{p7I

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

11 INDEX

10 CLEARINGHOUSE: Election Case Law 89

800 LINE

8 Last-Minute Contributions: 48-Hour

Reporting

9 Last-Minute Independent Expenditures

24-Hour Reporting

COMPLIANCE

8 New Procedures for Investigations

8 MURS Released to the Public

6 STATISTICS: House and Senate Activi

axmT CASES

4 FEC v. Working Names, Inc.

4 FEC v. Friends of Isaiah Fletcher

COIm\ittee

4 New Litigation

6 PUBLI~TIONS: 1990 Disclosure Direc

5 AUDITS: Report on Larouche Campaign

1 ADVISORY OPINIWS

(contin

3 LmIS!ATIOO; Ethics Reform Act Amen

TABLE OF CDfi'I!Nl'S

AD 1990-4: Use of Credit Cards to Char

Combined Dues/Contribution

payments

The American veterinary Medical Associa

(AVMA), an incorporated membership orga

tion, may collect combined payments of

membership dues and contributions to it

separate segregated fund (AVMAPAC) thro

credit card charges. This method of co

lecting PAC contributions will not resu

prohibited contributions since AVMA pla

deposit payments charged to professiona

corporation accounts into a separate fu

used to defray AVMAPAC's administrative

expenses.

999 EStreet NW Washington DC 20463 Volume 16, Numb

ADVISORY OPINICN SllMHARIES

July 1990

AOR 1990-11

Disposal of excess campaign assets (silver

belt buckles) by 1988 Presidential campaign. (Date Made Public: May 24, 1990;

Length: 2 pages)

FEe STAFF TO VISIT B<H>LUW

As part of the Conunission's state

outreach program, FEC public affairs

specialists will be in Honolulu

August 6-7 to answer questions on the

Federal Election Campaign Act and FEC

regulations. They will meet with

candidates, campaign workers and the

staffs of PACs and party committees.

Individuals involved in the September

22 Hawaii special election and anyone

else interested in the rules on federal campaign finance may schedule a

meeting with the FEC's visiting

staff. Call FEC specialists Dorothy

Hutcheon or Patricia Klein at 800/

424-9530 or 202/376-3120.

AOR 1990-9

Publication of public affairs newsletter by

candidate as sole proprietor. (Date made

public: May 15, 1990; Length: 9 pages,

including attachment)

ADVISORY OPINIQ{ REQ:JESTS

The following chart lists recent

requests for advisory opinions (AORS). The

full text of each AOR is available for

public review and comment in the FEe's

Public Records Office.

AOR 1990-10

Disaffiliation between PACs of parent

corporation and its bankrupt subsidiary.

(Date Made Public: May 23, 1990; Length:·

21 pages, including attachment)
July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COrviIVIISSIOI\J Volume 16, Numb

under the proposed plan, AVMA will act

as a collecting agent for AVMAPAC, depositing the combined dues/contribution payments

into a holding account (considered an AVMA.

corporate account) and then transmitting to

the PAC a check representing the total of

noncorporate money contributed to AVMAPAC.

This procedure is consistent with FEC collecting agent regulations, provided AVMA

forwards to the PAC both the contributions

and the required contributor information

within certain time limits. Contributions

of $50 or less must be forwarded within 30

days of AVMA's receipt, and contributions

exceeding $50 must be forwarded within 10

days. 11 CFR 102.6(c)(4) and (5) and

102.8(b) • The Commission has previously permitted

contributions made by credit cards. AO

1976-68; see also AOs 1989-26 and 1984-45.

AO 1990-4, however, makes clear that the

date of receipt for a contribution made by

credit card is the date that AVMA. receives

the member's authorization to charge dues

and a contribution to his or her credit card

account. This date is considered the date

upon which AVMA obtains possession of the

contribution. (See 11 CFR 102.8(b)(2).) In

this respect, AO 1990-4 supersedes AD 1978-

68, which stated that the date of receipt

was the date when the recipient committee'S

account received a credit or deposit of the

proceeds.

Because individual members of AVMA. may

use credit cards issued to their incorporated practices, AVMA plans to deposit this

corporate money into a "corporate" AVMAPAC

account used only for the PAC's administrative expenses. This is a permissible use of

corporate payments, based on FEC rules and

past advisory opinions. Commission regulations permit an incorporated membership organization to use "general treasury monies,

including.••dues monies or membership fees,

for the establishment, administration, and

solicitation of contributions to its separate segregated fund." 11 CFR 114.5(b).

