Independent Expenditures by Authorized Committees; Reporting Multistate Independent Expenditures and Electioneering Communications, 3996-4005 [2018-01074]
Download as PDF
3996
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 83, No. 19
Monday, January 29, 2018
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
11 CFR Parts 102, 104, and 109
[Notice 2018–01]
Independent Expenditures by
Authorized Committees; Reporting
Multistate Independent Expenditures
and Electioneering Communications
Federal Election Commission.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Federal Election
Commission requests comments on
proposed changes to its regulations
concerning independent expenditures
by candidates. The Commission also
requests comments on proposed
changes to its regulations to address
reporting of independent expenditures
and electioneering communications that
relate to presidential primary elections
and that are publicly distributed in
multiple states but that do not refer to
any particular state’s primary election.
The Commission has made no final
decision on the issues and proposals
presented in this rulemaking.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before March 30, 2018.
ADDRESSES: All comments must be in
writing. Comments may be submitted
electronically via the Commission’s
website at https://sers.fec.gov/fosers,
reference REG 2014–02. Commenters are
encouraged to submit comments
electronically to ensure timely receipt
and consideration. Alternatively,
comments may be submitted in paper
form. Paper comments must be sent to
the Federal Election Commission, Attn.:
Robert M. Knop, Assistant General
Counsel. Comments submitted before
the Commission’s relocation on March
5, 2018 must be sent to 999 E Street NW,
Washington, DC 20463; comments
submitted after the Commission’s
relocation must be sent to 1050 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20463. See
Change of Address; Technical
Amendments, 82 FR 60852 (Dec. 26,
2017). Each commenter must provide, at
a minimum, his or her first name, last
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jan 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
name, city, state, and zip code. All
properly submitted comments,
including attachments, will become part
of the public record, and the
Commission will make comments
available for public viewing on the
Commission’s website and in the
Commission’s Public Records room.
Accordingly, commenters should not
provide in their comments any
information that they do not wish to
make public, such as a home street
address, personal email address, date of
birth, phone number, social security
number, or driver’s license number, or
any information that is restricted from
disclosure, such as trade secrets or
commercial or financial information
that is privileged or confidential.
The Commission may hold a public
hearing on this notice of proposed
rulemaking. Commenters wishing to
testify at a hearing must so indicate in
their comments. If a hearing is to be
held, the Commission will publish a
notification of hearing in the Federal
Register announcing the date and time
of the hearing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Robert M. Knop, Assistant General
Counsel, Ms. Esther D. Gyory, or Ms.
Joanna S. Waldstreicher, Attorneys,
(202) 694–1650 or (800) 424–9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Commission is considering revising
some of its regulations concerning
independent expenditures and
electioneering communications, and it
seeks comment on the proposed
changes.
The Commission is proposing
revisions to its regulations concerning
whether authorized committees may
make independent expenditures. The
Federal Election Campaign Act, 52
U.S.C. 30101–46 (the ‘‘Act’’) and
Commission regulations state that no
political committee that ‘‘supports’’
more than one candidate may be
designated as an authorized campaign
committee. 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(3); 11
CFR 102.12(c), 102.13(c). The statute
and regulations do not define ‘‘support’’
for the purposes of these two provisions,
except to state that the term ‘‘does not
include contributions by an authorized
committee in amounts aggregating
$2,000 or less per election to an
authorized committee of any other
candidate.’’ 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(3)(B); 11
CFR 102.12(c)(2), 102.13(c)(2). The
Commission is considering revising its
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
regulations to specifically state that for
the purposes of these provisions,
‘‘support’’ includes making independent
expenditures, or, in the alternative, that
‘‘support,’’ in this context, does not
include independent expenditures. The
Commission is seeking comment on the
following proposed revisions to its
regulations, which would clarify the
meaning of ‘‘support’’ as it is used in 11
CFR 102.12(c)(2) and 102.13(c)(2). In the
event that the Commission promulgates
final rules that exclude independent
expenditures from the definition of
support, the Commission is also
proposing changes to its reporting
regulations at 11 CFR 104.3 and 104.4
to provide for authorized committees to
report independent expenditures.
The Commission is also seeking
comment on proposed revisions to its
regulations concerning independent
expenditures and electioneering
communications as they apply to
communications that relate to
presidential primary elections and that
are publicly distributed in multiple
states but that do not refer to any
particular state’s primary election. The
Act and Commission regulations require
persons who make independent
expenditures and electioneering
communications to report certain
information to the Commission within
specified periods of time. See 52 U.S.C.
30104(b)–(c), (g); 11 CFR 104.3, 104.4,
104.20, 109.10. The Commission is
considering revising its regulations to
specifically address how these reporting
requirements apply to an independent
expenditure or electioneering
communication that relates to a
presidential primary election and is
distributed in multiple states but does
not refer to any particular state’s
primary election (a ‘‘multistate
independent expenditure’’ or
‘‘multistate electioneering
communication’’). The Commission is
seeking comment on the following
proposed revisions to its regulations,
which would clarify when and how
multistate independent expenditures
and multistate electioneering
communications must be reported.
I. Background
The Act and Commission regulations
require that political committees report
all disbursements. 52 U.S.C.
30104(b)(4); 11 CFR 104.3(b). Political
committees must also itemize their
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
disbursements according to specific
categories. 52 U.S.C. 30104(b)(4); 11
CFR 104.3(b)(1)–(2).
An ‘‘independent expenditure’’ is an
expenditure that expressly advocates
the election or defeat of a clearly
identified federal candidate and is not
coordinated with such candidate (or his
or her opponent) or political party. 52
U.S.C. 30101(17); see also 11 CFR
100.16(a). Under existing regulations, a
political committee (other than an
authorized committee) that makes
independent expenditures must itemize
those expenditures on its regular
periodic reports, stating, among other
things, the name of the candidate whom
the expenditure supports or opposes
and the office sought by that candidate.
52 U.S.C. 30104(b)(4)(H)(iii), (6)(B)(iii);
11 CFR 104.4(a). Any person other than
a political committee that makes
independent expenditures aggregating
in excess of $250 during a calendar year
must disclose the same information in a
statement filed with the Commission.1
52 U.S.C. 30104(c); 11 CFR 109.10(b).
In addition, any person that makes
independent expenditures aggregating
$10,000 or more for an election in any
calendar year, up to and including the
20th day before an election, must report
the expenditures within 48 hours. 52
U.S.C. 30104(g)(2)(A); 11 CFR
104.4(b)(2), 109.10(c). Additional
reports must be filed within 48 hours
each time the person makes further
independent expenditures aggregating
$10,000 or more with respect to the
same election. 52 U.S.C. 30104(g)(2)(B);
11 CFR 104.4(b)(2), 109.10(c).
Any person that makes independent
expenditures aggregating $1,000 or more
less than 20 days, but more than 24
hours, before the date of an election
must report the expenditures within 24
hours. 52 U.S.C. 30104(g)(1)(A); 11 CFR
104.4(c), 109.10(d). Additional reports
must be filed within 24 hours each time
the person makes further independent
expenditures aggregating $1,000 or more
with respect to the same election. 52
U.S.C. 30104(g)(1)(B); 11 CFR 104.4(c),
109.10(d).
A. Independent Expenditures by
Authorized Committees
The Act requires that every candidate
for federal office (other than the
nominee for Vice President) designate a
political committee ‘‘to serve as the
1 Further, Commission regulations provide that
persons other than political committees ‘‘shall
[also] file a report or statement for any quarterly
period during which any such independent
expenditures that aggregate in excess of $250 are
made and in any quarterly reporting period
thereafter in which additional independent
expenditures are made.’’ 11 CFR 109.19(b).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jan 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
principal campaign committee’’ for that
candidate. 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(1); 11 CFR
102.12(a). The principal campaign
committee of a candidate is
‘‘authorized’’ by the candidate to receive
contributions or to make expenditures
on behalf of that candidate. See 11 CFR
102.13(a)(1); 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(1), (3).
A candidate may also designate
additional political committees to serve
as authorized committees of that
candidate. 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(1); 11 CFR
102.13(a)(1). The Act and Commission
regulations state that no political
committee that ‘‘supports’’ more than
one candidate may be designated as an
authorized committee. 52 U.S.C.
30102(e)(3); 11 CFR 102.12(c), 102.13(c).
