39–006 

113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 113–291 

TO AMEND THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986 TO 

PROHIBIT THE USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS FOR POLITICAL 

PARTY CONVENTIONS 

DECEMBER 12, 2013.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan, from the Committee on House 

Administration, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

MINORITY VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 94] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on House Administration, to whom was referred 

the bill (H.R. 94) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 

prohibit the use of public funds for political party conventions, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

The Presidential Election Campaign Fund, established by Congress, was first used in the Presidential campaign of 1976. It provides taxpayer support for presidential campaigns in three forms: 

payments to candidates in primary elections to match qualifying individual donations, fixed grants to candidates in general elections 

who agree to forego individual donations and fixed grants to major 

parties to fund presidential nominating conventions. 

The PECF is financed by allowing taxpayers to check a box on 

their tax returns designating an amount for the Fund. The amount 

was originally set at $1 per individual and subsequently increased 

to $3 per individual. If the taxpayer checks the box, that amount 

of their individual tax liability is directed to PECF. Checking the 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

box does not change the amount of tax paid, so the PECF reduces 

Treasury funds available for other purposes. 

The number of taxpayers who indicated their support for taxpayer financial of presidential campaigns by checking the box to divert funds to PECF peaked in 1980 at 28.7 percent. It has declined 

consistently since then, to 5.1 percent in 2012. Support for the 

PECF by candidates also has declined. In 2000 major candidates 

began rejecting the PECF matching funds during the primary campaign in order to avoid the restrictions that accompanied them. In 

2008 then-candidate Obama rejected PECF funds in the primary 

election and also became the first major party candidate to reject 

the general election grant. In 2012 only three candidates (Gary 

Johnson, Buddy Roemer and Jill Stein) applied for PECF funds. 

Neither major party candidate accepted the PECF grant in the general election. 

With the decline in candidate participation to nearly zero, the remaining use of the PECF is to provide grants to major party’s to 

conduct their presidential nominating conventions. In 2012 each 

major party received approximately $18 million for its convention. 

In addition to the $36 million total from PECF, the parties raised 

approximately $80 million in private funds. 

Reports prepared by Senator Coburn using records from the Federal Election Commission showed that the conventions held in 2008 

spent over $2 million for travel expenses, almost as much for catering and over $6 million for salaries. The reports also show payments for gift bags, flowers and entertainment. At a time when 

budgets are being cut in important programs across the federal 

government, diverting taxpayer resources to these costs is not appropriate. 

During the consideration of H.R. 94, Representative Brady offered an amendment that would repeal the taxpayer financing of 

party nominating conventions and allow parties to raise funds for 

conventions and other purposes in a separate account subject to the 

limitations on sources and amounts that currently apply to the parties. Representative Brady withdrew the amendment and the 

Chairman agreed to work with him to seek agreement on legislative language. No agreement has been achieved but additional discussions on the approach embodied in Representative Brady’s 

amendment may occur prior to the bill being considered by the 

House. 

INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL

On January 3, 2013, Congressman Tom Cole of Oklahoma introduced H.R. 94, which was referred to the Committee on House Administration. 

HEARINGS

There were no legislative hearings held on H.R. 94. 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On June 4, 2013, the Committee on House Administration met 

to consider H.R. 94. The Committee ordered the bill reported favorably to the House without amendment by voice vote with a quorum 

present. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

COMMITTEE RECORD VOTES

In compliance with House Rule XIII, clause 3(b), requiring the 

results of each record vote on an amendment or motion to report, 

together with the names of those voting for and against, to be 

printed in the Committee report, the Committee states that there 

were no record votes during the Committee’s consideration of H.R. 

94. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In compliance with House Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(1), the Committee states that the findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on oversight activities under House rule X, clause 

2(b)(1), are incorporated into the general discussion section of this 

report. 

STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY AND RELATED ITEMS

The bill does not provide new budget authority, new spending 

authority, new credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures and a statement under House Rule XIII, 

clause 3(c)(2), and section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget 

Act of 1974 is not required. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is the cost estimate provided by 

the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 

Congressional Budget Act of 1974: 

JUNE 26, 2013. 