Furthermore, the Commission has previously

permitted members of an incorporated tra

association to provide funds or merchan

to the association or to a separate adnU

trative account for the purpose of defra

the administrative and solicitation expe

of the association's separate segregated

fund. ADs 1986-13, 1982-36 and 1980-59.

The Co~ssion has also permitted indivi

members of a membership organization to 

their professional corporation accounts 

defray administrative costs of the organ

ization's separate segregated fund. NJ

1982-61. Accordingly, funds from a prof

sional corporation controlled by an indi

ual AVMA member may be deposited into an

administrative account used solely for

admdnistrative and solicitation expenses 

the PAC.

AVMA may absorb all credit card fees

since they are considered admdnistrative 

solicitation expenses. 11 CFR 102.6(c)

(2)(i). (Date issued: May 4, 1990; Len

5 pages)

NJ 1990-6: Preemption of oregon Law

prohibiting Charitable Match

Plan for PAC Contributions

Pacific power and Light (PP&L) may imple

ment a plan to match employees' contribu

tions to its federal separate segregated

fund (PAC) with charitable donations sin

the Federal Election campaign Act preem

an Oregon law prohibiting such a plan•.

oregon law prohibits the application 

"undue influenceu to induce a person to

make a political contribution and define

"undue influenceu to include "giving or

promising to give money, employment or

other thing of value. u Oregon State

Statutes, section 260.665. As written, 

provision applies to federal-election co

tributions as well as nonfederal contrib

tions. According to the Oregon Election

Division, PP&L's plan to match the full

value of employees' contributions to its

federal PAC with a donation to a 501(c)(

charity chosen by the contributor would

Federal Election CalIIli.ssion, 999 E street, NW, Washington, OC 20463

800/424-9530 202/376-3120 202/376-3136 (TOO)

Lee Ann Elliott, Chairman

JOM Warren McGarry, Vice Chairman

Joan D. Aikens

'Ihomas J. Josefiak

Danny L. McDonald

Scott E. 'Ihamas

Walter J. Stewart, secretary of the Senate,

Ex Officio Commissioner

Dennald K. Anderson, Clerk of the House of

Representatives, Ex Officio Commissioner

2
July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16,Num

constitute a "thing of value" to an employee and could induce an employee to contribute.

Past advisory opinions regarding

corporate matching plans have viewed a

corporation's payment of matching charitable donations as an exempt solicitation

expense, payable by a separate segregated

fund's connected organization under

2 U.S.C. §441b(b)(2)(C). ADs 1989-9, 1989-

7, 1988-48, 1987-18 and 1986-44. PP&L may

rely on those opinions to conduct its own

plan.

Concerning the preemption issue, the

legislative history of the Act makes clear

that federal law occUpies the field with

respect to the limdtations and prohibitions on contributions and expenditures

used in federal elections. (H.R. Rep. Nos.

93-1239 (p. 10) and 93-1438 (p. 69), 93d

Cong., 2d Sess. (1974).) See 2 U.S.C §453;

11 CFR 108.7. The Act therefore preempts

the Oregon statute or any state law, or

interpretation of state law, prohibiting

the use of a charitable matching plan to

raise funds for use in federal elections

only. See also AD 1982-29.

Commissioners McDonald and Thomas plan

to file concurring opinions. (Date issued:

May 21, 1990; Length: 4 pages)

TO ETHICS REFORM ACr

Technical amen~ents to the Ethics

Reform Act of 1989 restore several

provisions of the 1978 Ethics in Government

Act concerning the filing of candidates'

personal financial disclosure reports.

Signed into law by president Bush on May 4,

1990 (Public Law 101-280), the amendments

("Technical Correctionstt ) also revise the

Federal Election Campaign Act provision on

honoraria, 2 V.s.C. §441i.

Personal Financial Disclosure

Under the new law, all House and Senate

candidates, including nonincumbents, will

continue to file reports disclosing their

lThe changes brought about by the Ethics

Reform Act of 1989 were summarized in past

Record issues: February 1990 (repeal of

grandfather clause); April 1990 (personal

financial disclosure and honoraria); and

May 1990 (correction to April 1990

article) •

3

personal finances with the Clerk of the

House or the Secretary of the Senate, a

the Congressional ethics committees wil

continue to review those reports. (The

1989 provision, now repealed, would hav

required nonincumbent House and Senate

candidates to file personal financial

reports with the FEC, which would have 

responsible for reviewing them.) still

effective is the longstanding requireme

that nonincumbent Presidential and vice

Presidential candidates file their pers

financial reports with the FEC.