The Act and regulations further state
that for the purposes of these
provisions, ‘‘the term support does not
include contributions by an authorized
committee in amounts aggregating
$2,000 or less per election to an
authorized committee of any other
candidate,’’ but the term is not
otherwise defined. 11 CFR 102.12(c)(2),
102.13(c)(2); 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(3)(B).2
Until recently, the Commission had
not definitively addressed whether the
term ‘‘support’’ in section 30102(e)(3)
includes independent expenditures.3 In
2 ‘‘Support’’ appears in other places in the
regulations but is not defined in most of those other
instances. See, e.g., 11 CFR 100.24(b)(3) (defining
‘‘federal election activity’’ as public communication
that refers to clearly identified candidate for federal
office and that ‘‘promotes or supports, or attacks or
opposes any candidate for Federal office’’), 104.5(d)
(requiring treasurer of political committee
‘‘supporting’’ candidate for Vice President to file
reports on same basis as principal campaign
committee of presidential candidate), 110.1(h)
(addressing circumstances in which person may
contribute to more than one committee
‘‘supporting’’ the same candidate), 114.4(d)(1)
(stating that corporation or labor organization may
‘‘support or conduct’’ voter registration and get-outthe-vote drives), 114.4(d)(2) (specifying that voter
registration and get-out-the-vote drives are not
expenditures when they meet certain criteria,
including that individuals conducting drive are not
paid on basis of number of individuals registered
or transported ‘‘who support one or more particular
candidates’’), 300.2(m) (stating that definition of
‘‘solicitation’’ does not include ‘‘mere statements of
political support’’), 300.37(a)(3)(iv) (excluding from
prohibition on fundraising for certain tax-exempt
organizations a ‘‘political committee under [s]tate
law, that ‘supports’ only [s]tate or local candidates
. . . .’’). Section 100.6, which defines ‘‘connected
organization,’’ states that, for the purposes of that
provision, the term ‘‘financially supports’’ does not
include contributions to a political committee, but
does include payments of establishment,
administration, and solicitation costs of a political
committee.
3 In MUR 2841 (Jenkins), the Commission stated
that 2 U.S.C. 432(e) (now 52 U.S.C. 30102(e))
precluded a principal campaign committee from
‘‘making expenditures on behalf of another
candidate, thus supporting more than one
candidate,’’ but ultimately decided the matter on
other grounds. See Conciliation Agreement ¶ IV.13
(Dec. 11, 1992), https://www.fec.gov/disclosure_
data/mur/2841.pdf. In a subsequent MUR, the
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3997
Matter Under Review (‘‘MUR’’) 6405
(Friends of John McCain Inc., et al.), the
Commission dismissed an allegation
that an authorized committee violated
52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(3) by running ads
that expressly advocated the election of
another candidate. Factual and Legal
Analysis at 2–3, MUR 6405 (Friends of
John McCain Inc., et al.) (Feb. 25, 2015),
https://eqs.fec.gov/eqsdocsMUR/
15044371159.pdf (‘‘McCain’’). In its
analysis, the Commission cited the
Supreme Court’s decisions in Buckley v.
Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976) (striking down
limits on independent expenditures for
most individuals and groups), Colorado
Republican Federal Campaign
Committee v. FEC, 518 U.S. 604 (1996)
(striking down limit on independent
expenditures by political party
committees on grounds that
independent expenditures do not pose a
risk of corruption or the appearance of
corruption), and Citizens United v. FEC,
558 U.S. 310 (2010) (striking down
prohibition on independent
expenditures by corporations). McCain
at 9–10. The Commission concluded
that ‘‘it is unlikely that independent
spending by authorized committees
would be deemed more potentially
corrupting than independent
expenditures by individuals, political
parties, or corporations, each of which
has been found [by the Supreme Court]
to have a constitutional right to make
unlimited independent expenditures.’’
McCain at 10.
Currently, neither the regulations nor
the Commission’s reporting forms
provide a mechanism for authorized
committees to report independent
expenditures. Section 104.3(b)(2), which
covers reporting by authorized
committees, does not include
independent expenditures made by the
reporting committee among the
categories of disbursements that must be
itemized. Similarly, § 104.3(b)(4) sets
out the categories of information that
authorized committees must report
about itemized disbursements and does
not contain a provision for independent
expenditures. Finally, section 104.4
specifies that political committees that
make independent expenditures must
report them on Schedule E of FEC Form
Office of the General Counsel, relying on the
Commission’s reasoning in MUR 2841 (Jenkins),
recommended finding reason to believe that an
authorized committee violated 2 U.S.C. 432(e). See
First General Counsel’s Report at 11, MUR 3676
(Stupak) (Jan. 11, 1995), all documents for MUR
3676 available at https://www.fec.gov/disclosure_
data/mur/3676.pdf. The Commission rejected
OGC’s recommendation, though the four
Commissioners did not agree on the reasoning for
that decision. See Thomas Statement of Reasons;
Aikens et al. Statement of Reasons, MUR 3676
(Stupak).
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
3998
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
3X, but authorized committees file Form
3 (for House and Senate candidates) or
Form 3P (for presidential candidates),
neither of which contains Schedule E.
B. Multistate Independent Expenditures
and Electioneering Communications
As described above, the Act and
Commission regulations require any
person who makes independent
expenditures aggregating at or above
certain threshold amounts and within
certain periods prior to an election to
report those independent expenditures
within 48 or 24 hours. 52 U.S.C.
30104(g)(1)(A), (2)(A); 11 CFR
104.4(b)(2), (c), 109.10(c)–(d). The 48and 24-hour filing requirements begin to
run when the independent expenditures
aggregating at least $10,000 or $1,000,
respectively, are ‘‘publicly distributed
or otherwise publicly disseminated’’ 11
CFR 104.4(b)(2), (c), (f), 109.10(c)–(d).
For purposes of calculating these
expenditures and determining if a
communication is ‘‘publicly
distributed’’ within an applicable 24hour pre-election filing window, each
state’s presidential primary election is
considered a separate election. See
Advisory Opinion 2003–40 (U.S. Navy
Veterans’ Good Government Fund) at 3–
4 (noting that ‘‘publicly distributed’’ in
section 104.4 has same meaning as the
term in 11 CFR 100.29(b)(3)(ii)(A),
under which each state’s presidential
primary election is a separate election)
(citing Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
of 2002 Reporting, 68 FR 404, 407 (Jan.
3, 2003); Electioneering
Communications, 67 FR 65190, 65194
(Oct. 23, 2002)).
An ‘‘electioneering communication,’’
in the context of a presidential election,
is a broadcast, cable, or satellite
communication that refers to a clearly
identified candidate for President or
Vice President and is ‘‘publicly
distributed’’ within sixty days before a
general election or thirty days before a
primary election or nominating
convention. 52 U.S.C. 30104(f)(3)(A)(i);
11 CFR 100.29(a). If the candidate
identified in the communication is
seeking a party’s nomination for the
presidential or vice presidential
election, ‘‘publicly distributed’’ means
the communication can be received by
at least 50,000 people in a state where
a primary election is being held within
30 days, or that it can be received by at
least 50,000 people anywhere in the
United States within the period between
30 days before the first day of the
national nominating convention and the
conclusion of the convention. 11 CFR
100.29(b)(3). A person who makes
electioneering communications that
aggregate in excess of $10,000 in a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jan 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
calendar year must file a statement with
the Commission disclosing certain
information about the electioneering
communication, including the election
to which the electioneering
communication pertains. 52 U.S.C.
30104(f); 11 CFR 104.20(b)–(c). As with
independent expenditures, each state’s
presidential primary election is
considered a separate election for
purposes of determining whether an
electioneering communication is
‘‘publicly distributed’’ within the preelection reporting window. See
Advisory Opinion 2003–40 (U.S. Navy
Veterans’ Good Government Fund) at
3–4.
The Commission’s current regulations
do not specifically address how the
public distribution criteria and other
reporting requirements apply to
independent expenditures or
electioneering communications that are
made in the context of a presidential
primary election and that are distributed
in multiple states. In particular, the
regulations do not specify which state’s
primary election date is relevant for
determining whether the
communication falls within the 24-hour
reporting window (for independent
expenditures) or the 30-day definitional
window (for electioneering
communications).
In a 2012 advisory opinion, the
Commission considered how the
independent expenditure reporting
requirements applied to independent
expenditures that supported or opposed
a presidential primary candidate and
were distributed nationwide without
referring to any specific state’s primary
election. See Advisory Opinion 2011–28
(Western Representation PAC). In that
advisory opinion, the Commission
concluded that a political committee
making such an independent
expenditure should divide the cost of
the independent expenditure by the
number of states that had not yet held
their primary elections, and should use
the resulting amounts to determine
whether the committee must file 24- and
48-hour reports and for which states. Id.
In 2014, the Commission made
available for public comment three
alternative draft interpretive rules on
this topic. Draft Notices of Interpretive
Rule Regarding Reporting Nationwide
Independent Expenditures in
Presidential Primary Elections (Jan. 17,
2014) (‘‘Draft Interpretive Rules’’),
www.fec.gov/law/policy/
nationwideiereporting/
draftnationwideiereporting.pdf.4 Draft A
4 The Draft Interpretive Rules referred to the type
of independent expenditures that are the subject of
this proposed rulemaking as ‘‘nationwide
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
would have followed the approach set
forth in Advisory Opinion 2011–28
(Western Representation PAC),
instructing persons making a
nationwide independent expenditure to
divide the cost of the nationwide
independent expenditure by the number
of states with upcoming presidential
primary elections. Draft B would have
instructed persons making a nationwide
independent expenditure to report it as
a single expenditure without indicating
a state where the expenditure was made,
instead using ‘‘memo text’’ 5 to indicate
that the independent expenditure was
made nationwide. Draft B also would
have instructed filers to use the first day
of the candidate’s national nominating
convention as the election date for
determining whether they must file 24and 48-hour reports. Finally, Draft C
would have provided the same reporting
guidance as Draft B, except that Draft C
would have instructed filers to use the
date of the next presidential primary
election (rather than the beginning of
the national nominating convention) as
the election date.
