A loan exceeding the contri

continue

""However, a partnership composed entirely of "However, when employees volunteer thei

corporate members may not make contributions time to a committee during nonworking hours o

or expenditures to establish or support a noncon­ make up work time used for volunteer activities

nected political committee. II CFR 114.2; AOs the volunteer activity is not considered a contri

1981-54 and 1981-56. . bution and is not reportable. 11 CFR 100.7(b)(3). 

10
 
June 1983	 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 9, Number 

• 

bution limit is unlawful even if repaid in full. The 

committee must report the receipt of the loan 

and repayments made on the loan until the debt is 

extinguished. 11 CFR 100.7(a)(1)(i). 

m.	 PROVIDE LEGAL AND ACCOUNTING 

SERVICES 

A partnership may offer free legal and accounting services to its nonconnected committee, 

to candidate committees and to other political 

committees provided: 

The individual who performs the service is a 

regular employee of the partnership (a partner is considered a regular employee of a 

partnership); 

The services to candidate committees and 

other nonparty committees are provided only 

for the purpose of helping them comply with 

the federal election campaign law; and 

The services provided to party political committees do not directly further the election 

of candidates for federal office. 11 CFR 

100.7(b)(l3) and (l4). 

'The recipient committee must report the value of 

the donated services as a memo entry' on Schedule A if the aggregate value exceeds $200 per 

calendar year. 11 CFR 104.3(h). 

• 

FEC v, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION 

OF AMERICA 

On April 27, 1983, the U.S. District Court fo

the District of Columbia issued a consent decre

resolving claims brought by the FEC against th

National Rifle Association of America (NRA), an 

incorporated association; the Institute for Legis

lative Action (ILA), NRA's lobbying organization

and the NRA Political Victory Fund (PVF), NRA'

separate segregated fund (Civil Action No. 81

1218). 

The FEC filed suit against the defendants in Ma

1981, claiming that they had violated 2 U.S.C

§44lb(a), which prohibits corporations from 

making contributions in connection with federa

elections. Specifically, the FEC alleged that: 

NRA and ILA had made corporate expendi

tures in connection with the 1978 and 198

Congressional elections and the 1980 Presi

dential elections;
 

NRA and ILA had made corporate contribu

tions to PVF in the form of advanced pay

ments of expenditures on behalf of PVF, fo

Which they were later reimbursed by PVF

and
 

PVF had received corporate contributions by

accepting (and SUbsequently reimbursing) the

advanced payments of expenditures by NRA

and ILA.
 

On January 6, 1983, the court dismissed, withou

prejudice, a portion of the FEC's claims, namely

allezations related to NRA's purchase of certai

goods and services for PVF that had resulted in 

violation of 2 U.S.C. §44lb(a). The court foun

that it did not have SUbject matter jurisdictio

over these specific factual allegations becaus

the FEC had not undertaken conciliation wit

respect to them. 

By	 the terms of the court's April 27 consen

decree, the defendants agreed that: 

They will no longer engage in those activitie

alleged in the FEC's complaint which wer

not dismissed as part of the court's Januar

6, 1983, order. 

They will no longer spend corporate funds i

connection with any federal election o

otherwise engage in political activities pro

hibited by 2 U.S.C. §44lb(a). 

They will limit partisan communications t

• 

NRA's restricted class of personnel (as speci

fied by 2 U.S.C. §431(8)(BXvi)). 

• A memo entry is supplemental information They will limit corporate expenditures i

on a reporting schedule. The dollar amount in a connection with federal elections to thos

memo entry is not incorporated into the total exempt activities explicitly permitted by th

figure for that schedule.	 Act and FEC Regulaticns, 

11
 
June1983	 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Vdume9,Numoor

CHANGE OF ADDRESS 

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: 

I.	 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. 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
 

1325 K Street, N.w.
 

Washington, D.C. 20463
 

Official Business 

First Class Mail
 

Postage & Fees Paid
 

FEC
 

Washington, D.C.
 

Permit No. G-31
 

12