Hon. CANDICE MILLER, 

Chairman, Committee on House Administration, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MADAM CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has 

prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 94, a bill to amend the 

Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to prohibit the use of public funds 

for political party conventions. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Maggie Morrissey and 

Matthew Pickford. 

Sincerely, 

DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF. 

Enclosure. 

H.R. 94—A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to prohibit the use of public funds for political party conventions 

Summary: H.R. 94 would amend federal law to prohibit the use 

of public funds for political campaign conventions. By eliminating 

that option, CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 94 would reduce direct spending by $126 million over the 2014–2023 period. In addition, the legislation would affect direct spending and federal penalties related to campaign financing (some of which are recorded in 

the budget as revenues and are available to be spent without further appropriation); CBO estimates, however, that any such effects 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

would not be significant. Because the bill would affect direct spending and revenues, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. The staff of the 

Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimates that enacting the 

legislation would have no impact on federal income tax revenues. 

JCT has determined that H.R. 94 contains no intergovernmental 

or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act (UMRA). 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 94 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 800 (general government). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2014– 

2018 

2014– 

2023 

CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING 

Estimated Budget Authority 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays ............. 0 ¥40 0 0 0 ¥42 0 0 0 ¥44 ¥40 ¥126 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the legislation will be enacted before the end of 2013. We estimate that enacting the bill would reduce direct spending but would have no significant effect on revenues (including penalties). 

The Presidential Election Campaign Fund (PECF) provides 

money for Presidential election campaigns including political party 

conventions. The fund is financed by taxpayers who voluntarily 

designate on their income tax returns that a portion of their annual tax liability ($3 for individual income tax filers and $6 for 

joint returns) be credited to the PECF. The voluntary earmarking 

of a portion of a taxpayer’s liability does not affect the amount of 

tax owed to the federal government or the amount of any refund 

owed to that taxpayer. Use of the fund has gradually diminished 

in recent years along with the amounts credited to the fund. In 

2012, $35 million was credited to the fund and during the most recent Presidential campaign, spending from the PECF totaled $36 

million for political conventions organized by the two major political parties. In addition, the two major party candidates did not accept public funding for their campaigns and other candidates received a little more than $1 million for their campaigns. 

CBO estimates that eliminating the use of the PECF to fund political campaign conventions would reduce direct spending by $126 

million over the 2014–2023 period. That estimate is based on PECF 

spending on political conventions over the last two Presidential 

election cycles. 

Reducing the use of the PECF could reduce the administrative 

costs that the Federal Election Commission incurs to oversee the 

use of amounts drawn from that fund during Presidential election 

campaign cycles. However, because of the diminished use of the 

funds in recent years, CBO expects any such savings would be insignificant. 

Enacting H.R. 94 could affect federal revenues by decreasing the 

collection of fines for violating campaign finance law. Such collections are recorded in the budget as revenues and, in certain cases, 

such amounts may be spent without further appropriation. CBO estimates that any net changes in revenues and associated direct 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
5 

spending would be insignificant because of the small number of 

possible violations. 

Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act 

of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement procedures 

for legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. The changes 

in outlays that are subject to those pay-as-you-go procedures are 

shown in the following table. Enacting the legislation would have 

no significant effect on revenues (including penalties). 

CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR H.R. 94, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION ON JUNE 4, 2013 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2013– 

2018 

2013– 

2023 

NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (¥) IN THE [ON-BUDGET] DEFICIT 

Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact .................................... 0 0 ¥40 0 0 0 ¥42 0 0 0 ¥44 ¥40 ¥126 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 94 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA. 