The Commission received two
comments on the Draft Interpretive
Rules.6 Both comments generally
supported Draft B. Both comments also
argued that the approach in Draft A was
unnecessarily complex and would not
provide clear information to the public
about the reported independent
expenditures.
After reviewing the comments and
engaging in further deliberation, the
Commission has determined that this
issue would be better addressed through
regulatory amendments than through an
interpretive rule. Accordingly, the
Commission is now seeking comment
on proposed revisions to its regulations
regarding reporting of independent
expenditures and electioneering
communications.
independent expenditures.’’ As discussed below,
however, the Commission has not yet determined
the number of states in which an independent
expenditure or electioneering communication must
be distributed to fall under the proposed rules.
Accordingly, such communications are referred to
in this Notice as ‘‘multistate’’—rather than
‘‘nationwide’’—independent expenditures and
electioneering communications.
5 ‘‘Memo text’’ refers to a means of including
additional information or explanation about a
receipt or disbursement on a Commission form. See
FEC, Campaign Guide for Nonconnected
Committees (2008), https://www.fec.gov/resources/
cms-content/documents/nongui.pdf.
6 These comments are available on the
Commission’s website at https://www.fec.gov/law/
policy.shtml.
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Proposed Revisions to 11 CFR Parts
102 and 104—Independent
Expenditures by Authorized
Committees of a Candidate
As set forth below, the Commission
proposes revisions to section 102.12,
concerning principal campaign
committees, and section 102.13,
concerning authorized committees. The
Commission also proposes revisions to
sections 104.3 and 104.4 regarding
authorized committees’ reporting of
independent expenditures. The
Commission seeks comment on these
revisions, which are intended to clarify
the type of activity that an authorized
committee may engage in without
‘‘supporting’’ another candidate, as well
as to require disclosure of independent
expenditures by authorized committees
if such expenditures are determined to
be permissible.
A. Proposed New 11 CFR 102.12(c)(2)(i)
and 102.13(c)(2)(i)—Definition of
‘‘Support’’
In both sections 102.12 and 102.13,
the Commission is proposing to
redesignate current paragraph (c)(2) as
paragraph (c)(2)(ii) and to add new
paragraph (c)(2)(i), which would define
the term ‘‘support.’’ The Commission is
proposing two alternative provisions for
new 11 CFR 102.12(c)(2)(i) and
102.13(c)(2)(i) and seeks comment on
whether either alternative is preferable.
Under either alternative, the
regulations would continue to exclude
from the definition of support
contributions by an authorized
committee in amounts aggregating
$2,000 or less per election to an
authorized committee of any other
candidate. Under both alternatives,
current §§ 102.12(c)(2) and 102.13(c)(2)
would be redesignated as
§§ 102.12(c)(2)(ii) and 102.13(c)(2)(ii),
respectively.
Under Alternative A, new
§§ 102.12(c)(2)(i) and 102.13(c)(2)(i)
would state that for the purposes of the
regulation, the term ‘‘support’’ includes
an independent expenditure by an
authorized committee. (The proposed
regulations would clarify that this does
not affect the ability of a national
committee of a political party that has
been designated as the principal
campaign committee of that party’s
presidential candidate to make
independent expenditures supporting or
opposing other candidates. See 11 CFR
109.36.7) Under Alternative B, new
7 Currently, both sections 102.12 and 102.13 state
that the national party committee of a political
party that has been designated as the principal
campaign committee of that party’s presidential
candidate may contribute to another candidate in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jan 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
§§ 102.12(c)(2)(i) and 102.13(c)(2)(i)
would state that for the purposes of the
regulation, the term ‘‘support’’ does not
include independent expenditures by an
authorized committee.
The Commission seeks comment on
the two alternatives. Is either alternative
preferable as a matter of statutory
interpretation, taking into account the
applicable case law? If both alternatives
are statutorily permissible, is either
alternative preferable as a matter of
policy?
For the purposes of sections 102.12
and 102.13, the term ‘‘support’’ does not
include contributions aggregating
$2,000 or less. Thus, Alternative A
would prohibit authorized committees
from making independent expenditures
in any amount, while not prohibiting
those committees from making
contributions (including coordinated
expenditures and coordinated
communications, see 52 U.S.C.
30116(a)(7)(B)(i); 11 CFR 109.20) of up
to $2,000 to other candidates. If the
Commission adopts Alternative A,
should the Commission also exclude
independent expenditures aggregating
$2,000 or less per election from the
definition of support? If the Commission
adopts Alternative B, authorized
committees would be allowed to make
independent expenditures in any
amount. What are the implications of
authorized committees’ potentially
using substantial portions of their
resources on independent expenditures?
B. Proposed Revisions to 11 CFR 104.3—
Contents of Reports and 11 CFR 104.4—
Independent Expenditures by Political
Committees
Currently, all political committees—
including authorized committees—must
report the name and address of any
person who has received any
disbursement in an aggregate amount
exceeding $200 within a certain period,
along with the date, amount, and
purpose of such disbursement. 52 U.S.C.
30104(b)(5), (6); 11 CFR 104.3(b)(3), (4).
Additionally, political committees—
other than authorized committees—
must provide for each reported
disbursement in connection with an
independent expenditure the date,
amount, and purpose of the
independent expenditure, a statement
accordance with certain regulations. Section 102.13
states that such contributions must be made in
accordance with 11 CFR part 109, subpart D
(coordinated party expenditures) and part 110
(contribution limits and prohibitions); section
102.12, however, states only that such contributions
must be made in accordance with 11 CFR part 110.
Under both alternatives A and B, proposed
paragraph 102.12(c)(2) would be revised to include
a reference to 11 CFR part 109, subpart D, tracking
the existing language in 11 CFR 102.13(c)(2).
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3999
indicating whether the independent
expenditure was in support of, or in
opposition to, a candidate, the name
and office sought by that candidate, and
a certification that the expenditure was,
in fact, independent. 52 U.S.C.
30104(b)(6)(B); 11 CFR 104.3(b)(3)(vii).
If the Commission adopts Alternative
B above, the Commission also proposes
to revise 11 CFR 104.3 and 104.4 to
provide a mechanism for authorized
committees to report independent
expenditures. Specifically, the
Commission proposes revising
§ 104.3(b)(2) to add independent
expenditures to the categories of
itemized disbursements for authorized
committees, and adding new
§ 104.3(b)(4)(iv) to require authorized
committees to report the same
information about independent
expenditures that other political
committees must report. Proposed
§ 104.3(b)(4)(iv) would bring authorized
and non-authorized committees into
parity by requiring that authorized
committees report the same information
about independent expenditures that
non-authorized committees are required
to report, using the same form (Schedule
E).8
The Commission seeks comment on
these proposed changes to § 104.3(b)(2)
and (4), which are intended to require
authorized committees that make
independent expenditures to report the
same information, in the same manner,
as all other political committees. If
authorized committees make
independent expenditures, should they
report more or less detailed information
about those disbursements than other
political committees? Is there another
method that the Commission should use
to allow for authorized committees to
report independent expenditures?
The Commission also proposes
revisions to 11 CFR 104.4 to refer to the
new paragraphs that it proposes to add
to section 104.3, described above. In
§ 104.4(a), (b), (c), and (d), the
Commission proposes adding crossreferences to 11 CFR 104.3(b)(4)(iv) to
reflect the independent expenditure
reporting requirements for authorized
committees, described above. The
Commission also proposes revising
§ 104.4(b)(1) and (2) to omit the specific
references to FEC Form 3X because, as
discussed above, authorized committees
do not file that form. These proposed
regulatory changes would be in
conjunction with changes to Schedule E
and to Forms 3 and 3P. The Commission
8 Because Schedule E is not currently included in
the forms used by authorized committees, the
Commission would add that schedule to Form 3 (for
House and Senate candidates) and Form 3P (for
presidential candidates).
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
4000
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
seeks comment on these proposed
changes.
III. Proposed Revisions to 11 CFR 104.3
and 104.4—Reporting Multistate
Independent Expenditures by Political
Committees
As set forth below, the Commission
proposes revisions to section 104.3,
concerning the content of independent
expenditure reports by political
committees, and section 104.4,
concerning the timing of independent
expenditure reports by political
committees. The Commission seeks
comment on these revisions, which are
intended to clarify the reporting
obligations of a political committee
when it makes a multistate independent
expenditure. The Commission is
considering three alternative proposals
and seeks comment on which
alternative would be preferable.
A. Alternative A
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
1. Proposed New 11 CFR
104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C)—Content of Reports
In section 104.3, the Commission
proposes adding new paragraph
(b)(3)(vii)(C), which would require that
when a political committee makes an
independent expenditure in support of
or in opposition to a candidate in a
presidential primary election, and the
communication is publicly distributed
or otherwise disseminated in more than
a specified number of states but does
not refer to any particular state, the
political committee must report the
independent expenditure as a single
expenditure and use memo text to
indicate the states where the
communication is distributed. The
Commission would also redesignate
current paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(C) as
paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(D).
