Interpretive Rule Regarding Electronic Contributor Redesignations, 16233 [2011-6756]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
National (Overseas) (BN(O)) passport
with a Hong Kong identification card.
(B) Taiwan. To be eligible to
participate in the program as a result of
a connection to Taiwan, one must be a
resident of Taiwan who begins his or
her travel in Taiwan and who travels on
direct flights from Taiwan to Guam or
the CNMI without an intermediate
layover or stop, except that the flights
may stop in a territory of the United
States en route.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: March 16, 2011.
Janet Napolitano,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–6555 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
11 CFR Part 110
[Notice 2011–02]
Interpretive Rule Regarding Electronic
Contributor Redesignations
Federal Election Commission.
Notice of interpretive rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Commission regulations
require that a contributor’s
redesignation of a contribution for
another election be in writing and
signed by the contributor. The
Commission construes the requirements
of 11 CFR 110.1(b)(5) and 110.2(b)(5) to
encompass a certain method of
electronic redesignation. The method of
electronic redesignation is described in
the supplementary information below.
DATES: This Interpretive Rule is effective
March 23, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Allison T. Steinle, Attorney, Office of
General Counsel, 999 E Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20463 (202) 694–1000
or (800) 424–9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Commission regulations require that a
contributor’s redesignation of a
contribution for another election be in
writing and be signed by the
contributor. 11 CFR 110.1(b)(5) and
110.2(b)(5). The Commission, however,
recognizes that it should interpret the
Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971,
as amended, 2 U.S.C. 431 et seq. (‘‘the
Act’’) and its regulations ‘‘consistent
with contemporary technological
innovations * * * where such
technology would not compromise the
intent of the Act and regulations.’’
Advisory Opinion 1999–09 (Bradley for
President); see also Advisory Opinions
2007–30 (Dodd); 2007–17 (DSCC);
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:27 Mar 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
1999–36 (Campaign Advantage); 1999–
03 (Microsoft PAC); 1995–09
(NewtWatch).
During the course of an audit, the
Commission recently determined that a
specific redesignation practice provided
the same degree of assurance of the
contributor’s identity and the
contributor’s intent to redesignate the
contribution as a handwritten signature.
Accordingly, the Commission
determined that the practice met the
requirements of 11 CFR 110.1(b)(5). The
Commission believes it is important to
inform the public, including political
committees and their treasurers, of this
determination.
The specific method approved by the
Commission worked in the following
manner: The political committee
informed contributors through postal
mail, with a follow-up e-mail, that, by
visiting a Web site printed in the letter
or by clicking on a link in the e-mail
message that directed contributors to the
Web site, they could redesignate their
contributions to the candidate’s other
authorized committee if they wished to
do so. Contributors were also informed
that if they did not redesignate their
contributions, they would then receive
refunds automatically. Contributors who
visited the Web site were asked to fill
out an electronic form affirmatively
authorizing the redesignation and
verifying their identity by entering their
personal information, including first
and last name, address, phone number,
e-mail address, occupation, and name of
employer. Upon completing the form,
contributors received a ‘‘receipt record,’’
thanking them for their redesignation.
The political committee also retained a
record of each electronic redesignation
in a database, including the personal
information provided by each
contributor making a redesignation, in a
manner consistent with the
recordkeeping requirements for signed
written redesignations under 11 CFR
110.1(l). The Commission concluded
that this process provided assurance of
contributor identity and intent
equivalent to a written signature.
Accordingly, the Commission
construes the written signature
requirements of 11 CFR 110.1(b)(5) and
110.2(b)(5) to encompass the method of
electronic redesignation described
above. Because the specific method
approved by the Commission requires
the contributor to provide personal
information that can be verified against
a committee’s records, it provides a
level of assurance as to the contributor’s
identity and intent comparable to that of
a written signature. See Explanation and
Justification for Final Rules on
Contribution Limitations and
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
16233
Prohibitions, 67 FR 69928, 69934 (Nov.
19, 2002) (Commission declined to
eliminate the written signature
requirement for contributor
redesignations).
The Commission encourages the use
of innovations in technology to
effectuate electronic redesignations. In
that light, committees are advised that
the Commission will consider other
methods of electronic redesignation not
explicitly addressed in this interpretive
rule, provided that they offer a sufficient
degree of assurance of the contributor’s
identity and the contributor’s intent to
redesignate. Unless and until the
Commission initiates a rulemaking on
this issue, such consideration may be
provided on a case-by-case basis,
including but not limited to the
Commission’s advisory opinion process
or requests for Commission
consideration of legal questions. See 2
U.S.C. 437f; 11 CFR part 112; Policy
Statement Establishing a Pilot Program
for Requesting Consideration of Legal
Questions by the Commission, 75 FR
42088 (July 20, 2010). Committees are
also advised that this interpretive rule
does not alter or affect the timing or
recordkeeping requirements of 11 CFR
110.1 or 110.2.
This Federal Register notice
represents an interpretive rule
announcing the general course of action
that the Commission intends to follow.
This interpretive rule does not
constitute an agency rule requiring
notice of proposed rulemaking,
opportunities for public participation,
prior publication, and delay in effective
date under 5 U.S.C. 553 of the
Administrative Procedure Act (‘‘APA’’).
As such, it does not bind the
Commission or any members of the
general public, or create or remove any
rights, duties, etc. The provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, which apply
when notice and comment are required
by the APA or another statute, are not
applicable. See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
Dated: March 16, 2011.
On behalf of the Commission.
Cynthia L. Bauerly,
Chair, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011–6756 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715–01–P
E:\FR\FM\23MRR1.SGM
23MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 23, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16233]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6756]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
11 CFR Part 110
[Notice 2011-02]
Interpretive Rule Regarding Electronic Contributor Redesignations
AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.
ACTION: Notice of interpretive rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Commission regulations require that a contributor's
redesignation of a contribution for another election be in writing and
signed by the contributor. The Commission construes the requirements of
11 CFR 110.1(b)(5) and 110.2(b)(5) to encompass a certain method of
electronic redesignation. The method of electronic redesignation is
described in the supplementary information below.
DATES: This Interpretive Rule is effective March 23, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allison T. Steinle, Attorney, Office
of General Counsel, 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20463 (202) 694-
1000 or (800) 424-9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Commission regulations require that a
contributor's redesignation of a contribution for another election be
in writing and be signed by the contributor. 11 CFR 110.1(b)(5) and
110.2(b)(5). The Commission, however, recognizes that it should
interpret the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, 2
U.S.C. 431 et seq. (``the Act'') and its regulations ``consistent with
contemporary technological innovations * * * where such technology
would not compromise the intent of the Act and regulations.'' Advisory
Opinion 1999-09 (Bradley for President); see also Advisory Opinions
2007-30 (Dodd); 2007-17 (DSCC); 1999-36 (Campaign Advantage); 1999-03
(Microsoft PAC); 1995-09 (NewtWatch).
During the course of an audit, the Commission recently determined
that a specific redesignation practice provided the same degree of
assurance of the contributor's identity and the contributor's intent to
redesignate the contribution as a handwritten signature. Accordingly,
the Commission determined that the practice met the requirements of 11
CFR 110.1(b)(5). The Commission believes it is important to inform the
public, including political committees and their treasurers, of this
determination.
The specific method approved by the Commission worked in the
following manner: The political committee informed contributors through
postal mail, with a follow-up e-mail, that, by visiting a Web site
printed in the letter or by clicking on a link in the e-mail message
that directed contributors to the Web site, they could redesignate
their contributions to the candidate's other authorized committee if
they wished to do so. Contributors were also informed that if they did
not redesignate their contributions, they would then receive refunds
automatically. Contributors who visited the Web site were asked to fill
out an electronic form affirmatively authorizing the redesignation and
verifying their identity by entering their personal information,
including first and last name, address, phone number, e-mail address,
occupation, and name of employer. Upon completing the form,
contributors received a ``receipt record,'' thanking them for their
redesignation. The political committee also retained a record of each
electronic redesignation in a database, including the personal
information provided by each contributor making a redesignation, in a
manner consistent with the recordkeeping requirements for signed
written redesignations under 11 CFR 110.1(l). The Commission concluded
that this process provided assurance of contributor identity and intent
equivalent to a written signature.
Accordingly, the Commission construes the written signature
requirements of 11 CFR 110.1(b)(5) and 110.2(b)(5) to encompass the
method of electronic redesignation described above. Because the
specific method approved by the Commission requires the contributor to
provide personal information that can be verified against a committee's
records, it provides a level of assurance as to the contributor's
identity and intent comparable to that of a written signature. See
Explanation and Justification for Final Rules on Contribution
Limitations and Prohibitions, 67 FR 69928, 69934 (Nov. 19, 2002)
(Commission declined to eliminate the written signature requirement for
contributor redesignations).
The Commission encourages the use of innovations in technology to
effectuate electronic redesignations. In that light, committees are
advised that the Commission will consider other methods of electronic
redesignation not explicitly addressed in this interpretive rule,
provided that they offer a sufficient degree of assurance of the
contributor's identity and the contributor's intent to redesignate.
Unless and until the Commission initiates a rulemaking on this issue,
such consideration may be provided on a case-by-case basis, including
but not limited to the Commission's advisory opinion process or
requests for Commission consideration of legal questions. See 2 U.S.C.
437f; 11 CFR part 112; Policy Statement Establishing a Pilot Program
for Requesting Consideration of Legal Questions by the Commission, 75
FR 42088 (July 20, 2010). Committees are also advised that this
interpretive rule does not alter or affect the timing or recordkeeping
requirements of 11 CFR 110.1 or 110.2.
This Federal Register notice represents an interpretive rule
announcing the general course of action that the Commission intends to
follow. This interpretive rule does not constitute an agency rule
requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, opportunities for public
participation, prior publication, and delay in effective date under 5
U.S.C. 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (``APA''). As such, it
does not bind the Commission or any members of the general public, or
create or remove any rights, duties, etc. The provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, which apply when notice and comment are
required by the APA or another statute, are not applicable. See 5
U.S.C. 603(a).
Dated: March 16, 2011.
On behalf of the Commission.
Cynthia L. Bauerly,
Chair, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011-6756 Filed 3-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P