Previous CBO estimate: On June 21, 2013, CBO transmitted a 

cost estimate for H.R. 95, a bill to reduce federal spending and the 

deficit by terminating taxpayer financing of Presidential election 

campaigns and party conventions, as ordered reported by the Committee on House Administration on June 4, 2013. On May 13, 2013, 

CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 2019, the Kids First Research Act of 2013, as introduced on May 16, 2013. The three bills 

would affect the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. H.R. 95 and 

H.R. 2019 have identical provisions that would eliminate the 

PECF, while under H.R. 94, spending for presidential party conventions would end but other spending could continue. Those differences are reflected in the CBO cost estimates. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Spending: Maggie Morrissey and 

Matthew Pickford; Intergovernmental and Private-Sector Mandates: Joint Committee on Taxation. 

Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

In compliance with House Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(4), the Committee states that the general discussion section of this report includes a statement of the general performance goals and objectives, 

including outcome-related goals and objectives, for which H.R. 94 

authorizes funding. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant to 

Amendment XVI of the U.S. Constitution relating to the collection 

of income tax and additionally to Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. 

Constitution granting Congress the authority to make laws governing the time, place and manner of holding Federal elections. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

ADVISORY ON EARMARKS

In accordance with House Rule XXI, clause 9, the Committee 

states that H.R. 94 does not contain any congressional earmarks, 

limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 

9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of rule XXI. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986 

* * * * * * * 

Subtitle H—Financing of Presidential 

Election Campaigns 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 95—PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 

CAMPAIGN FUND 

* * * * * * * 

øSec. 9008. Payments for presidential nominating conventions.¿ 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 9006. PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) INSUFFICIENT AMOUNTS IN FUND.—If at the time of a certification by the Commission under section 9005 for payment to the 

eligible candidates of a political party, the Secretary determines 

that the moneys in the fund are not, or may not be, sufficient to 

satisfy the full entitlements of the eligible candidates of all political 

parties, he shall withhold from such payment such amount as he 

determines to be necessary to assure that the eligible candidates of 

each political party will receive their pro rata share of their full entitlement. Amounts withheld by reason of the preceding sentence 

shall be paid when the Secretary determines that there are sufficient moneys in the fund to pay such amounts, or portions thereof, 

to all eligible candidates from whom amounts have been withheld, 

but, if there are not sufficient moneys in the fund to satisfy the full 

entitlement of the eligible candidates of all political parties, the 

amounts so withheld shall be paid in such manner that the eligible 

candidates of each political party receive their pro rata share of 

their full entitlement. In any case in which the Secretary determines that there are insufficient moneys in the fund to make payments under subsection (b)ø, section 9008(b)(3),¿ and section 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

9037(b), moneys shall not be made available from any other source 

for the purpose of making such payments. 

* * * * * * * 

øSEC. 9008. PAYMENTS FOR PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATING CONVENTIONS. 

ø(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNTS.—The Secretary shall maintain in the fund, in addition to any account which he maintains 

under section 9006(a), a separate account for the national committee of each major party and minor party. The Secretary shall 

deposit in each such account an amount equal to the amount which 

each such committee may receive under subsection (b). Such deposits shall be drawn from amounts designated by individuals under 

section 6096 and shall be made before any transfer is made to any 

account for any eligible candidate under section 9006(a). 

ø(b) ENTITLEMENT TO PAYMENTS FROM THE FUND.— 

ø(1) MAJOR PARTIES.—Subject to the provisions of this section, the national committee of a major party shall be entitled 

to payments under paragraph (3), with respect to any presidential nominating convention, in amounts which, in the aggregate, shall not exceed $4,000,000. 

ø(2) MINOR PARTIES.—Subject to the provisions of this section, the national committee of a minor party shall be entitled 

to payments under paragraph (3), with respect to any presidential nominating convention, in amounts which, in the aggregate, shall not exceed an amount which bears the same 

ratio to the amount the national committee of a major party 

is entitled to receive under paragraph (1) as the number of 

popular votes received by the candidate for President of the 

minor party, as such candidate, in the preceding presidential 

election bears to the average number of popular votes received 

by the candidates for President of the United States of the 

major parties in the preceding presidential election. 