The Commission seeks comment on
the proposed new provision. Would the
proposed paragraph provide sufficient
guidance to political committees
reporting multistate independent
expenditures? Is the proposed provision
necessary or desirable to provide full,
accurate, and timely disclosure to the
public regarding multistate independent
expenditures that are made by political
committees?
If the Commission amends section
104.3(b)(4) to account for independent
expenditures by authorized committees
as described above in Section II.B, the
Commission would propose to include
regulatory text in revised section
104.3(b)(4) providing that the reporting
requirements for authorized committees
that make independent expenditures
would mirror the reporting
requirements for all other political
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jan 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
committees that make independent
expenditures. The Commission seeks
comment on whether these proposed
requirements should apply to multistate
independent expenditures made by
authorized committees.
The Commission also seeks comment
on the number of states that would be
the threshold for a communication to
fall within the new paragraph.
Requiring an independent expenditure
to be ‘‘nationwide’’—i.e., disseminated
in all fifty states plus the District of
Columbia (and possibly Puerto Rico,
Guam, and American Samoa)—would
exclude some independent expenditures
that are distributed in a large number of
states (e.g., the entire continental United
States). This would significantly limit
the benefits and application of the
proposed reporting rule. Alternatively,
applying the new provision to
independent expenditures that are
disseminated in only a handful of states
might result in independent
expenditures that are targeted to a
specific state’s primary—but partially
distributed in neighboring states that
share its media markets—being
misleadingly reported as ‘‘multistate’’
communications. In how many states
should an independent expenditure
have to be distributed to fall within the
proposed new reporting rule? Should
the rule specify a particular number of
states, or are there other ways to
effectively delineate the
communications that would be reported
as multistate independent expenditures?
The proposed new paragraph would
represent a change from the
Commission’s previous guidance on this
issue. In Advisory Opinion 2011–28
(Western Representation PAC), the
Commission instructed a political
committee to allocate the cost of a
multistate independent expenditure
among all the states where the
communication was distributed. None
of the persons who commented on the
Draft Interpretive Rules supported
retaining that approach, and the
Commission is not proposing it here.
Nonetheless, are there advantages to
that approach that the Commission
should consider in crafting the new
rule?
If the proposed new paragraph is
adopted, the Commission recognizes
that implementing it would likely
require modifying the instructions for
the Commission’s Schedule E form. The
Commission anticipates that these
modified instructions would provide
political committees flexibility on how
to report the states where the multistate
independent expenditure is distributed.
For example, the instructions would
permit the memo text for a multistate
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
independent expenditure to indicate
that the independent expenditure was
distributed ‘‘nationwide,’’ in ‘‘all fifty
states,’’ in ‘‘IN, OH, WI, MI, MN, IL, PA,
MO,’’ or in ‘‘all states except Alaska and
Hawaii,’’ etc. Would such instructions
provide sufficient guidance and
flexibility to filers? Should the
Commission provide more specific
guidelines on how political committees
should indicate the states where
multistate independent expenditures are
distributed? Should the proposed new
regulation address this issue
specifically? If so, how?
2. Proposed New 11 CFR 104.4(f)(2)—
Timing of Reports
In section 104.4, the Commission is
proposing to redesignate current
paragraph (f) as paragraph (f)(1) and add
new paragraph (f)(2), concerning when
a political committee must file a 24- or
48-hour report for a multistate
independent expenditure.
Following the approach proposed in
Draft Interpretive Rule B, a political
committee that makes a multistate
independent expenditure would report
it as a single expenditure, as discussed
above, and the political committee
would use the date of the national
nominating convention for the clearly
identified candidate’s party as the date
of the election to determine whether the
independent expenditure is within the
20 days before the election and is
therefore subject to the 24-hour
reporting requirement under 52 U.S.C.
30104(g)(1).
The Commission seeks comment on
this proposal. Does it provide sufficient
guidance to political committees as to
how to determine whether they must
file 24-hour or 48-hour reports for
multistate independent expenditures? Is
this proposal preferable to the
Commission’s existing guidance under
Advisory Opinion 2011–28 (Western
Representation PAC)? Would this
proposal enhance the public’s access to
full, accurate, and timely information
about multistate independent
expenditures?
B. Alternative B
1. Proposed New 11 CFR
104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C)—Content of Reports
In section 104.3, the Commission
proposes making the same changes as
described above under Alternative A,
adding new paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(C) and
redesignating current paragraph
(b)(3)(vii)(C) as paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(D).
2. Proposed New 11 CFR 104.4(f)(2)—
Timing of Reports
Similar to Alternative A, in section
104.4, the Commission is proposing to
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
redesignate current paragraph (f) as
paragraph (f)(1) and add new paragraph
(f)(2), concerning when a political
committee must file a 24- or 48-hour
report for a multistate independent
expenditure. However, under
Alternative B, which follows the
approach proposed in Draft Interpretive
Rule C, the political committee would
determine whether the independent
expenditure is within the 20 days before
the election and is therefore subject to
the 24-hour reporting requirement
under 52 U.S.C. 30104(g)(1) by using as
the date of the election the date of the
next upcoming presidential primary
among the presidential primaries to be
held in the states in which the
independent expenditure is distributed
or disseminated.
The Commission seeks comment on
this proposal. Does it provide sufficient
guidance to political committees as to
how to determine whether they must
file 24-hour or 48-hour reports for
multistate independent expenditures? Is
this proposal preferable to the
Commission’s existing guidance under
Advisory Opinion 2011–28 (Western
Representation PAC)? Would this
proposal enhance the public’s access to
full, accurate, and timely information
about multistate independent
expenditures?
C. Alternative C
1. Proposed New 11 CFR
104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C)—Multistate
Independent Expenditures
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
As with Alternatives A and B, for
Alternative C the Commission proposes
to amend section 104.3 by adding new
paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(C). For Alternative
C, however, the new paragraph would
provide that for any independent
expenditure in support of or in
opposition to a candidate in a
presidential primary election, where the
communication is publicly distributed
or otherwise disseminated in more than
a specified number of states but does
not refer to any particular state, the
political committee must report the
independent expenditure according to
new section 104.4(f)(2), discussed
below. The Commission would also
redesignate current paragraph
(b)(3)(vii)(C) as paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(D).
2. Proposed New 11 CFR 104.4(f)(2)—
Reporting Multistate Independent
Expenditures
As with Alternatives A and B, for
Alternative C the Commission proposes
to amend section 104.4 by redesignating
current paragraph (f) as paragraph (f)(1)
and adding new paragraph (f)(2). Under
Alternative C, new paragraph (f)(2)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jan 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
would bring together all of the
aggregation and reporting requirements
for multistate independent expenditures
in one paragraph. New section
104.4(f)(2) would set forth the
requirements for determining whether
and when a 24- or 48-hour report is
required, along with the specific
information to be included in such a
report.
In contrast to Alternatives A and B,
which would require a political
committee to determine whether a 24hour report is required based on the
total amount of the independent
expenditure, Alternative C would
require political committees to allocate
the amount of the expenditure among
the states where it is distributed whose
primary elections have yet to occur.
Political committees who file
electronically would be able to rely on
the new electronic filing system that the
Commission expects to introduce before
the 2020 election cycle or third-party
electronic filing software to do this
calculation. If this alternative is
adopted, the Commission also proposes
to make a calculator available on its
website to aid political committees that
do not file electronically in making the
necessary allocations.
Under Alternative C, a political
committee would disregard any states
where the communication was
distributed but where the presidential
primary election has already occurred,
and would allocate the total amount of
the independent expenditure among the
remaining states, according to a ratio
based on the number of U.S. House of
Representatives districts apportioned to
each state.
For purposes of determining whether
the independent expenditure is within
the 20 days before the election and is
therefore subject to the 24-hour
reporting requirement under 52 U.S.C.
30104(g)(1), the political committee
would use the date of the next
upcoming primary election among the
states where the independent
expenditure was distributed. If that date
is more than 20 days away from the date
of the expenditure and the amount
allocated to that state causes the
political committee’s aggregate spending
in that state to exceed $10,000, the
committee would be required to file a
48-hour report. If that date is between 1
and 20 days away and the amount
allocated to that state causes the
political committee’s aggregate spending
in that state to exceed $1,000, the
committee would be required to file a
24-hour report.
Information about the dates of the
major-party presidential primary
elections and the number of House
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
4001
districts apportioned to each state
would be incorporated into the
Commission’s electronic filing system,
so a political committee that filed
electronically would be able to enter the
date and amount of the independent
expenditure and the states where it was
distributed, and the software would do
the calculation to determine whether
any reports were required. The same
information would be provided on the
Commission’s website for the benefit of
any political committees that do not file
electronically, in the form of a
calculator that would perform the
allocation calculation when a political
committee enters the amount and date
of a communication and the states in
which it is publicly distributed.