The 1990 amendments do not affect o

provisions of the 1989 Ethics Reform Ac

that govern the filing of candidates'

personal financial reports. Under one

provision, which will become effective 

January 1991, the filing requirement fo

candidates will apply only to those ind

viduals who have met the definition of Itcandi dat elt under 2 U.S.C. §431(2).2 u

another provision, also effective Janua

1991, a personal financial report will 

due within 30 days after the individual

becomes a Itcandidate" or on May 15 of t

election year, whichever is later, but 

no event 3later than 30 days before the

election.

Honorarium 1\IEndment

The 1990 technical amendments also

change 2 U.S.C. §441i, excluding from t

definition of honorarium any amounts

accepted for the travel and subsistence

expenses of a child accompanying the

honorarium recipient. The amendment be

(contin

2under the Ethics in Government Act of 

(in effect until January 1991), an indi

ual becomes a "candi.date" for purposes 

filing a personal financial report when 

or she (1) has taken action necessary u

state law to qualify for election or (2

has filed a statement of Candidacy (FEC

Form 2 or letter containing the same

information) pursuant to 2 U.S.C. S432(

(1) •

3Still effective until January 1991 is 

requirement that candidates file a pers

financial report within 30 days of beco

a candidate. during the election year or 

May 15 of the election year, whichever 

later, but in no event later than seven

days before the election.
July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16, Numbe

effective on May 4, 1990. Thus, the travel

and subsistence exemption now applies to

the honorarium recipient and to a child or

spouse or aide accompanying the recipient.

The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 previously amended section 441i by limiting

its application to the Senate--that is, to

honoraria accepted by Senators and officers

and employees of the U.S. Senate. That

amendment will become effective January 1,

1991.

FEC v , WRKIR; NMES, INC. (87-2467-GAG)

On May 10, 1990, the U.S. District

Court for the District of Columbia granted

the FEC's petition to hold Working Names,

Inc., and its president, Meyer T. Cohen, in

contempt of court for failing to pay civil

penalties. In a May 1989 default judgment,

the court had ordered defendants to pay a $2,000 civil penalty included in a conciliation agreement (MUR 1542) and had imposed

an additional $2,000 civil penalty plus

court costs. (See the July 1988 Record for

a summary of the default judgment.) However, defendants paid only $100 toward the

penalties.

Under the terms of the court's May 1990

order, defendants must pay $75 per day for

each day the assessments remain unpaid.

The late charge will increase to $150 per

day after June 17, 1990. Additionally,

defendants must pay interest on the unpaid

civil penalties and court costs.

(A new suit filed against working Names

is summarized under New Litigation, below.)

FEC v. FRIENDS OF ISAIAH FLETCHER CCI'IUTTEE

On May 18, 1990, the U.S. District

Court for the District of Maryland ordered

the Friends of Isaiah Fletcher Committee

and its treasurer, Mr. Fletcher, to begin

paying a $5,000 civil penalty that had

remained outstanding since the court imposed it on April 24, 1989. (Civil Action

No. PN 88-2323.) In that ruling, the court

found that the committee had violated

2 U.S.C. §434(a)(2)(A) by failing to file a

1986 quarterly report. The court ordered

defendants to pay a $5,000 penalty and the

FEC's court costs. (See the June 1989

Record for a summary of the judgment.)

On March 27, 1990, the FEC filed a

petition asking the court to (1) hold

defendants in contempt for their failure to

4

pay the assessments and (2) order defend

ants to pay the interest that had accrue

on the penalty. The court denied the

motion but ordered defendants to begin

paying the assessments in monthly instal

ments of $300 each beginning June 15, 19

The court also ordered Mr. Fletcher to f

a statement profiling his financial

situation.

NDl LITI~TlOO

FEe v , working Names, Inc. (9O-1009-GAG)

The Commission asks the district cou

to declare that Working Names, Inc., and

its president, Meyer T. Cohen, knowingly

and willfully violated 2 U.S.C. §438(a)(

by making commercial use of information

copied from reports maintained by the

Senate Office of PUblic Records.

The FEC claims that Working Names co

piled a list of potential contributors f

disclosure reports filed with the Senate

Office of Public Records. The list 1

allegedly included two fictitious names

taken from a 1983 report filed by the

Senator Lloyd Bentsen Election Committee

The FEC further claims that Working Name

marketed the mailing list to brokers, wh

in turn, rented the list to at least 17

organizations. Because Mr. Cohen, as

President of working Names, had previous

signed a conciliation agreement in MUR 1

in which he admitted to past violations 

§438(a)(4), the Commission contends that

Working Names and Mr. Cohen were aware o

the prohibitions against the salejuse

restriction on information copied from

reports, and that the violation was ther

fore knowing and willful.