ø(3) PAYMENTS.—Upon receipt of certification from the Commission under subsection (g), the Secretary shall make payments from the appropriate account maintained under subsection (a) to the national committee of a major party or minor 

party which elects to receive its entitlement under this subsection. Such payments shall be available for use by such committee in accordance with the provisions of subsection (c). 

ø(4) LIMITATION.—Payments to the national committee of a 

major party or minor party under this subsection, from the account designated for such committee shall be limited to the 

amounts in such account at the time of payment. 

ø(5) ADJUSTMENT OF ENTITLEMENTS.—The entitlements established by this subsection shall be adjusted in the same manner as expenditure limitations established by section 315(b) 

and section 315(d) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 

1971 are adjusted pursuant to the provisions of section 315(c) 

of such Act. 

ø(c) USE OF FUNDS.—No part of any payment made under subsection (b) shall be used to defray the expenses of any candidate 

or delegate who is participating in any presidential nominating 

convention. Such payments shall be used only— 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

ø(1) to defray expenses incurred with respect to a presidential nominating convention (including the payment of deposits) by or on behalf of the national committee receiving such 

payments; or 

ø(2) to repay loans the proceeds of which were used to defray 

such expenses, or otherwise to restore funds (other than contributions to defray such expenses received by such committee) 

used to defray such expenses. 

ø(d) LIMITATION OF EXPENDITURES.— ø(1) MAJOR PARTIES.—Except as provided by paragraph (3), 

the national committee of a major party may not make expenditures with respect to a presidential nominating convention 

which, in the aggregate, exceed the amount of payments to 

which such committee is entitled under subsection (b)(1). 

ø(2) MINOR PARTIES.—Except as provided by paragraph (3), 

the national committee of a minor party may not make expenditures with respect to a presidential nominating convention 

which, in the aggregate, exceed the amount of the entitlement 

of the national committee of a major party under subsection 

(b)(1). 

ø(3) EXCEPTION.—The Commission may authorize the national committee of a major party or minor party to make expenditures which, in the aggregate, exceed the limitation established by paragraph (1) or paragraph (2) of this subsection. 

Such authorization shall be based upon a determination by the 

Commission that, due to extraordinary and unforeseen circumstances, such expenditures are necessary to assure the effective operation of the presidential nominating convention by 

such committee. 

ø(4) PROVISION OF LEGAL OR ACCOUNTING SERVICES.—For 

purposes of this section, the payment, by any person other 

than the national committee of a political party (unless the 

person paying for such services is a person other than the regular employer of the individual rendering such services) of 

compensation to any individual for legal or accounting services 

rendered to or on behalf of the national committee of a political 

party shall not be treated as an expenditure made by or on behalf of such committee with respect to its limitations on presidential nominating convention expenses. 

ø(e) AVAILABILITY OF PAYMENTS.—The national committee of a 

major party or minor party may receive payments under subsection 

(b)(3) beginning on July 1 of the calendar year immediately preceding the calendar year in which a presidential nominating convention of the political party involved is held. 

ø(f) TRANSFER TO THE FUND.—If, after the close of a presidential 

nominating convention and after the national committee of the political party involved has been paid the amount which it is entitled 

to receive under this section, there are moneys remaining in the account of such national committee, the Secretary shall transfer the 

moneys so remaining to the fund. 

ø(g) CERTIFICATION BY COMMISSION.—Any major party or minor 

party may file a statement with the Commission in such form and 

manner and at such times as it may require, designating the national committee of such party. Such statement shall include the 

information required by section 303(b) of the Federal Election CamVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:38 Dec 14, 2013 Jkt 039006 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR291.XXX HR291

smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 

paign Act of 1971, together with such additional information as the 

Commission may require. Upon receipt of a statement filed under 

the preceding sentences, the Commission promptly shall verify 

such statement according to such procedures and criteria as it may 

establish and shall certify to the Secretary for payment in full to 

any such committee of amounts to which such committee may be 

entitled under subsection (b). Such certifications shall be subject to 

an examination and audit which the Commission shall conduct no 

later than December 31, of the calendar year in which the presidential nominating convention involved is held. 