Example: A political committee spent
$40,000 on an independent expenditure
broadcast in Texas, Arizona, New
Mexico, and Oklahoma on March 15,
where the next upcoming primary
election was going to be in Oklahoma on
March 20. There are a total of 53 House
districts in those four states: 9 in
Arizona, 3 in New Mexico, 5 in
Oklahoma, and 36 in Texas. On the date
the communication was distributed, all
four states where it was distributed had
yet to hold their presidential primary
elections. Therefore the political
committee would allocate the $40,000
according to each state’s proportion of
House districts out of the 53 total:
$6,792 for Arizona (40,000 × (9/53)),
$2,264 for New Mexico (40,000 ×
(3/53)), $3,773 for Oklahoma (40,000 ×
(5/53)), and $27,169 for Texas (40,000 ×
(36/53)). Because the next upcoming
primary election where the
communication was distributed would
be within 20 days, in Oklahoma, and the
political committee would have spent
more than $1,000 in that state, a 24-hour
report would be required.
The Commission acknowledges that
the proposed allocation calculation may
seem complex, but notes that this
proposal would allow political
committees to take advantage of
advancing technology to relieve them of
the burden of determining whether and
when to report multistate independent
expenditures. A political committee
would need only enter the date and total
amount of an independent expenditure
and the states in which it was publicly
distributed, and the electronic filing
system or calculator would determine
whether a 24- or 48-hour report was
required and what amount to allocate to
each state. The Commission would not
implement Alternative C until the new
electronic filing system and calculator
were in place so as to avoid requiring
any political committee to perform the
allocation calculation manually.
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
4002
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Would Alternative C satisfy the Act’s
provisions for reporting independent
expenditures? Would this approach
enhance the public’s access to full,
accurate, and timely information about
multistate independent expenditures?
Would this proposal provide sufficient
guidance to political committees as to
how to determine whether they must
file 24-hour or 48-hour reports for
multistate independent expenditures
and what information to include in such
reports? Is this proposal preferable to
the Commission’s existing guidance
under Advisory Opinion 2011–28
(Western Representation PAC)? Does the
feasibility of this proposal depend on
whether a political committee files
electronically, and if so, is the number
of political committees that make
multistate independent expenditures
but do not file electronically significant?
The Commission seeks comment on
whether it is appropriate or desirable to
use House representation, which is
based on population, as a basis for
allocation. Does the use of House
districts assume that the entire
population of a state receives the
communication, and does that question
make a difference in how independent
expenditures should be reported? Does
this proposed use of House districts to
determine whether and when
independent expenditures must be
reported differ materially from proposed
Alternatives A and B?
The Commission also seeks overall
comment on which of the three
alternatives (A, B or C) is preferable
with respect to (1) the burden on the
political committees that must report
their multistate independent
expenditures, and (2) the usefulness of
the information disclosed to the public.
Are there other approaches that might
be preferable to any of these proposed
alternatives?
IV. Proposed Revision to 11 CFR
109.10—Reporting Multistate
Independent Expenditures by Persons
Other Than Political Committees
In 11 CFR 109.10(e)—which addresses
the content of independent expenditure
reports filed by persons other than
political committees—the Commission
proposes to reference the requirements
for reporting multistate independent
expenditures that the Commission
proposes to add to section
104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C) or in new section
104.4(f)(2). Specifically, revised section
109.10(e)(1)(iv) would provide that
when a person other than a political
committee makes an expenditure
meeting the criteria set forth in section
104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C) (i.e., an independent
expenditure that supports or opposes a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jan 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
presidential primary candidate and that
is distributed in more than the specified
number of states but does not refer to
any particular state), the person must
report the expenditure pursuant to the
provisions of section 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C)
or section 104.4(f)(2).
The Commission requests comments
on this proposed revision to 11 CFR
109.10. Should the reporting
requirements for multistate independent
expenditures made by persons other
than political committees parallel the
reporting requirements for multistate
independent expenditures made by
political committees? Although
Advisory Opinion 2011–28 (Western
Representation PAC) and the Draft
Interpretive Rules did not address how
persons other than political committees
should report multistate independent
expenditures, is there any legal or
policy reason that the reporting
requirements for political committees
and for other persons should differ in
the context of multistate independent
expenditures? Does the proposed
revision to section 109.10 clarify the
reporting obligations of persons who
make multistate independent
expenditures? Is the proposed revision
to section 109.10 necessary or desirable
to provide full, accurate, and timely
disclosure to the public regarding
multistate independent expenditures
made by persons other than political
committees? Would the proposed
revision reduce or increase the
administrative burden on such persons?
If the proposed revision does increase
the administrative burden on such
persons, is that burden outweighed by
the usefulness of the information
disclosed to the public?
V. Proposed Revision to 11 CFR
104.20—Electioneering
Communications
In section 104.20(c), which concerns
the content of reports regarding
electioneering communications, the
Commission proposes to add a new
paragraph (c)(6) and redesignate current
paragraphs (c)(6)–(9) as paragraphs
(c)(7)–(10). Proposed new paragraph
(c)(6) would apply when the relevant
election (which the reporting person is
required to disclose pursuant to
paragraph (c)(5)) is a presidential
primary election and the electioneering
communication is distributed in more
than a specified number of states but
does not refer to any particular state’s
primary election.
In such situations, this new paragraph
would parallel the new reporting
requirements for multistate independent
expenditures as discussed above, either
new section 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C) if
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Alternative A or B is adopted, or new
section 104.4(f)(2) if Alternative C is
adopted. If Alternative A or B is
adopted, new paragraph (c)(6) would
provide that the reporting person must
report the electioneering
communication as a single
communication and use a memo text to
indicate the states in which the
communication constitutes an
electioneering communication (as
defined in 11 CFR 100.29(a)).
If Alternative C is adopted, new
paragraph (c)(6) would provide that the
reporting person must allocate the cost
of the communication among the states
where it is publicly distributed and
whose presidential primary elections
have not yet occurred as set forth in new
section 104.4(f)(2). The proposed
revision would thus treat multistate
electioneering communications
similarly to multistate independent
expenditures, as discussed above.
The Commission seeks comment on
the proposed revision to section 104.20.
Should multistate electioneering
communications be treated similarly to
multistate independent expenditures, or
are there differences between the two
types of communications or the persons
that make them that would call for
different reporting requirements?
Should the same number of states
constitute the threshold for multistate
independent expenditures and
multistate electioneering
communications? Should the cost of an
electioneering communication be
allocated among the states where the
communication is publicly distributed
for reporting purposes?
Would the proposed new paragraph
increase or decrease the administrative
burden on persons reporting
electioneering communications? If the
proposed revision does increase the
administrative burden on such persons,
is that burden outweighed by the
usefulness of the information disclosed
to the public? Would the proposed
revision provide sufficient information
on how persons making multistate
electioneering communications should
disclose them? Is the proposed revision
necessary or desirable to provide full,
accurate, and timely disclosure of
information about multistate
electioneering communications to the
public?
Certification of No Effect Pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 605(b) (Regulatory Flexibility
Act)
The Commission certifies that the
attached proposed rules, if adopted,
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The proposed rules would
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
clarify whether authorized committees
may make independent expenditures
and provide a mechanism for authorized
committees to report independent
expenditures. The proposed reporting
requirements would only affect
authorized committees that choose to
make independent expenditures.
Moreover, authorized committees are
already required to report all
disbursements, as well as the name and
address of any person who has received
any disbursement in an aggregate
amount exceeding $200 within a certain
period, along with the date, amount,
and purpose of such disbursement.
Thus, the proposed rules would not
materially change the amount of
information reported, but rather would
change how disbursements for
independent expenditures are identified
on reports.
The proposed rules would also
provide for consolidated reporting of
certain independent expenditures and
electioneering communications that the
Commission’s current reporting
guidance indicates should be allocated
among elections in multiple states. The
Commission anticipates that the
proposed consolidation of these reports
would generally result in a modest
reduction of the administrative burdens
on reporting entities, and it would not
impose any new reporting obligations.
Thus, to the extent that any entities
affected by these proposed rules might
fall within the definition of ‘‘small
businesses’’ or ‘‘small organizations,’’
the economic impact of complying with
these rules would not be significant.
List of Subjects
11 CFR Part 102
Political committees and parties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
11 CFR Part 104
Campaign funds, Political committees
and parties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
11 CFR Part 109
Elections, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Federal Election
Commission proposes to amend 11 CFR
chapter 1, as follows:
PART 102—REGISTRATION,
ORGANIZATION, AND
RECORDKEEPING BY POLITICAL
COMMITTEES (52 U.S.C. 30103)
1. The authority citation for part 102
continues to read as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jan 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
Authority: 52 U.S.C. 30102, 30103,
30104(a)(11), 30111(a)(8), and 30120.
2. Revise paragraph (c)(2) of § 102.12
to read as follows:
■
§ 102.12 Designation of principal
campaign committee (52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(1)
and (3)).
*
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
Alternative A
(2)(i) For purposes of paragraph (c) of
this section, the term support includes
an independent expenditure by an
authorized committee.
(ii) For purposes of paragraph (c) of
this section, the term support does not
include contributions by an authorized
committee in amounts aggregating
$2,000 or less per election to an
authorized committee of any other
candidate.
(iii) Nothing in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section affects the ability of a national
committee of a political party that has
been designated as the principal
campaign committee of that party’s
presidential candidate to contribute to
or make independent expenditures in
support of another candidate in
accordance with 11 CFR part 109,
subpart D, and 11 CFR part 110.