The Commission asks the court to ass

the perialty for a knowing and willful

violation (the greater of $10,000 or 200

percent of the amount involved in the

violation; see 2 U.S.C. §437g(a)(6)(C»).

The Commission also asks that the court

award the FEC court costs and permanentl

enjoin defendants from further violation

of the salejuse prohibition.

U.S. District Court for the District 

Columbia, Civil Action No. 90-1009, Apr

30, 1990.

1FEC rules permit a political committee 

use up to ten fictitious names in a repo

as a method of determining whether the

names and addresses of individual

contributors are being used illegally.

11 CFR 103.4(e).
July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTIOI\J COIVIMISSION Volume 16, Numb

FEe v , Mann for Congress CODIIti.ttee

The Commission asks the district court

to declare that the Mann for Congress

Committee and its treasurer, Terry L. Mann,

failed to comply with the terms of a

conciliation agreement entered into on

December 19, 1988. (The committee was the

principal campaign committee of Mr. Mann, a

1986 House candidate.) Under the terms of

the 1988 agreement, the committee and Mr.

Mann, as treasurer, agreed to refund

$17,746 in excess contributions, disclose

the refunds on FEC reports and pay a $5,000

civi! penalty. The Commission claims that

defendants have not made any payments

toward the civil penalty and have not filed

any reports showing that they refunded the

excess amounts to the contributors. The

Commission therefore asks the court to:

o Order defendants to comply with the

conciliation agreement and pay interest

on the $5,000 penalty;

o Assess additional penalties against

defendants;

a Per.manently enjoin them from future

violations of the conciliation agreement;

and

o Award the FEC court costs.

U.S. District Court for the District of

Columbia, Civil Action No. 90-1154, May 16,

1990.

AUDIT REPORT 00 LAIUJCHE CAMPAI~ RELFASED

on May 17, 1990, the Commission

approved the final audit report on the

LaRouche Democratic Campaign, the publicly

funded committee of Lyndon LaRouche, a 1988

Presidential primary candidate. Based on

the results of the audit, the Commission

made an iniHal determination that the

campaign repay a total of $154,894 in

public funds to the U.S. Treasury. The

repayment total is based on the audit

findings summarized below.

If the campaign does not dispute the

initial determination within 30 days, the

determination becomes final, and the campaign must make the repayment to the u.s.

Treasury within 90 days of the initial

determination.

Final audit reports are available for

review in the Public Records Office.

5

Matching Fwlds Received in Excess of

Entitlement

The audit determined that the camp

had received $109,149 in matching fund

payments to which the candidate was not

entitled because the funds were in exce

of the campaign's net debts as of his d

of ineligibility, as defined in 11 CFR

9033.5. After that date, a candidate m

receive matching funds only to the exte

of the campaign'S net outstanding camp

obligations. 11 CFR 9038.2(b)(1)(i).

Stale-Dated Coomittee Checks

Audit staff identified nine stale-d

committee checks, totaling $1,161, that 

never been cashed by the payees. Unde

11 CFR 9038.6, the total amount of such

outstanding committee checks are repay

Expenses Incurred Aftet" Date of

Ineligibility

Commission regulations provide that

expenses incurred after a candidate's d

of ineligibility are not considered qu

fied campaign expenses unless they rela

to winding down costs. Expenses incurr

before the date of ineligibility for go

or services received after that date ar

also considered nonqualified campaign

expenses. 11 CFR 9034.4(a)(3) and (b)

The audit report found that the LaRouch

campaign had incurred $213,789 in nonqualified campaign expenses. Under 11 

9038.2(b)(2)(iii), a ratio repayment

formula is used to determine what porti

of nonqualified campaign expenses were

defrayed with public funds (as opposed 

private contributions). Application o

this formula yielded a repayment amoun

$40,950.

Expenditures in Excess of the Limit

Funds spent in excess of a state li

are also considered nonqualified campa

expenses, subject to the ratio repayme

formula. 11 CFR 9034.4(b)(2) and

9038.2(b)(2)(ii)(A) and (iii). The au

report revealed that the campaign had

exceeded the New Hampshire expenditure

limit by $59,034. For purposes of det

mining the amount of the repayment, ce

reductions were made to the amount spe

excess of the limit. (For example, $2

was subtracted because these expenses w

paid after the campaign accounts no lon

contained any matching funds.) Using 

adjusted figure ($18,973) in the repaym

formula, the amount subject to repayme

was calculated to be $3,634.
July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16, Numb

f~7r~~-;;~;'~S%~:~s::2 UI[

.--'-'--...~~-"'-'--..,...~.~. ::-:...~_..:. _~~~~~~~~_~ -2-~~-=-~~~~ __=: 

1990 DISCLOSURE DIREC'!URY

on May 1, 1990, the FEC released the

fifth edition of the Combined Federal/state

Disclosure Directory, a reference tool

identifying where to locate reports or

information on:

o Campaign finance;

o Personal finances of officials and

candidates;

o Lobbying;

o Corporate registrations;

o Public financing;

o Spending on state initiatives and

referenda;

o Candidates on the ballot;

o Election results;

o voting accessibility; and

o Election-related litigation.

The directory covers both federal and

state government offices. The 1990 edition

includes two new sections listing state

legislative committees dealing with election law and similar committees involved in

ethics legislation.

To order a copy of the 1990 Directory,

call the Public Records Office: 800/424-

9530 or 202/376-3140.

15--lt:Nl'H STATISTICS SHCW l«)DERATE INCREA

IN IUJSE AND SENATE CAMPAIGl ACTIVITY

Candidates for 1990 U.S. House and

Senate seats raised more than $192 milli

and spent $127 million during the first 

months of the election cycle (January 1,

1989, through March 31, 1990). When com

pared with the same period for the 1988

election cycle, 1990 campaign receipts

increased by 7 percent ($12.6 million)

while spending rose 12 percent ($13.9

million). An FEC press release issued M

8, 1990, provides summary data on the 15

month activity of 1990 House and Senate

candidates and comparable data for 1986 

1988 campaigns.

Based on those statistics, the chart

below show the financial activity of 199

House candidates and compare the sources 

receipts for 1986, 1988 and 1990 House

candidates.

Chart I

Receipts and Disbursements of 1990

House Candidates

(January 1,1989, through March 31, 1990)

PUBLIC APPFAlU\NCES

7/16-20 Conference of Canadian

Election Officials

st. John's, Newfoundland

Chairman Lee Ann Elliott

7/29-8/2 Council of State Governments

Manchester, New Hampshire

N. Bradley Litchfield,

Associate General Counsel

for Policy

Incumbents· Challengers Open Se

Candida

o

45

15

30

Millions of Dollars

90

_Receipts

_ Disbursements

60

75

Bellcore

Livingston, New Jersey

N. Bradley Litchfield,

Associate General Counsel

for Policy

8/16

8/1 Iowa State Association of

County Auditors

Cedar Rapids, Iowa

William Kimberling,

Clearinghouse on Election

Administration

No. ofCandidates 413 527 211

6
July 1990 FEDERALELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16, Numbe

House Candidates' It Sources of Receipts:

First 15 Months

Chart II

Incumbents

Millions of Dollars

1-- :'" I Contributions from Individuals

_ Contributions from PACs

_ Contributions and Loans from

Candidate

_ Other Loans

_ Other Receipts 1

90

75

60

45

30

15

o

1986

No. ot Candidates 396

.-:. .. ... , - .,

~~~~i.~~\·:~f:-~·:

1988

413

1990

413

1990

211

1988

182

o

3

9

6

18

12 f----------l

15

1986

No. ofCandidates 227

Chart IV

Open Seat Candidates

Millions of Dollars 2

1990

527

1988

606

I-------,-----~::-l-------j_:;; _:;~~?J;--r-r.===:==:::::=;--

::::~~~~:~2i:

~:J~:

e Chart III

Challengers

Millions of Dollars 2

18

15

12

9

6

3

0

1986

No. ofCandidates 638

• , Other receipts consist of contributions from party committees, transfers (such as joint fundraising proceeds but not

funds transferred from committees authorized by the candidate for the current campaign), refunds and rebates, and intere

income.

2Note change in scale between Chart II and Charts III and IV.

7
July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16, Num

NEW PROCEDURES FOR INVESTICATIOOS

On April 26, 1990, the commdssion

adopted a new practice permitting the

Office of General Counsel (OGC) to conduct

informal investigations of enforcement

cases (MURs or Matters Under Review)

without seeking advance approval from the

Commission. OGC will initiate infoDmaI

investigation and discovery only after the

Commission has found "reason to believe."

(A "reason to believe" finding means the

Commission believes that an investigation

should be conducted in order to determine

whether the respondent has violated the

law.) Under former procedures, OGC used

more formal methods of obtaining information, such as subpoenas and orders, after

first obtaining Commission approval. OGC

proposed the new practice to shorten the

time it takes to process an enforcement

case and to foster cooperation from

witnesses and respondents.

MURS RELEASED 'ID THE PUBLIC

Listed below are MURs (FEC enforcment

cases) recently released for public review.

The list is based on the FEC press releases

of May 23 and June 1, 1990. Files on

closed MURs are available for review in the

Public Records Office.

Unless otherwise noted, civil penalties

result from conciliation agreements reached

between the respondents and the Commission.

MUR 2766

Respondents: (a) Friends of Connie Mack

(FL) and treasurer; (b) Auto Dealers and

Drivers for Free Trade political Action

Committee (NY) and treasurer; (c) Representative Connie Mack (FL); (d) Hecht ReElection Committee (NV) and treasurer; (e)

Senator Chic Hecht (NV)

COOIplainant: Robert F. Bauer, Democratic

Senatorial Campaign Committee (DC)

Subject: Independent expenditures; excessive contributions; inadequate disclosure

Disposition: (a) $3,500 civil penalty

(inadequate dislosure); (b) failed to find

reason to believe; (c)-(e) no reason to

believe

MURS 3016/2973

Respondents: State Democratic Executive

Committee of Alabama and treasurer

Complainant: FEC initiated

8

SUbject: Failure to report on time

Disposition: $3,800 civil penalty

MUR 1438

Respondents: (a) Harvey rurgatch (CA)

J. David Dominelli (CA)

Complainant: FEC initiated

Subject: Independent expenditures

Disposition: (a) U.S. District Court 

ment: $25,000 civil penalty; (b) U.S. 

trict Court Judgment: $8,471 civil pe

MUR 2415

Respondents: Reagan-Bush' 84 (general

election committee) (DC) and treasurer

COmplainant: FEC initiated

SUbject: Failure to retain and furnish

records

Disposition: $2,500 civil penalty

MURS 2465/1616/1557

Respondents: (a) Seminole Tribe of

Florida; (b) James E. Billie (FL); (c) 

cellus Osceola (FL); (d) Howard E. Tom

(FL); (e) Stephen H. Whilden (FL)

Complainant: Paul Harvill (FL) (1616/

1557); FEC initiated (2465)

SUbject: Contributions made in the nam

another; excessive contributions, failu

to register and report as a political

conunittee

Disposition: (a) and (b) $32,000 civi

penalty; (c) and (d) reason to believe 

took no further action; (e) reason to

believe (Commission could not locate

respondent to serve him with General

Counsel's probable cause brief)

IAST-MlNUTE CCN1'RIBurrrns:

46-1UJR REPORTIN:i

This article explains the special

notices that candidate committees must 

if they receive contributions of $1,000 

more shortly before an election. Thes

notices are referred to as 48-hour not

because they are due within 48 hours o

receipt of the contribution.

Who Reports

The authorized candidate committee 

receives the last-minute contribution 

the contributor) must file the 48-hour

notice. 
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

•

•

•

July 1990

What Triggers 48-Hour Reporting

A candidate committee must file a 48-

hour notice if it receives a contribution

of $1,000 or more after the close of books

for the pre-election report but more than

48 hours before the election. 2 U.S.C.

S434(a)(6); 11 CFR 104.5(f).

Please note that the 48-hour notice

requirement applies to all types of

contributions, including:

o In-kind contributions;

o Loans (other than bank loans);

o Guarantees and endorsements of bank

loans; and

o Contributions and loans from the

candidate.

What to Report

The committee must disclose the following information in the notice:

o The name of the candidate;

o The office sought;

o The identification of the contributor

(i.e., full name, address and, for

individuals, occupation and employer);

and

o The date and amount of the contribution.

2 U.S.C. S434(a)(6); 11 CFR 104.5(f).

Unlike regular reports, the 48-hour

notice does not require the treasurer's

signature. AD 1988-32.

When to Report

A 48-hour notice is due within 48 hours

of the committee's receipt of the contribution. The committee must itemize the contribution a second time on its next

regularly scheduled report. 2 u.S.C."

S434(a)(6); 11 CFR 104.5(f).

Filing on Time

To ensure that a notice is filed within

48 hours, the committee may use a mailgram,

a telegram or an express mail service.

Certified, registered and first-class mail

are acceptable methods of sending a notice,

provided the notice is received at the

appropriate filing office by the 48-hour

deadline. In the case of a 48-hour notice,

the postmark date is not significant for

purposes of filing on time. AD 1988-32.

Where to File

Authorized committees of House and

Senate candidates file with the Clerk of

the House or the Secretary of the Senate,

as appropriate. Under no circumstances

should House and Senate committees file

with the FEC. Authorized committees of

Presidential candidates, however, do file

with the FEC. 2 U.S.C. §432(g); 11 CFR

105.1-105.3.

9

Volume 16, Number 

House and Senate candidate committees

must simultaneously file copies of 48-hou

notices with the Secretary of State (or

equivalent officer) in the state in which

the candidate is seeking election.

2 U.S.C. S439(a) (2) (B); 11 CFR 108.3.

Presidential candidate committees should

consult 2 U.S.C. S439(a) (2) (A) for

requirements on filing with state offices

LlIST-MINUTE INDEPENDENT EXPENDIWRES:

24-HOOR REPORTIt«i

This article explains the 24-hour

reporting of independent expenditures

aggregating $1,000 or more that are made

shortly before an election.

Who Reports

The person who makes the last-minute

independent expenditure (i.e., a registered1political committee, an unregistered

group or an individual) is responsible fo

filing the 24-hour report.

Definition of Independent Expenditure

An independent expenditure is an expe

diture for a communication which expressl

advocates the election or defeat of a

clearly identified candidate and which is

not made with the cooperation or prior co

sent of, or in consultation with, or at th

request or suggestion of, any candidate o

his or her authorized committees or agent

2 U.S.C. §431(17); 11 CFR 100.16 and

109.1(a).

What Triggers 24-Hour Reporting

The requirement to file a 24-hour

report is triggered when a person makes

independent expenditures aggregating $1,0

or more between 2 and 20 days before the

election. 2 U.S.C. §434(c); 11 CFR

104.4(b), 104.5(g) and 109~2(b).

When to Report

The report on last-minute independent

expenditures is due within 24 hours after

the expenditure is made.

In addition, the person making the

expenditures must disclose them a second

time in the report due at the end of the

reporting period during which the expendi

(continue

IAn unregistered group whose federal election activity exceeds $1,000 in calendar

year may be required to register and repo

as a federal political committee. 11 CFR

100.5(a).
July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16, Num

tures were made. 2 U.S.C. §434(c)i 11 CFR

l04.4(a) and (b), l04.5(g), and 109.2(a)(2)

and (b).

What to Report

The following information must be disclosed in a 24-hour report:

a The committee's name, address and FEC

identification number or, in the case of

an individual or group, the name,

address, occupation and employer of the

individual responsible for reporting;

o The name and address of the payee (i.e.,

the vendor or other person who receives

payment for providing goods or services

related to the independent expenditure);

o The date, amount and purpose of the

expenditure; and

a The name of the candidate, the office

sought, and whether the expenditure was

made to support or oppose the candidate.

A 24-hour report must also include a

notarized statement certifying that the

expenditure was made without the cooperation or consent of any candidate or authori zed conuni.t tee.

The above information may be disclosed

in a statement or on an FEC reporting form

(Schedule E for political committees, Form

5 for individuals and groups). The PAC

treasurer or the individual reporting the

information must sign the statement or

form. 2 U.S.C. §434(c)i 11 CFR 104.4(b),

104.5(g) and 109.2(b).

Filing on Time

In order to meet the 24-hour deadline,

the report must be delivered by hand or

through an express mail service. (The need

for a signature and notarized statement

precludes the use of telegrams or

mailgrams. 11 CFR 104.14(a).)

Where to File

Reports on last-minute independent

expenditures that support or oppose House

or Senate candidates are filed with the

Clerk of the House or the Secretary of the

Senate, as appropriate. A copy of the

report must also be filed with the

Secretary of State (or equivalent officer)

of the state in which the candidate seeks

election.

Reports on last-minute independent

expenditures that support or oppose

Presidential candidates are filed with the

FEC and with the secretary of State (or

equivalent officer) of the state in which

the expenditure was made. 11 CFR 104.4 (c) •

10

PUBLIC ACCESS 'lO LAST-MINlJl'E

TRANSACTICIfS