ø(h) REPAYMENTS.—The Commission shall have the same authority to require repayments from the national committee of a major 

party or a minor party as it has with respect to repayments from 

any eligible candidate under section 9007(b). The provisions of section 9007(c) and section 9007(d) shall apply with respect to any repayment required by the Commission under this subsection.¿ 

SEC. 9009. REPORTS TO CONGRESS; REGULATIONS. 

(a) REPORTS.—The Commission shall, as soon as practicable after 

each presidential election, submit a full report to the Senate and 

House of Representatives setting forth— 

(1) * * * 

(2) the amounts certified by it under section 9005 for payment to the eligible candidates of each political party; and 

(3) the amount of payments, if any, required from such candidates under section 9007, and the reasons for each payment 

requiredø; and¿. 

ø(4) the expenses incurred by the national committee of a 

major party or minor party with respect to a presidential nominating convention; 

ø(5) the amounts certified by it under section 9008(g) for 

payment to each such committee; and 

ø(6) the amount of payments, if any, required from such committees under section 9008(h), and the reasons for each such 

payment.¿ 

Each report submitted pursuant to this section shall be printed as 

a Senate document. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 9012. CRIMINAL PENALTIES. 

(a) EXCESS EXPENSES.— 

(1) It shall be unlawful for an eligible candidate of a political 

party for President and Vice President in a presidential election or any of his authorized committees knowingly and willfully to incur qualified campaign expenses in excess of the aggregate payments to which the eligible candidates of a major 

party are entitled under section 9004 with respect to such election. øIt shall be unlawful for the national committee of a 

major party or minor party knowingly and willfully to incur expenses with respect to a presidential nominating convention in 

excess of the expenditure limitation applicable with respect to 

such committee under section 9008(d), unless the incurring of 

such expenses is authorized by the Commission under section 

9008(d)(3).¿ 

* * * * * * * 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

(c) UNLAWFUL USE OF PAYMENTS.— (1) * * * 

ø(2) It shall be unlawful for the national committee of a 

major party or minor party which receives any payment under 

section 9008(b)(3) to use, or authorize the use of, such payment 

for any purpose other than a purpose authorized by section 

9008(c).¿ 

ø(3)¿ (2) Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than five 

years, or both. 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 96—PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY 

MATCHING PAYMENT ACCOUNT 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 9037. PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNT.—The Secretary shall maintain 

in the Presidential Election Campaign Fund established by section 

9006(a), in addition to any account which he maintains under such 

section, a separate account to be known as the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account. The Secretary shall deposit into 

the matching payment account, for use by the candidate of any political party who is eligible to receive payments under section 9033, 

the amount available after the Secretary determines that amounts 

for payments under section 9006(c) øand for payments under section 9008(b)(3)¿ are available for such payments. 

* * * * * * * 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(11) 

MINORITY VIEWS 

Starting in 1976, both major parties have used public funding to 

finance their nominating conventions since the creation of the Presidential Election Campaign Fund (PECF). In 2012, the Democratic 

and Republican convention committees each received approximately $18 million of public funding for their respective nominating conventions. 

The money used for these grants is withdrawn from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund, which in turn is funded by taxpayers who voluntarily elect to contribute $3.00. Electing to make 

this contribution has no effect on either a taxpayer’s tax liability 

or on their refund amount. The entirety of the PECF balance is donated voluntarily. 

I oppose H.R. 94 in its current form. I believe that using federal 

funds to underwrite nominating conventions is not the best use of 

this money but also recognize that taxpayers are fully aware of 

what it is they are subsidizing, as the system is voluntary. In keeping with the spirit of those that would still like to contribute to convention funding, I offered an amendment to this bill at the markup that would prohibit public funding of nominating conventions 

while creating a vehicle by which citizens can still contribute. The 

amendment also banned the use of so-called ‘‘soft money’’ contributions by special interests to convention committees. 

I withdrew the amendment at the request of the Chairman upon 

her offer to work out a legislative fix to accomplish the amendment’s goal before the bill receives floor consideration. 

ROBERT A. BRADY. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS