May 1999 Federal Election Commission Volume 25, Number 5

Table of Contents

Staff

1 New FEC Staff Director Appointed

Public Funding

1 Estimated Public Funding

Available for 2000 Primaries

Shrinks Further

2 Bradley Eligible for Matching

Funds

Publications

2 Disclosure Directory of Federal and

State Election Offices Available

Electronic Filing

4 Free Filing Software Available on

the Web

Legislation

4 Legislative Recommendations

Submitted to President and

Congress

5 Advisory Opinions

Regulations

6 Proposed “Member” Regulations

Draw More Discussion at Second

Public Hearing

6 Public Funding Hearing Touches on

Party Ads, Internet Contributions

Court Cases

7 New Litigation

Compliance

8 MUR 4546

Outreach

8 FEC Conducts Monthly

Roundtable Sessions

9 FEC Conference Schedule

8 Public Appearances

Information

9 FEC Faxline Menu

11 Index

Public Funding

(continued on page 2)

Staff

New FEC Staff Director

Appointed

On April 14, the FEC announced

the appointment of James A.

Pehrkon as Staff Director. Mr.

Pehrkon had been serving as Acting

Staff Director since August 1998.

With this new appointment, he

officially replaces John M. Surina,

who left the agency last year for a

position at the Department of

Agriculture.

Before becoming Acting Staff

Director, Mr. Pehrkon served 18

years as the Commission’s Deputy

Staff Director with responsibilities

for managing the FEC’s budget,

administration and computer

systems. Among the agency’s first

employees, Mr. Pehrkon is credited

with setting up the FEC’s data

processing department and establishing the Data Systems Development Division. He directed the data

division before assuming his duties

as Deputy Staff Director.

Most recently, Mr. Pehrkon has

overseen the FEC’s response to

PricewaterhouseCooper’s performance audit and management

review of the agency. The FEC’s

Commissioners have directed Mr.

Pehrkon to continue to recommend

and implement improvements in the

FEC’s operations, saying his

Estimated Public Funding

Available for 2000 Primaries

Shrinks Further

FEC staff has revised its estimate

for the amount of public funds that

will be available to Presidential

primary candidates at the start of

2000. Previously, qualified Presidential candidates were expected to

receive approximately 40 percent of

their full entitlement on January 2,

2000. Now the estimate is roughly

32 percent.

Total deposits for calendar year

1998 to the Presidential Election

Campaign Fund, which is funded by

the $3 checkoff box on tax forms,

are approximately $3 million less

than the average amount deposited

in the previous three years. If this

trend continues through 1999, the

FEC staff forecast $6 million less

available on January 2, 2000, than

what it had previously estimated.

As required by the U.S. Treasury,

the primary funding amount is

calculated after setting aside the

amounts needed for the general

election (estimated at $147.2 million

for 2000) and conventions (estimated at $28.9 million for 2000) for

the Democratic, Republican and

Reform parties.

Depending on their number and

the amount of matchable contribu-

(continued on page 2)
Federal Election Commission RECORD May 1999

2

Federal Election Commission

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

800/424-9530

202/694-1100

202/501-3413 (FEC Faxline)

202/219-3336 (TDD for the

 hearing impaired)

800/877-8339 (FIRS)

Scott E. Thomas, Chairman

Darryl R. Wold, Vice Chairman

Lee Ann Elliott, Commissioner

David M. Mason, Commissioner

Danny L. McDonald,

 Commissioner

Karl J. Sandstrom, Commissioner

James A. Pehrkon, Staff Director

Lawrence M. Noble, General

 Counsel

Published by the Information

 Division

Louise D. Wides, Director

Angela Rucker, Editor

http://www.fec.gov

Public Funding

(continued from page 1)

Staff

(continued from page 1)

experience and knowledge will be

invaluable in this regard.

An Austin, TX, native, Mr.

Pehrkon received an undergraduate

degree from Harvard University and

did graduate work in foreign affairs

at Georgetown University. ✦

Bradley Eligible for

Matching Funds

On March 25, Democrat Bill

Bradley became the first 2000

Presidential candidate eligible for

public matching funds.

To establish eligibility, a candidate must raise $100,000 by collecting $5,000 in matchable

contributions in at least 20 different

states. Only contributions received

from individuals, and only up to

$250 of a contributor’s total, are

matchable by the federal government.

Eligible candidates must agree to

limit their spending, use funds for

campaign-related expenses only,

keep financial records and submit

their records to an FEC audit.

Once declared eligible, candidates can submit additional contributions for matching funds on the

first business day of every month.

The U.S. Treasury will begin paying

out the FEC-certified amounts in

January 2000. Currently, the maximum amount a Presidential primary

candidate can receive in matching

funds is calculated at $16.75 million.

Matching fund submissions are

available at the FEC’s web site—

tions they raise, primary Presidential Publications

candidates will be eligible to receive

an estimated $98.7 million in public

funds, but only an estimated $20.4

million of that amount will be

available in the fund on January 2,

2000.

If a significant number of candidates remain eligible for matching

funds throughout the Presidential

primaries, subsequent entitlements

may not be fully funded until new

checkoff moneys are received in

2001. That would mean that, based

on these projections, primary

candidates may not get their full

share of the fund until after the

general election is decided. See

graph on p. 3.

During the last Presidential

election cycle in 1996, the first

payment to qualified primary

candidates on January 1, 1996,

represented 60 percent of what they

were entitled to receive. Most

candidates were able to secure

bridge loans until checkoff receipts

for 1996 overcame the shortfall in

April.

For previous articles about the

shortfall, see the July 1998 Record,

p. 1, and the January 1998 Record,

p. 13. ✦

http://www.fec.gov—as

downloadable FTP files. Go to

“Financial Information About

Candidates, Parties and PACs” and

follow the links. Instructions are on

the web site. Copies of submissions

are also available from the FEC’s

Public Records Office. Call 800/

424-9530 (press 3) or 202/694-

1120. ✦

Disclosure Directory of

Federal and State Election

Offices Available

The Combined Federal/State

Disclosure and Election Directory

1999, which lists national and state

offices responsible for public

disclosure of financial- and electionrelated filings for candidates and

officeholders, is now available.

The publication contains information concerning state responsibilities

in the areas of campaign finances,

candidates on the ballot, election

results, lobbying, personal finances,

public financing, spending on state

initiatives and other financial

filings. It also includes e-mail and

home page addresses for agencies

that have a presence on the Internet.

Agencies with on-line access to the

FEC’s database are noted.

The directory is available at the

FEC’s web site—http://

www.fec.gov—and includes links to

many of the other agencies listed in

the publication. The web edition of

the directory will be updated

periodically throughout the year.

The directory is also available on

3.5 inch diskettes for $3. Paper

copies of the 1999 edition, which

are free, can be ordered from the

Public Records Office by calling

800/424-9530 (press 3) or 202/694-

1120. ✦
May 1999 Federal Election Commission RECORD

3

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

Apr.

2001

Mar.

2001

Feb.

2001

Jan.

2001

Dec.

2000

Nov.

2000

Oct.

2000

Sept.

2000

Aug.

2000

Jul.

2000

Jun.

2000

May

2000

Apr.

2000

Mar.

2000

Feb.

2000

Jan.

2000

Millions

Estimated Cumulative Entitlements

Estimated Cumulative Payments

Presidential Election Campaign Fund: Estimated Entitlements and Payments

The estimated cumulative entitlements in the graph below reflect the amount of public funds the Commission

expects qualified candidates to be eligible to receive. The estimated cumulative payments show the amount of public

funds projected to be available to fulfill those entitlements.
Federal Election Commission RECORD May 1999

4

Free Filing Software

Available on the Web

The FEC’s electronic filing

software, FECFile 3, is now only a

few clicks away.

To access the software, just

follow the links to electronic filing

from the FEC’s home page (http://

www.fec.gov), fill out an on-line

form and download the software.

FECFile 3, the latest version of the

FEC’s free electronic filing software,

has been available since the first

week of March. It is faster and easier

to use than the previous version, and

the FEC anticipates many committees will use it to file their reports

during the current cycle.

The growth of the electronic

filing system during the last year has

been smooth and impressive. In

April 1998, 50 committees had filed

electronically. Now, more than a

year later, that number has increased

to 266 committees. Electronic filers

have transmitted more than 1,600

reports to the Commission disclosing over $37 million in transactions.

Careful planning has ensured that

this growth, and the rapid expansion

expected throughout the current

cycle, will not stress the electronic

filing system.

To help pave the way for larger

committees, the FEC has entered

into agreements with commercial

software vendors Aristotle Publishing and Gnossos Software, companies whose products are used by

many medium to large federal

political committees. Working

closely with the FEC, they have

added electronic filing capability to

their software products, obviating

the need for separate filing software.

The FEC is beginning to see the

impact of these efforts with monthly

filings from a number of large,

nonparty committees. Other software companies may also have

Electronic

Filing

Legislative Recommendations

Submitted to President and

Congress

The Commission has submitted

41 recommendations for legislative

action to President Bill Clinton and

the U.S. Congress.

The recommendations were

submitted in batches. The first

group—three priority recommendations—was sent to Congress and the

President on March 8. The three

recommendations were:

• Electronic Filing. The recommendation would require committees

that reach a certain threshold of

financial activity to file their

reports electronically with the

Commission. Among the benefits:

faster processing of reports by the

FEC, standardized presentation of

reports on the FEC web site for all

committees of a certain threshold,

enhanced public disclosure of

campaign finance information and

easier filing for committees. The

Commission has facilitated

electronic filing, on a voluntary

basis, since 1997 and has designed

software that accommodates many

committees.

• Campaign Cycle Reporting. This

proposal would place committee

Legislation

incorporated electronic filing

capability into their products. You

should check with your vendor to

find out if your software offers this

option.

The Commission will be sending

a questionnaire to all committees

soon asking about their computer

capabilities and attitudes toward

filing electronically. The agency

hopes committees will take a few

minutes to respond and help

develop a system that best meets

their needs. ✦

reporting on a campaign-cycle

basis. It would simplify

recordkeeping and reporting for

authorized committees. Currently,

they must track contributions on a

calendar-year basis to comply with

the Federal Election Campaign

Act’s (the Act’s) reporting requirements and track contributions on a

per-election basis to comply with

the Act’s contribution limits.

Moving to election-cycle reporting

would also enhance disclosure of

aggregate totals for contributions

and disbursements.

• $25,000 Annual Limit. This

proposal would help eliminate

confusion among some contributors who inadvertently exceed their

annual limit when making contributions to a candidate in a

nonelection year. Current law

states that these contributions

count against the annual limit for

the year in which the candidate’s

election is held—not the

nonelection year during which the

contribution was made. The

proposed change to the law would

also allow the Commission to

better monitor the annual contribution limit for individuals through

its computer database.

The second batch—a supplemental set of 38 recommendations

transmitted to the Hill and the White

House April 1—is divided into two

parts: those that would ease burdens

for political committees and streamline the administration of current

campaign finance laws and those

that are primarily technical in

nature. This supplemental included

recommendations covering:

• An administrative fine schedule

• A shortfall in the Presidential

Election Campaign Fund

• Contributor information

• Fraudulent solicitations

• Draft committees

• Contributions by foreign nationals

• Travel

• Contributions from minors

• Loans from non-banking institutions
May 1999 Federal Election Commission RECORD

5

• Use of force and reprisals

• Audits for cause

• “Reason to Believe” terminology

• Threshold eligibility for primary

matching funds

• State expenditure limits for

Presidential primary candidates

• Eligibility for public funding

Each recommendation is followed by an explanation of the need

for it and the expected benefits. To

view the entire list of 1999 legislative recommendations, go the FEC’s

web site—http://www.fec.gov—and

click on “What’s New!” ✦

Advisory

Opinions

AO 1999-3

Use of Electronic Signatures

Authorizing Payroll

Deductions to Corporate

PAC

The Microsoft Corporate Political

Action Committee (Microsoft PAC)

may accept digital electronic

signatures from Microsoft Corp.

employees who authorize payroll

deduction of contributions to the

PAC. An electronic signature

constitutes a valid written authorization for the deductions as required

by law.

Microsoft currently uses electronic signatures for other companywide purposes and attests that the

practice is secure. Microsoft ensures

this security by requiring employees

to periodically change their passwords, to protect their passwords

from disclosure and to secure their

work stations whenever they step

away.

In addition, Microsoft proposes a

confirmation process for employees

who wish to use payroll deduction

to contribute to its PAC. When the

PAC receives an electronically

Advisory Opinion Requests

Advisory opinion requests are

available for review and comment in

the Public Records Office.

AOR 1999-8

Investment of excess campaign

funds in mutual funds (Citizens for

Arlen Specter, March 16, 1999; 5

pages)

AOR 1999-9

Matching credit card contributions

received by Presidential primary

candidates via Internet (Bill Bradley

for President, Inc., March 18, 1999;

9 pages)

AOR 1999-10

SSF solicitation of member policyholders of mutual insurance company who are independent

contractor agents (Nationwide

Political Participation Committee,

March 29, 1999; 2 pages plus 44-

page attachment)

AOR 1999-11

Federal candidate’s use of funds

from state-level campaign account

to advertise forum for discussing

state matters (Dianne Byrum, April

8, 1999; 6 pages) ✦

signed payroll deduction form by email, it will send an e-mail reply to

notify the employee of its receipt of

the form and to request a second

confirmation of the employee’s

choice to participate in the payroll

deduction program.

Commission regulations permit a

corporate PAC to use a payroll

deduction plan to solicit and collect

contributions from the corporation’s

restricted class (executive and

administrative personnel, and their

families). 11 CFR 114.1(f) and

114.5(k)(1). In soliciting the restricted class, corporations and

PACs must follow FEC rules that

ensure that contributions are voluntarily given. 11 CFR 114.5(a)(1)-

(5). Further, when using payroll

deduction, a PAC must first secure

an affirmative written authorization

from the contributor. This is often

accomplished by a combination

solicitation and payroll deduction

form sent to the employee. This

form allows an employee to designate the amount to be deducted

during the pay period and to indicate

his or her authorization via a

signature.

This signature required by

Commission recordkeeping regulations is necessary as a unique

identifier of the employee. 11 CFR

104.14(b)(1). An authorization form

signed by a contributor becomes

part of a committee’s records, which

must be preserved for at least three

years after the related report or

statement is filed. 11 CFR

104.14(b)(3) and 102.9(c).

The Commission has, in the past,

interpreted its regulations in such a

way as to accommodate technological innovations where the use of

technology does not compromise the

intent of the Federal Election Campaign Act or FEC regulations. See

AOs 1995-9, 1994-40 and 1993-4.

An electronic signature, like a

written signature, functions as a

unique identifier of the authorizing

employee. In view of Microsoft

PAC’s stated procedures and

safeguards for the payroll deduction

plan, electronic signatures may be

used by employees to authorize such

transactions provided that the

following conditions are met.

• An employee must be able to use

the electronic signature or a

written signature to revoke or

modify the amount of the authorization at any time; and

• A record of the electronic signature, including verification that the

signature came from a particular

employee, must be maintained in a

retrievable form available to the

Commission in the event of an

audit or investigation.

Date Issued: March 18, 1999;

Length: 4 pages. ✦
Federal Election Commission RECORD May 1999

6

Proposed “Member”

Regulations Draw More

Discussion at Second Public

Hearing

On March 17, the Commission

held a public hearing regarding

revisions to regulations that govern

who qualifies as a member of a

membership organization.

The public hearing was the

second the Commission has held in

the past 12 months as it attempts to

craft revisions to the member

regulations found at 11 CFR parts

100 and 114. The first hearing, in

April 1998, produced no consensus

on which of the Commission’s

alternative proposals would best

implement the requirements of the

law. The second Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) was published

in the Federal Register on December 16, 1998.

 Laurence E. Gold, Associate

General Counsel for the AFL-CIO,

called the suggested revisions in the

NPRM an improvement, but said

more is needed to establish a

standard for “member.” The standard must be meaningful and not

subject to manipulation, he and

other union officials stressed. One

suggestion: a minimum dues

payment of $50 or a smaller dues

payment plus a meaningful organizational attachment to the organization. Mr. Gold also told

Commissioners that its regulations

should not hold union retirees to the

same membership requirements as

the general membership, but should

recognize anyone the union calls a

retiree as a bona fide member.

Robert D. Lenhard, of the

American Federation of State,

County and Municipal Employees,

also noted union concerns about the

disclosure of their organizing

documents to members, arguing that

any regulation requiring this would

Public Funding Hearing

Touches on Party Ads,

Internet Contributions

On March 24, the Commission

held a public hearing on public

financing of Presidential primary

and general election candidates.

The Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) on this issue

(63 FR 69524, Dec. 16, 1998)

covers a number of topics, but

speakers at the public hearing

focused on just a few issues, including party committee ads and other

types of expenditures coordinated

with Presidential candidates, host

committee expenditures, Internet

contributions to Presidential candidates, services provided to media

representatives and the

Commission’s procedures for

auditing federally financed Presidential committees.

Thomas J. Josefiak, a former FEC

Commissioner who spoke on behalf

of the Republican National Committee, said that the Commission’s

proposal to make party committee

issue ads clearly identifying a

Presidential nominee count against a

party’s general election coordinated

spending limit would be unconstitutional since the ads would not

contain express advocacy.

Democratic National Committee

counsel Joseph E. Sandler said that

the FEC’s proposed three-part test

for determining whether an ad was a

coordinated expenditures was too

subjective. The test would not count

Regulations be potentially burdensome and carry

“significant” consequences if

violated.

Professional and advocacy

groups, on the other hand, told

Commissioners not to set a minimum dues amount, and said that

such decisions should be left to

individual organizations. The

Commission must take the diversity

of organizations into account as

well, added Jerald A. Jacobs, of the

American Society of Association

Executives. Mr. Jacobs and others

urged that lifetime, student and

honorary members and members

who are retirees be treated the same

as all other members even if their

dues have been waived or are lower

than those paid by full members.

Other organizational attachments

should be sufficient for these

members, speakers argued.

James Bopp, Jr., speaking on

behalf of the James Madison Center

for Free Speech, told Commissioners that the agency’s suggestion for

an annual affirmation of membership was burdensome and unnecessary—an opinion backed up by a

number of those testifying at the

hearing. National Education Association attorney Richard B. Wilkof

said the recommendation for an

annual affirmation would be unconstitutional, preventing unions from

effectively communicating with

their members. He and other witnesses also noted that some membership organizations do not collect

dues annually, yet members of those

groups display organizational

attachments that should prove

sufficient to qualify them as members under Commission regulations.

A majority of speakers told the

Commission that its proposed

requirement for membership

organizations to make their formal

organizational documents (articles,

bylaws and the like) available to

members could be burdensome, as

could any regulation that would

require an organization to amend its

governing documents.

For more information about the

member NPRM or public hearing:

• Request a transcript of the hearing

testimony from the Public Records

Office (800/424-9530, press 3, or

202/694-1120).

• Read the NPRM (63 FR 69224),

which is available from Faxline

(call 202/501-3413, document 229)

and at the FEC’s web site (http://

www.fec.gov, click “What’s

New!”). ✦
May 1999 Federal Election Commission RECORD

7

New Litigation

Fireman v. United States

Simon C. Fireman asks the U.S.

Court of Federal Claims to compel

the FEC to refund $69,000 in illegal

contributions he made to two 1996

Presidential campaign committees

of former Senator Bob Dole.

Faced with a 73-count information, Mr. Fireman in 1996 pleaded

guilty to making contributions in the

names of others and making excessive contributions. The U.S. District

Court Cases

an ad against a party’s expenditure

limit if the ad focused on legislative

or public policy issues, addressed an

audience that would be affected by

the legislation being discussed, or

mentioned the candidate only

incidentally or only as a proponent

or opponent of the subject being

presented.

Lyn Utrecht, of the law firm

Ryan, Phillips, Utrecht &

MacKinnon, added that the Commission “should not interfere with

the relationship between the party

and their candidate” and cautioned

Commissioners not to do anything

that discourages compliance with

the election law.

Parties are not simply election

machines for federal candidates, but

have a much wider agenda, argued

James Bopp, Jr., who testified at the

hearing on behalf of the James

Madison Center for Free Speech.

David Eisner, Vice President for

Corporate Affairs for America

Online, Inc., told Commissioners

that the current regulation prohibiting public matching funds for credit

card contributions to Presidential

candidates was a stumbling block to

an increasingly computer-savvy

community that already uses the

World Wide Web to register to vote,

e-mail congressional representatives

and sign-up to volunteer in political

campaigns.

“We obviously face a rapidly

changing legal environment in this

area,” added Trevor Potter, a former

FEC Commissioner who was

representing AOL. He said the

Commission should consider not

only credit card contributions

eligible for matching funds, but also

contributions made with debit cards,

electronic funds transfers and cyber

cash.

George Condon, Washington

bureau chief for Copley News

Service, told the Commissioners

that “some guidelines are sorely

needed” to instruct Presidential

campaigns about what they can

charge the media for the costs of

providing transportation and ground

services to those covering the

campaigns. During the last two

Presidential campaigns, Mr. Condon

said, a breakdown of the unwritten

rules between the campaigns and the

media meant confusion over when

the media should pay and how much

they should be charged.

Mr. Condon and Kim Hume, of

Fox News, represented the concerns

of 29 news organizations that were

asking for rules to describe allowable expenses more explicitly,

require itemized bills from campaigns and limit abuse by Presidential committees of media

representative’s personal credit

cards.

For more information about the

public funding NPRM and public

hearing:

• Request a transcript of the hearing

testimony from the Public Records

Office (800/424-9530, press 3, or

202/694-1120).

• Read the NPRM in the December

16, 1998, Federal Register. The

document is available from FEC

Faxline (202/501-3413, document

235) and at http://www.fec.gov.

• See the January 1999 Record, p. 7,

for a summary of the NPRM. ✦

Court for the District of Massachusetts ordered him to pay a $1 million

fine and sentenced him to one year

of probation. Upon learning that the

contributions were likely impermissible, Mr. Dole’s primary and

compliance committees disgorged

the $69,000 to the U.S. Treasury.

Fireman alleges that FEC regulations mandate that a contribution

that does not appear impermissible

at the time it is made, but later is

found to be from a prohibited

source, be refunded to the contributor within 30 days. 11 CFR

103.3(b)(2). He also alleges that

Commission advisory opinions

concluding that a campaign committee could also refund impermissible

contributions to the U.S. Treasury

are beyond the Commission’s

authority and contrary to its regulations.

U.S. Court of Federal Claims, 99-

17, January 8, 1999. ✦

Back Issues of the

Record Available on

the Internet

This issue of the Record and all

other issues of the Record starting

with January 1996 are available

through the Internet as PDF files.

Visit the FEC’s World Wide Web

site at http://www.fec.gov and

click on “What’s New” for this

issue. Click “Help for Candidates,

Parties and PACs” to see back issues. Future Record issues will be

posted on the web as well. You

will need Adobe® Acrobat®

Reader software to view the publication. The FEC’s web site has

a link that will take you to Adobe’s

web site, where you can download

the latest version of the software

for free.
Federal Election Commission RECORD May 1999

8

Compliance

MUR 4546

Failure to Follow “Best

Efforts” Rules Results in

Civil Penalty

Friends of Jack Metcalf, the

principal campaign committee of

1996 Republican congressional

hopeful Jack Metcalf, has paid a

$7,000 civil penalty for failing to

use “best efforts” to obtain missing

contributor information.

The Federal Election Campaign

Act (the Act) requires committees to

identify each person making aggregate contributions of more than

$200 in a calendar year by name,

mailing address, occupation and

employer. 2 U.S.C. §§434(b)(3)(A)

and 431(13). In order to comply

with the Act, a committee must

make its “best efforts” to obtain,

maintain and submit the required

identifying information. A committee demonstrates “best efforts” by

making at least one follow-up,

stand-alone request for the missing

information within 30 days of

receiving a contribution and amending succeeding reports to disclose

the complete identification of

contributors.

The campaign committee here

failed to report complete contributor

information on its three quarterly

reports due in 1996 by a rate of

between 63 and 74 percent. Although the committee sent followup letters seeking the omitted

information, it did not do so within

30 days of receipt of the contribution. Further, the Committee did not

file amendments containing complete information about its contributors in the three reports until more

than a year after the 1996 election.

The Commission entered into a

conciliation agreement with the

Committee after finding probable

cause to believe that it had violated

the Act and Commission regulations. ✦

Public Appearances

May 4 Association Management and Public Affairs Consulting

Washington, DC

Dorothy Yeager, Senior Public Affairs Specialist

May 4 National Association of Business Political Action Committees

Washington, DC

Scott Thomas, Chairman

Outreach

Date Subject Intended Audience

May 5

9:30 -11 a.m.

Fundraising Through

Payroll Deductions and

Combined Dues/PAC

Solicitations

(Code #599)

•

•

Corporate/Labor/Trade

PAC Staff

Lawyers, Accountants

and Consultants to

Above PACs

June 2

9:30 -11 a.m.

Candidate Reporting

Basics

(Code #699)

• House and Senate

Candidates

July 7

9:30 -11 a.m.

Using Prizes or

Entertainment to Raise

SSF Funds

(Code #799)

•

•

Corporate/Labor/Trade

PAC Staff

Lawyers, Accountants

and Consultants to

Above PACs

August 4

9:30 -11 a.m.

Corporate Mergers and

Spin-Offs —Effect on

the SSF

(Code #899)

•

•

Corporate PAC Staff

Lawyers, Accountants

and Consultants to

Corporate PACs

Filled!

Waiting List

Only

FEC Conducts Monthly

Roundtable Sessions

The FEC is conducting monthly

roundtable sessions for the regulated

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

to 12 participants per session, focus

on a range of topics. See the table

below for dates and topics.

Registration is $25 and will be

accepted on a first-come, firstserved basis. Please call the FEC

before registering or sending money

to be sure that openings remain in

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

form is available at the FEC’s web

site (http://www.fec.gov) and from

Faxline, the FEC’s automated fax

system (202/501-3413, request

document 590). For more information, call 800/424-9530 (press 1) or

202/694-1100.

Individuals who have signed up

for a roundtable but who will be

unable to attend are strongly encouraged to call the FEC and cancel

their registration so that the next

person on the waiting list may

attend in their place. ✦
May 1999 Federal Election Commission RECORD

9

FEC Conference

Schedule

 The FEC will sponsor a series

of conferences on campaign

finance in 1999 and 2000. See list

at right for details. To register for

any conference, call Sylvester

Management at 800/246-7277 or

send an e-mail to

tsylvester@worldnet.att.net. For

program information, call the

FEC’s Information Division at

800/424-9530 (press 1) or 202/

694-1100. A regularly updated

schedule for the conferences and

a downloadable invitation/

registration form for the June

conference appear at the FEC’s

web site. Go to

http://www.fec.gov for the latest

information.

Membership and Trade

Association Conference

Date: June 7-8, 1999

Location: Washington, DC

(Doubletree Hotel Pentagon City)

Registration: $225

Partnership Conference

Date: July 1999

Location: Washington, DC

Registration: To be determined

Regional Conference (includes

candidate, corporate/labor and

party workshops)

Date: September 1999

Location: Chicago, IL

Registration: To be determined

Regional Conference (includes

candidate, corporate/labor and

party workshops)

Date: November 15-17, 1999

Location: San Francisco

Registration: To be determined

Candidate Conference

Date: February 2000

Location: Washington, DC

Registration: To be determined

Regional Conference (includes

candidate, corporate/labor and

party workshops)

Date: March 2000

Location: Miami, FL

Registration: To be determined

Corporate and Labor

Conference

Date: May 2000

Location: Washington, DC

Registration: To be determined

Membership and Trade

Association Conference

Date: June 2000

Location: Washington, DC

Registration: To be determined

FEC Faxline Menu

FEC Faxline documents may be

ordered 24 hours a day, 7 days a week,

by calling 202/501-3413 on a touch

tone phone. You will be asked for the

numbers of the documents you want,

your fax number and your telephone

number. The documents will be faxed

shortly thereafter.

Federal Election Commission

411. Complete Menu of All Material

Available

501. The FEC and the Federal

Campaign Finance Law

502. La Ley Federal relativa al

Financiamiento de las Campañas

503. Federal and State Campaign

Finance Laws

504. Compliance with Laws Outside

the FEC’s Jurisdiction

505. Biographies of Commissioners

and Officers

506. Telephone Directory

Information 507. Table of Organization

508. Index for 1997 Record

Newsletter

509. Free Publications

510. Personnel Vacancy

Announcements

511. Freedom of Information Act

Requesters’ Guide

512. Legal Opportunities at the FEC

513. 1999 Legislative Recommendations

Disclosure

521. Guide to Researching Public

Records

522. Accessibility of Public Records

Office

523. Federal/State Records Offices

524. Using FEC Campaign Finance

Information

525. State Computer Access to FEC

Data

526. Direct Access Program (DAP)

527. Sale and Use of Campaign

Information

528. Combined Federal/State

Disclosure Directory 1998 on

Disk

529. Selected Political Party Organizations and Addresses

530. Internet Access to the FEC

531. Downloadable Databases via the

Internet

532. Electronic Filing Took Kit

533. State Campaign Finance and

Lobbying Data on the Internet

Limitations

546. Contributions

547. Coordinated Party Expenditure

Limits

548. Advances: Contribution Limits

and Reporting

549. Volunteer Activity

550. Independent Expenditures

551. Local Party Activity

552. Corporate Communications/

Facilities

553. Trade Associations

554. Foreign Nationals

555. The $25,000 Annual Contribution Limit

556. Personal Use of Campaign

Funds

557. Delegate Activity

558. Partnerships

(continued on page 10)
Federal Election Commission RECORD May 1999

10

Public Funding

566. Public Funding of Presidential

Elections

567. The $3 Tax Checkoff

568. 1993 Changes to Checkoff

569. Recipients of Public Funding

570. Presidential Fund Income Tax

Checkoff Status

571. Presidential Spending Limits

Compliance

581. Candidate Registration

582. Committee Treasurers

583. Special Notices on Political Ads

and Solicitations

584. 10 Questions from Candidates

585. Filing a Complaint

586. 1999 Reporting Dates

587. 1998 Congressional Primary

Dates

588. 1999 Special Election Reporting

Dates

589. 1999 FEC Regional Conference

Schedule

590. FEC Monthly Roundtables

Money in Politics Statistics

601. 1991-2 Political Money

602. 1998 Year-End PAC Count

603. 1993-4 Congressional

604. 1993-4 National Party

605. 1993-4 PAC Finances

606. 1995-6 Congressional

607. 1995-6 National Party

608. 1995-6 PAC Finances

609. 1997-8 National Party

610. 1997-8 Congressional

611. 1997-8 PAC Finances

Presidential

651. Selected 2000 Campaign Names

and Addresses

652. Selected 2000 Campaign

Summary Pages

660. 1996 Presidential Primary Dates

661. Selected 1996 Campaign Names

and Addresses

662. Selected 1996 Campaign

Finance Figures

663. 1996 Public Funding Certifications and Payments

664. 1996 Presidential General

Election Ballots

665. 1996 Presidential General

Election Results

Office of Election Administration

701. List of Reports Available

702. Voting Accessibility for the

Elderly and Handicapped Act

703. National Voter Registration Act

Regulations

704. National Voter Registration Act

of 1993

705. The Electoral College

706. Organizational Structure of the

American Election System

707. Primary Functions of an Election

System

Forms

801. Form 1, Statement of Organization

802. Form 2, Statement of Candidacy

803. Form 3 and 3Z, Report for an

Authorized Committee

804. Form 3X, Report for Other Than

an Authorized Committee

805. Form 5, Report of Independent

Expenditures

806. Form 6, 48-Hour Notice of

Contributions/Loans Received

807. Form 7, Report of Communication Costs

808. Form 8, Debt Settlement Plan

809. Form 1M, Notification of

Multicandidate Status

Schedules

825. Schedule A, Itemized Receipts

826. Schedule B, Itemized Disbursements

827. Schedules C and C-1, Loans

828. Schedule D, Debts and Obligations

829. Schedule E, Itemized Independent Expenditures

830. Schedule F, Itemized Coordinated Expenditures

831. Schedules H1 –H4, Allocation

832. Schedule I, Aggregate Page

Nonfederal Accounts

Regulations (11 CFR Parts 100-201)

100. Part 100, Scope and Definitions

1007. Part 100.7, Contribution

1008. Part 100.8, Expenditure

101. Part 101, Candidate Status and

Designations

102. Part 102, Registration, Organization and Recordkeeping by

Political Committees

1021. Part 102.17, Joint Fundraising

by Committees Other Than SSFs

103. Part 103, Campaign Depositories

104. Part 104, Reports by Political

Committees

1047. Part 104.7, Best Efforts

105. Part 105, Document Filing

106. Part 106, Allocations of Candidate and Committee Activities

107. Part 107, Presidential Nominating Convention, Registration and

Reports

108. Part 108, Filing Copies of

Reports and Statements with

State Offices

109. Part 109, Independent Expenditures

110. Part 110, Contribution and

Expenditure Limitations and

Prohibitions

1101. Part 110.1, Contributions by

Persons Other Than Multicandidate Political Committees

1102. Part 110.2, Contributions by

Multicandidate Committees

1103. Part 110.3, Contribution

Limitations for Affiliated

Committees and Political Party

Committees; Transfers

1104. Part 110.4, Prohibited Contributions

1105. Part 110.5, Annual Contribution

Limitation for Individuals

1106. Part 110.6, Earmarked Contributions

1107. Part 110.7, Party Committee

Expenditure Limitations

1108. Part 110.8, Presidential Candidate Expenditure Limitations

1109. Part 110.9, Miscellaneous

Provisions

1110. Part 110.10, Expenditures by

Candidates

1111. Part 110.11, Communications;

Advertising

1112. Part 110.12, Candidate Appearances on Public Educational

Institution Premises

1113. Part 110.13, Nonpartisan

Candidate Debates

1114. Part 110.14, Contributions to

and Expenditures by Delegates

and Delegate Committees

111. Part 111, Compliance Procedure

112. Part 112, Advisory Opinions

113. Part 113, Excess Campaign

Funds and Funds Donated to

Support Federal Officeholder

Activities

114. Part 114, Corporate and Labor

Organization Activity

115. Part 115, Federal Contractors

116. Part 116, Debts Owed by

Candidates and Political

Committees

200. Part 200, Petitions for Rulemaking

201. Part 201, Ex Parte Communications

Information

(continued from page 9)
May 1999 Federal Election Commission RECORD

11

Index

The first number in each citation

refers to the “number” (month) of

the 1999 Record issue in which the

article appeared. The second

number, following the colon,

indicates the page number in that

issue. For example, “1:4” means

that the article is in the January

issue on page 4.

Advisory Opinions

1998-22: Application of expenditure

definition and disclaimer requirements to web site containing

express advocacy, 1:16

1998-23: Status as state committee

of political party, 1:16

1998-26: Candidate committee’s

acceptance of loan repayment

from contested election trust fund

that contains funds loaned to it by

candidate, 3:5

1998-27: Status as state committee

of political party, 3:6

1999-1: Use of campaign funds to

pay salary to candidate, 4:5

1999-2: Use of corporate treasury

funds to provide meals to employees attending candidate forums,

4:6

1999-3: Use of digital signatures by

restricted class to authorize

payroll deductions, 5:5

Compliance

MUR 4546: Failure to provide

contributor information and

demonstrate “best efforts,” 5:8

MUR 4750: Excessive contributions, 1:13

MUR 4751: Excessive and improper

transfers of nonfederal funds,

excessive contributions, corporate

contributions, 2:2

MUR 4796: Corporate contributions, contributions in the names

of others, 1:13

MUR 4834: Foreign national

contribution, contribution in the

name of another, 3:7

Court Cases

FEC v. _____

– Al Salvi for Senate Committee

(98C-4933), 4:5

– Colorado Republican Federal

Campaign Committee, 4:1

– Forbes, 4:5

_____ v. FEC

– Judd, 1:3; 4:5

– Mariani, 2:1

– National Committee of the Reform

Party, 4:4

– RNC (98-5263), 1:2

Other

– Burris v. Russell, 1:3

– Cincinnati v. Kruse, 1:3

– Fireman v. United States, 5:7

Regulations

Definition of “Member” of Membership Association, 1:10; 3:1; 5:6

Electronic FOIA, 4:7

Express Advocacy, 3:2

Limited Liability Companies, 1:11

Public Financing of Presidential

Primary and General Election

Candidates, 1:7; 3:1; 5:6

Soft money, 1:12

Status of, 3:3

Reports

Electronic filing, 1:6; 2:1

Reports due in 1999, 1:4

Special election, Georgia, 2:3

Special election, Louisiana, 4:7

Statistics

Congressional, 2:4

PAC, 3:11

Party, 3:4

Recent Actions on Regulations,

Including Explanations

and Justifications

227. Electronic Filing of Reports by

Political Committees

228. Coordinated and Independent

Expenditures by Party Committees

229. Definition of “Member” of a

Membership Association

230. Prohibited and Excessive

Contributions; “Soft Money”

231. Recordkeeping and Reporting

232. Express Advocacy

233. Qualified Nonprofit Corporations

234. Electronic Filing of Reports by

Presidential Candidates

235. Public Financing of Presidential

Primary and General Election

Candidates

236. Treatment of Limited Liability

Companies under the Federal

Election Campaign Act

237. Definition of “Express Advocacy”

238. Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments

U.S. Code (Title 2)

431. Section 431 442. Section 442

432. Section 432 451. Section 451

433. Section 433 452. Section 452

434. Section 434 453. Section 453

437. Section 437 454. Section 454

4377. Section 437g 455. Section 455

438. Section 438

439. Section 439

441. Section 441

4411. Section 441a

4412. Section 441b

4413. Section 441c

4414. Section 441d

4415. Section 441e

4416. Section 441f

Advisory Opinions

9901-03. AOs 1999-1 through 1999-3

9801-27. AOs 1998-1 through 1998-27

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

9001-40. AOs 1990-1 through 1990-40
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300

Bulk Rate Mail

Postage and Fees Paid

Federal Election Commission

Permit Number G-31

Printed on recycled paper

Federal Election Commission RECORD May 1999