The Public Records Office makes

available computer indexes on lastminute contributions and independen

expenditures. A printout indexed b

candidate name (the E Index) lists 

hour notices on contributions filed 

the candidate's committee. Another

printout on independent expenditure

is indexed by both the name of the

person making the expenditure and t

name of the candidate supported or

opposed.

Shortly before the general elec

tion, the office produces a daily l

of 48-hour reports.

To order copies of the independ

ent expenditure index or indexes on

individual candidates showing lastminute reports, call the Public

Records Office: 800/424-9530 or 20

376-3140.

ELECTICN CASE LAW 89

on May 31, 1990, the FEC's Nationa

Clearinghouse on Election Administrati

released Election Case Law 89, an over

of election law as applied by state an

federal appellate courts. The volume

provides a survey of the judicial trea

of election-related issues, among them

reapportionment, ballot access and vot

registration. (Not covered lare cases

related to campaign finance. ) Each

chapter addresses a separate issue, op

with a summary of the current state of 

law, followed by summaries of leading 

cases. Each chapter also contains syn

of other selected cases and a bibliogr

of legal literature.

Tb order, call the Clearinghouse a

800/424-9530 or 202/376-5670. The pub

tion has been distributed throughout t

united states to libraries participati

the Federal Depository Library Program

lselected Court Case Abstracts summar

cases related to the Federal Election

Campaign Act. To order a copy, call

800/424-9530 or 202/376-3140.
.luly 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16,Number 

•

The first number in each

citation refers to the "number"

(month) of the 1990 Record

issue in which the article

appeared; the second number,

following the colon, indicates

the page number in that issue.

ADVISORY OPINICNS

1989-21: Fundraising by sale

proprietor in cooperation

with candidates, 1:9

1989-25: Preemption of state

law limiting party spending

on behalf of candidates, 1:10

1989-26: Automatic bank

transfers from contributor's

account to candidate committee's account, 1:11

1989-27: Act's preemption of

state law governing solicitations by state employees, 2:2

1989-28: Voter guides distributed by nonprofit corporation, 3:9

1989-29: PAC established by

company owned by foreign

principal, 2: 3

1989-30: Payment to Senator for

teaching course, 2:4

1990-1: Corporation's sale of

900-line fundraising service

to c~didates, 4:3

1990-2: Candidate's use of excess campaign funds to secure

loan for party committee, 4: 5

1990-3: PAC's sale of advertising space in newsletter, 5:3

1990-4: Use of credit cards to

charge combined dues/contribution payments, 7: 1

1990-5: Newsletter published by

candidate, 6:4

1990-6: preemption of Oregon

law prohibiting charitable

matching plan for PAC

contributions, 7:2

COURT CASES

Austin v. Michigan State

Chamber of Commerce, 5:5

FEC v.

- FranklIn, 1:13 - Friends of Isaiah Fletcher

Committee , 7: 4 - Furgatch (83-0596-GT(M)),

2:7

- Life Amendment PAC, Inc.

(89-1429), 4:7 - Mann for Congress

Committee, 7:5 - National Right to wo~k

Committee, Inc., 5:7 - NY State Conservative pa~tYl1984 Victory Fund

(87-3309), 6:7

- Working Names, Inc. (87-

2467-GAG), 7:4 - Wo~kin9 Names, Inc. (90-

1009--eJ1.G), 7: 4

v. FEe

- Common Cause

(89-0524(GAG)), 3:11

- Dolan, 5:7

11

- Fauche~ and Maine Right t

Life Committee, Inc.

(90-0112-B), 6: 7

- National Rifle Associatio

(89-3011), 2:7

MUR Sl1I'IMARIES

MUR 2823: Excessive contribution ~eceived by candidate

committee, 2:4

MUR 2599: Repo~ting errors by Cong~essional campaign, 4:6

MUR 3009: Excessive coordinat

expenditures by state party

committee, 6: 5

800 LINE

Basic recordkeeping rules, 4:

Combined dues/solicitation

statements, 1:17

Coordinated party expenditu~e

3:6

Designating a principal campaign committee, 1:19

Disclaimer notices, 5:8

Exempt party activities, 5:10

Last-minute contributions: 48

hour ~epo(ting, 7:8

Last-minute independent expen

itures: 24-hour reporting,

7:9

New treasurer, 2:9

Transfers from candidate'S no

federal committee to federa

committee, ·6:8

When reimbursements are required in SSF fundraising,

2:8
July 1990

CIIAfGi.: OF ADDRESS

FEDERAL ELECTION COMrvllSSION Volume 16, Num

Political Commdttees T~easurers of registered political committees automatically receive the Record

A change of address by a political committee (or any change to information disclose

on the Statement of Organization) must, by law, be made in writing on FEe Form 1 o

letter. The treasurer must sign the amendment and file it with the Secretary of th

Senate, the Clerk of the House o~ the FEe (as appropriate) and with the appropriat

state office.

other SUbscribers

Record subscribers who are not registe~ed political committees should include 

following information when requesting a change of address:

o Subscription number (located on the upper left hand corner of the mailing label)

a Name of the subscriber;

o Old address; and

o New address.

Subscribers (other than political committees) may correct their addresses by

phone as well as by mail.

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

Official Business

Bulk Rate Mail

Postage and Fees Paid

Federal Election Commissi

Permit Number G-31