Alternative B
(2) For purposes of paragraph (c) of
this section, the term support does not
include:
(i) Independent expenditures by an
authorized committee in any amount; or
(ii) Contributions by an authorized
committee in amounts aggregating
$2,000 or less per election to an
authorized committee of any other
candidate, except that the national
committee of a political party which has
been designated as the principal
campaign committee of that party’s
presidential candidate may contribute to
another candidate in accordance with
11 CFR part 109, subpart D, and part
110.
■ 3. Revise paragraph (c)(2) of § 102.13
to read as follows:
§ 102.13 Authorization of political
committees (52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(1) and (3)).
*
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
Alternative A
(2)(i) For purposes of paragraph (c) of
this section, the term support includes
an independent expenditure by an
authorized committee.
(ii) For purposes of paragraph (c) of
this section, the term support does not
include contributions by an authorized
committee in amounts aggregating
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
4003
$2,000 or less per election to an
authorized committee of any other
candidate.
(iii) Nothing in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section affects the ability of a national
committee of a political party that has
been designated as the principal
campaign committee of that party’s
presidential candidate to contribute to
or make independent expenditures in
support of another candidate in
accordance with 11 CFR part 109,
subpart D, and 11 CFR part 110.
Alternative B
(2) For purposes of paragraph (c) of
this section, the term support does not
include:
(i) Independent expenditures by an
authorized committee in any amount; or
(ii) Contributions by an authorized
committee in amounts aggregating
$2,000 or less per election to an
authorized committee of any other
candidate, except that the national
committee of a political party which has
been designated as the principal
campaign committee of that party’s
presidential candidate may contribute to
another candidate in accordance with
11 CFR part 109, subpart D, and 11 CFR
part 110.
PART 104—REPORTS BY POLITICAL
COMMITTEES AND OTHER PERSONS
(52 U.S.C. 30104)
4. The authority citation for part 104
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 52 U.S.C. 30101(1), 30101(8),
30101(9), 30102(i), 30104, 30111(a)(8) and
(b), 30114, 30116, 36 U.S.C. 510.
§ 104.3
[Amended]
5. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(2)(vi)
and (b)(2)(vii) as (b)(2)(vii) and
(b)(2)(viii).
■ 6. Add new paragraph (b)(2)(vi) and
revise paragraphs (b)(3)(vii)(C) and (D)
and (b)(4)(vi) to read as follows:
■
§ 104.3
Contents of Reports.
Alternatives A and B
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(vi) Independent expenditures made
by the reporting committee;
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * *
(vii) * * *
(C) For an independent expenditure
that is made in support of or opposition
to a presidential primary candidate and
is publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated in more than __
states but does not refer to any
particular state, the political committee
must report the independent
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
4004
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
expenditure as a single expenditure—
i.e., without allocating it among states—
and must use memo text to indicate the
states in which the communication is
distributed.
(D) The information required by 11
CFR 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(A) through (C) shall
be reported on Schedule E as part of a
report covering the reporting period in
which the aggregate disbursements for
any independent expenditure to any
person exceed $200 per calendar year.
Schedule E shall also include the total
of all such expenditures of $200 or less
made during the reporting period.
(4) * * *
(iv)(A) Each person who receives any
disbursement during the reporting
period in an aggregate amount or value
in excess of $200 within the calendar
year in connection with an independent
expenditure by the reporting committee,
together with the date, amount, and
purpose of any such independent
expenditure(s);
(B) For each independent expenditure
reported, the committee must also
provide a statement which indicates
whether such independent expenditure
is in support of, or in opposition to a
particular candidate, as well as the
name of the candidate and office sought
by such candidate (including State and
Congressional district, when
applicable), and a certification, under
penalty of perjury, as to whether such
independent expenditure is made in
cooperation, consultation or concert
with, or at the request or suggestion of,
any other candidate or any other
authorized committee or agent of such
committee;
(C) For an independent expenditure
that is made in support of or opposition
to a presidential primary candidate and
is publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated in more than __
states but does not refer to any
particular state, the political committee
must report the independent
expenditure as a single expenditure—
i.e., without allocating it among states—
and must use memo text to indicate the
states in which the communication is
distributed.
(D) The information required by 11
CFR 104.3(b)(4)(iv)(A) through (C) shall
be reported on Schedule E as part of a
report covering the reporting period in
which the aggregate disbursements for
any independent expenditure to any
person exceed $200 per calendar year.
Schedule E shall also include the total
of all such expenditures of $200 or less
made during the reporting period.
*
*
*
*
*
Alternative C
*
*
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
*
16:59 Jan 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(vi) Independent expenditures made
by the reporting committee;
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * *
(vii) * * *
(C) For an independent expenditure
that is made in support of or opposition
to a presidential primary candidate and
is publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated in more than __
states but does not refer to any
particular state, the political committee
must report the independent
expenditure according to 11 CFR
104.4(f)(2).
(D) The information required by 11
CFR 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(A) through (C) shall
be reported on Schedule E as part of a
report covering the reporting period in
which the aggregate disbursements for
any independent expenditure to any
person exceed $200 per calendar year.
Schedule E shall also include the total
of all such expenditures of $200 or less
made during the reporting period.
(4) * * *
(iv)(A) Each person who receives any
disbursement during the reporting
period in an aggregate amount or value
in excess of $200 within the calendar
year in connection with an independent
expenditure by the reporting committee,
together with the date, amount, and
purpose of any such independent
expenditure(s);
(B) For each independent expenditure
reported, the committee must also
provide a statement which indicates
whether such independent expenditure
is in support of, or in opposition to a
particular candidate, as well as the
name of the candidate and office sought
by such candidate (including State and
Congressional district, when
applicable), and a certification, under
penalty of perjury, as to whether such
independent expenditure is made in
cooperation, consultation or concert
with, or at the request or suggestion of,
any other candidate or any other
authorized committee or agent of such
committee;
(C) For an independent expenditure
that is made in support of or opposition
to a presidential primary candidate and
is publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated in more than __
states but does not refer to any
particular state, the political committee
must report the independent
expenditure according to 11 CFR
104.4(f)(2).
(D) The information required by 11
CFR 104.3(b)(4)(iv)(A) through (C) shall
be reported on Schedule E as part of a
report covering the reporting period in
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
which the aggregate disbursements for
any independent expenditure to any
person exceed $200 per calendar year.
Schedule E shall also include the total
of all such expenditures of $200 or less
made during the reporting period.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Amend § 104.4 by
■ a. In paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d),
adding ‘‘and (b)(4)(vi)’’ after ‘‘11 CFR
104.3(b)(3)(iv)’’;
■ b. In paragraph (b) removing ‘‘FEC
Form 3X’’ and adding, in its place, the
words ‘‘the applicable FEC Form’’;
■ c. Revising paragraph (f) as to read as
follows:
§ 104.4 Independent expenditures by
political committees.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Aggregating independent
expenditures for reporting purposes. (1)
For purposes of determining whether
24-hour and 48-hour reports must be
filed in accordance with paragraphs (b)
and (c) of this section and 11 CFR
109.10(c) and (d), aggregations of
independent expenditures must be
calculated as of the first date on which
a communication that constitutes an
independent expenditure is publicly
distributed or otherwise publicly
disseminated, and as of the date that
any such communication with respect
to the same election is subsequently
publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated. Every person
must include in the aggregate total all
disbursements during the calendar year
for independent expenditures, and all
enforceable contracts, either oral or
written, obligating funds for
disbursements during the calendar year
for independent expenditures, where
those independent expenditures are
made with respect to the same election
for Federal office.
Alternative A
(2) For purposes of determining
whether 24-hour or 48-hour reports
must be filed in accordance with
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section
and 11 CFR 109.10(c) and (d), if the
independent expenditure is made in
support of or opposition to a candidate
in a presidential primary election and is
publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated in more than __
states but does not refer to any
particular state, the date of the election
is the first day of the national
nominating convention of the party
whose nomination the candidate is
seeking.
Alternative B
(2) For purposes of determining
whether 24-hour or 48-hour reports
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
must be filed in accordance with
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section
and 11 CFR 109.10(c) and (d), if the
independent expenditure is made in
support of or opposition to a candidate
in a presidential primary election and is
publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated in more than __
states but does not refer to any
particular state, the date of the election
is the date of the next upcoming
presidential primary election among the
presidential primary elections to be held
in the states in which the independent
expenditure is publicly distributed or
disseminated.
Alternative C
(2) Multistate independent
expenditures. (i) If an independent
expenditure is made in support of or
opposition to a candidate in a
presidential primary election and is
publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated in more than __
states but does not refer to any
particular state, the political committee
must allocate the total amount of the
expenditure among each of the states
where it is publicly distributed or
disseminated and where the
presidential primary election has yet to
occur, according to the number of
Congressional districts apportioned to
each such state relative to the total
number of Congressional districts in all
such states.
(ii) If the communication is publicly
distributed or otherwise publicly
disseminated up to and including the
20th day before the next upcoming
presidential primary election in any of
the states, and the amount calculated in
paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section
aggregates to $10,000 or more with
respect to any of the states in that
calendar year, the political committee
must file a 48-hour report in accordance
with paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(iii) If the communication is publicly
distributed or otherwise publicly
disseminated after the 20th day but
more than 24 hours before 12:01 a.m. of
the day of the next upcoming
presidential primary election in any of
the states, and the amount calculated in
paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section
aggregates to $1,000 or more with
respect to any of the states, the political
committee must file a 24-hour report in
accordance with paragraph (c) of this
section.
(iv) For any report of an independent
expenditure included on a political
committee’s regular report under
paragraph (b)(1) of this section, or any
48- or 24-hour report of an independent
expenditure, the political committee
must indicate the date and amount of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jan 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
the expenditure, and list the states in
which the communication is publicly
disseminated or otherwise publicly
distributed.
§ 104.20
[Amended]
7. In § 104.20:
■ a. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(6)
through (c)(9) as paragraphs (c)(7)
through (c)(10).
■ b. Revise the heading and add new
paragraph (c)(6) to read as follows:
■
§ 104.20 Reporting electioneering
communications (52 U.S.C. 30104(f)).
*
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
Alternatives A and B
(6) If the election identified pursuant
to paragraph (c)(5) of this section is a
presidential primary election and the
electioneering communication is
publicly distributed or otherwise
disseminated in more than __ states but
does not refer to any particular state, the
electioneering communication shall be
reported as a single communication, and
the states in which it constitutes an
electioneering communication (as
defined in 11 CFR 100.29(a)) shall be
indicated in memo text.
4005
Alternatives A and B
(iv) A statement that indicates
whether such expenditure was in
support of, or in opposition to a
candidate, together with the candidate’s
name and office sought; if the
expenditure meets the criteria set forth
in § 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C), memo text must
be used to indicate the states in which
the communication is distributed, as
prescribed in that section;
Alternative C
(iv) A statement that indicates
whether such expenditure was in
support of, or in opposition to a
candidate, together with the candidate’s
name and office sought; if the
expenditure meets the criteria set forth
in § 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C), the
communication must be reported in
accordance with § 104.4(f)(2);
*
*
*
*
*
On behalf of the Commission.
Dated: January 17, 2018.
Caroline C. Hunter,
Chair, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. 2018–01074 Filed 1–26–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715–01–P
Alternative C
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
(6) If the election identified pursuant
to paragraph (c)(5) of this section is a
presidential primary election and the
electioneering communication is
publicly distributed or otherwise
disseminated in more than __ states but
does not refer to any particular state, the
cost of the electioneering
communication shall be allocated
among the states where it is publicly
distributed or otherwise disseminated in
accordance with § 104.4(f)(2)(A).
*
*
*
*
*
13 CFR Part 125
PART 109—COORDINATED AND
INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES (52
U.S.C. 30101(17), 30116(A) AND (D),
AND PUBLIC LAW 107–155 SEC.
214(C))
8. The authority citation for part 109
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 52 U.S.C. 30101(17), 30104(c),
30111(a)(8), 30116, 30120; Sec. 214(c),
Pub. L. 107–155, 116 Stat. 81.
9. Revise paragraph (e)(1)(iv) of
§ 109.10 as follows:
■
§ 109.10 How do political committees and
other persons report independent
expenditures?
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
PO 00000
Frm 00010
*
Fmt 4702
*
Sfmt 4702
RIN 3245–AG85
Ownership and Control of ServiceDisabled Veteran-Owned Small
Business Concerns
U.S. Small Business
Administration.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA or Agency)
proposes to amend its regulations to
implement provisions of The National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2017 (NDAA 2017). The NDAA
2017 placed the responsibility for
issuing regulations relating to
ownership and control for the
Department of Veterans Affairs
verification of Veteran-Owned (VO) and
Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned
(SDVO) Small Business Concern (SBC)
with the SBA. Pursuant to NDAA 2017,
there will be one definition of
ownership and control for these
concerns, which will apply to the
Department of Veterans Affairs in its
verification and Vets First Contracting
Program procurements, and all other
government acquisitions which require
self-certification. The legislation also
provides that in certain circumstances a
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 19 (Monday, January 29, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3996-4005]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01074]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2018 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 3996]]
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
11 CFR Parts 102, 104, and 109
[Notice 2018-01]
Independent Expenditures by Authorized Committees; Reporting
Multistate Independent Expenditures and Electioneering Communications
AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Election Commission requests comments on proposed
changes to its regulations concerning independent expenditures by
candidates. The Commission also requests comments on proposed changes
to its regulations to address reporting of independent expenditures and
electioneering communications that relate to presidential primary
elections and that are publicly distributed in multiple states but that
do not refer to any particular state's primary election. The Commission
has made no final decision on the issues and proposals presented in
this rulemaking.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 30, 2018.
ADDRESSES: All comments must be in writing. Comments may be submitted
electronically via the Commission's website at https://sers.fec.gov/fosers, reference REG 2014-02. Commenters are encouraged to submit
comments electronically to ensure timely receipt and consideration.
Alternatively, comments may be submitted in paper form. Paper comments
must be sent to the Federal Election Commission, Attn.: Robert M. Knop,
Assistant General Counsel. Comments submitted before the Commission's
relocation on March 5, 2018 must be sent to 999 E Street NW,
Washington, DC 20463; comments submitted after the Commission's
relocation must be sent to 1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20463.
See Change of Address; Technical Amendments, 82 FR 60852 (Dec. 26,
2017). Each commenter must provide, at a minimum, his or her first
name, last name, city, state, and zip code. All properly submitted
comments, including attachments, will become part of the public record,
and the Commission will make comments available for public viewing on
the Commission's website and in the Commission's Public Records room.
Accordingly, commenters should not provide in their comments any
information that they do not wish to make public, such as a home street
address, personal email address, date of birth, phone number, social
security number, or driver's license number, or any information that is
restricted from disclosure, such as trade secrets or commercial or
financial information that is privileged or confidential.
The Commission may hold a public hearing on this notice of proposed
rulemaking. Commenters wishing to testify at a hearing must so indicate
in their comments. If a hearing is to be held, the Commission will
publish a notification of hearing in the Federal Register announcing
the date and time of the hearing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert M. Knop, Assistant General
Counsel, Ms. Esther D. Gyory, or Ms. Joanna S. Waldstreicher,
Attorneys, (202) 694-1650 or (800) 424-9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is considering revising some
of its regulations concerning independent expenditures and
electioneering communications, and it seeks comment on the proposed
changes.
The Commission is proposing revisions to its regulations concerning
whether authorized committees may make independent expenditures. The
Federal Election Campaign Act, 52 U.S.C. 30101-46 (the ``Act'') and
Commission regulations state that no political committee that
``supports'' more than one candidate may be designated as an authorized
campaign committee. 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(3); 11 CFR 102.12(c), 102.13(c).
The statute and regulations do not define ``support'' for the purposes
of these two provisions, except to state that the term ``does not
include contributions by an authorized committee in amounts aggregating
$2,000 or less per election to an authorized committee of any other
candidate.'' 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(3)(B); 11 CFR 102.12(c)(2),
102.13(c)(2). The Commission is considering revising its regulations to
specifically state that for the purposes of these provisions,
``support'' includes making independent expenditures, or, in the
alternative, that ``support,'' in this context, does not include
independent expenditures. The Commission is seeking comment on the
following proposed revisions to its regulations, which would clarify
the meaning of ``support'' as it is used in 11 CFR 102.12(c)(2) and
102.13(c)(2). In the event that the Commission promulgates final rules
that exclude independent expenditures from the definition of support,
the Commission is also proposing changes to its reporting regulations
at 11 CFR 104.3 and 104.4 to provide for authorized committees to
report independent expenditures.
The Commission is also seeking comment on proposed revisions to its
regulations concerning independent expenditures and electioneering
communications as they apply to communications that relate to
presidential primary elections and that are publicly distributed in
multiple states but that do not refer to any particular state's primary
election. The Act and Commission regulations require persons who make
independent expenditures and electioneering communications to report
certain information to the Commission within specified periods of time.
See 52 U.S.C. 30104(b)-(c), (g); 11 CFR 104.3, 104.4, 104.20, 109.10.
The Commission is considering revising its regulations to specifically
address how these reporting requirements apply to an independent
expenditure or electioneering communication that relates to a
presidential primary election and is distributed in multiple states but
does not refer to any particular state's primary election (a
``multistate independent expenditure'' or ``multistate electioneering
communication''). The Commission is seeking comment on the following
proposed revisions to its regulations, which would clarify when and how
multistate independent expenditures and multistate electioneering
communications must be reported.
I. Background
The Act and Commission regulations require that political
committees report all disbursements. 52 U.S.C. 30104(b)(4); 11 CFR
104.3(b). Political committees must also itemize their
[[Page 3997]]
disbursements according to specific categories. 52 U.S.C. 30104(b)(4);
11 CFR 104.3(b)(1)-(2).
An ``independent expenditure'' is an expenditure that expressly
advocates the election or defeat of a clearly identified federal
candidate and is not coordinated with such candidate (or his or her
opponent) or political party. 52 U.S.C. 30101(17); see also 11 CFR
100.16(a). Under existing regulations, a political committee (other
than an authorized committee) that makes independent expenditures must
itemize those expenditures on its regular periodic reports, stating,
among other things, the name of the candidate whom the expenditure
supports or opposes and the office sought by that candidate. 52 U.S.C.
30104(b)(4)(H)(iii), (6)(B)(iii); 11 CFR 104.4(a). Any person other
than a political committee that makes independent expenditures
aggregating in excess of $250 during a calendar year must disclose the
same information in a statement filed with the Commission.\1\ 52 U.S.C.
30104(c); 11 CFR 109.10(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Further, Commission regulations provide that persons other
than political committees ``shall [also] file a report or statement
for any quarterly period during which any such independent
expenditures that aggregate in excess of $250 are made and in any
quarterly reporting period thereafter in which additional
independent expenditures are made.'' 11 CFR 109.19(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, any person that makes independent expenditures
aggregating $10,000 or more for an election in any calendar year, up to
and including the 20th day before an election, must report the
expenditures within 48 hours. 52 U.S.C. 30104(g)(2)(A); 11 CFR
104.4(b)(2), 109.10(c). Additional reports must be filed within 48
hours each time the person makes further independent expenditures
aggregating $10,000 or more with respect to the same election. 52
U.S.C. 30104(g)(2)(B); 11 CFR 104.4(b)(2), 109.10(c).
Any person that makes independent expenditures aggregating $1,000
or more less than 20 days, but more than 24 hours, before the date of
an election must report the expenditures within 24 hours. 52 U.S.C.
30104(g)(1)(A); 11 CFR 104.4(c), 109.10(d). Additional reports must be
filed within 24 hours each time the person makes further independent
expenditures aggregating $1,000 or more with respect to the same
election. 52 U.S.C. 30104(g)(1)(B); 11 CFR 104.4(c), 109.10(d).
A. Independent Expenditures by Authorized Committees
The Act requires that every candidate for federal office (other
than the nominee for Vice President) designate a political committee
``to serve as the principal campaign committee'' for that candidate. 52
U.S.C. 30102(e)(1); 11 CFR 102.12(a). The principal campaign committee
of a candidate is ``authorized'' by the candidate to receive
contributions or to make expenditures on behalf of that candidate. See
11 CFR 102.13(a)(1); 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(1), (3). A candidate may also
designate additional political committees to serve as authorized
committees of that candidate. 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(1); 11 CFR
102.13(a)(1). The Act and Commission regulations state that no
political committee that ``supports'' more than one candidate may be
designated as an authorized committee. 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(3); 11 CFR
102.12(c), 102.13(c). The Act and regulations further state that for
the purposes of these provisions, ``the term support does not include
contributions by an authorized committee in amounts aggregating $2,000
or less per election to an authorized committee of any other
candidate,'' but the term is not otherwise defined. 11 CFR
102.12(c)(2), 102.13(c)(2); 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(3)(B).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Support'' appears in other places in the regulations but
is not defined in most of those other instances. See, e.g., 11 CFR
100.24(b)(3) (defining ``federal election activity'' as public
communication that refers to clearly identified candidate for
federal office and that ``promotes or supports, or attacks or
opposes any candidate for Federal office''), 104.5(d) (requiring
treasurer of political committee ``supporting'' candidate for Vice
President to file reports on same basis as principal campaign
committee of presidential candidate), 110.1(h) (addressing
circumstances in which person may contribute to more than one
committee ``supporting'' the same candidate), 114.4(d)(1) (stating
that corporation or labor organization may ``support or conduct''
voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives), 114.4(d)(2)
(specifying that voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives are
not expenditures when they meet certain criteria, including that
individuals conducting drive are not paid on basis of number of
individuals registered or transported ``who support one or more
particular candidates''), 300.2(m) (stating that definition of
``solicitation'' does not include ``mere statements of political
support''), 300.37(a)(3)(iv) (excluding from prohibition on
fundraising for certain tax-exempt organizations a ``political
committee under [s]tate law, that `supports' only [s]tate or local
candidates . . . .''). Section 100.6, which defines ``connected
organization,'' states that, for the purposes of that provision, the
term ``financially supports'' does not include contributions to a
political committee, but does include payments of establishment,
administration, and solicitation costs of a political committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Until recently, the Commission had not definitively addressed
whether the term ``support'' in section 30102(e)(3) includes
independent expenditures.\3\ In Matter Under Review (``MUR'') 6405
(Friends of John McCain Inc., et al.), the Commission dismissed an
allegation that an authorized committee violated 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(3)
by running ads that expressly advocated the election of another
candidate. Factual and Legal Analysis at 2-3, MUR 6405 (Friends of John
McCain Inc., et al.) (Feb. 25, 2015), https://eqs.fec.gov/eqsdocsMUR/15044371159.pdf (``McCain''). In its analysis, the Commission cited the
Supreme Court's decisions in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976)
(striking down limits on independent expenditures for most individuals
and groups), Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. FEC, 518
U.S. 604 (1996) (striking down limit on independent expenditures by
political party committees on grounds that independent expenditures do
not pose a risk of corruption or the appearance of corruption), and
Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010) (striking down prohibition
on independent expenditures by corporations). McCain at 9-10. The
Commission concluded that ``it is unlikely that independent spending by
authorized committees would be deemed more potentially corrupting than
independent expenditures by individuals, political parties, or
corporations, each of which has been found [by the Supreme Court] to
have a constitutional right to make unlimited independent
expenditures.'' McCain at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In MUR 2841 (Jenkins), the Commission stated that 2 U.S.C.
432(e) (now 52 U.S.C. 30102(e)) precluded a principal campaign
committee from ``making expenditures on behalf of another candidate,
thus supporting more than one candidate,'' but ultimately decided
the matter on other grounds. See Conciliation Agreement ] IV.13
(Dec. 11, 1992), https://www.fec.gov/disclosure_data/mur/2841.pdf. In
a subsequent MUR, the Office of the General Counsel, relying on the
Commission's reasoning in MUR 2841 (Jenkins), recommended finding
reason to believe that an authorized committee violated 2 U.S.C.
432(e). See First General Counsel's Report at 11, MUR 3676 (Stupak)
(Jan. 11, 1995), all documents for MUR 3676 available at https://www.fec.gov/disclosure_data/mur/3676.pdf. The Commission rejected
OGC's recommendation, though the four Commissioners did not agree on
the reasoning for that decision. See Thomas Statement of Reasons;
Aikens et al. Statement of Reasons, MUR 3676 (Stupak).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, neither the regulations nor the Commission's reporting
forms provide a mechanism for authorized committees to report
independent expenditures. Section 104.3(b)(2), which covers reporting
by authorized committees, does not include independent expenditures
made by the reporting committee among the categories of disbursements
that must be itemized. Similarly, Sec. 104.3(b)(4) sets out the
categories of information that authorized committees must report about
itemized disbursements and does not contain a provision for independent
expenditures. Finally, section 104.4 specifies that political
committees that make independent expenditures must report them on
Schedule E of FEC Form
[[Page 3998]]
3X, but authorized committees file Form 3 (for House and Senate
candidates) or Form 3P (for presidential candidates), neither of which
contains Schedule E.
B. Multistate Independent Expenditures and Electioneering
Communications
As described above, the Act and Commission regulations require any
person who makes independent expenditures aggregating at or above
certain threshold amounts and within certain periods prior to an
election to report those independent expenditures within 48 or 24
hours. 52 U.S.C. 30104(g)(1)(A), (2)(A); 11 CFR 104.4(b)(2), (c),
109.10(c)-(d). The 48- and 24-hour filing requirements begin to run
when the independent expenditures aggregating at least $10,000 or
$1,000, respectively, are ``publicly distributed or otherwise publicly
disseminated'' 11 CFR 104.4(b)(2), (c), (f), 109.10(c)-(d). For
purposes of calculating these expenditures and determining if a
communication is ``publicly distributed'' within an applicable 24-hour
pre-election filing window, each state's presidential primary election
is considered a separate election. See Advisory Opinion 2003-40 (U.S.
Navy Veterans' Good Government Fund) at 3-4 (noting that ``publicly
distributed'' in section 104.4 has same meaning as the term in 11 CFR
100.29(b)(3)(ii)(A), under which each state's presidential primary
election is a separate election) (citing Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
of 2002 Reporting, 68 FR 404, 407 (Jan. 3, 2003); Electioneering
Communications, 67 FR 65190, 65194 (Oct. 23, 2002)).
An ``electioneering communication,'' in the context of a
presidential election, is a broadcast, cable, or satellite
communication that refers to a clearly identified candidate for
President or Vice President and is ``publicly distributed'' within
sixty days before a general election or thirty days before a primary
election or nominating convention. 52 U.S.C. 30104(f)(3)(A)(i); 11 CFR
100.29(a). If the candidate identified in the communication is seeking
a party's nomination for the presidential or vice presidential
election, ``publicly distributed'' means the communication can be
received by at least 50,000 people in a state where a primary election
is being held within 30 days, or that it can be received by at least
50,000 people anywhere in the United States within the period between
30 days before the first day of the national nominating convention and
the conclusion of the convention. 11 CFR 100.29(b)(3). A person who
makes electioneering communications that aggregate in excess of $10,000
in a calendar year must file a statement with the Commission disclosing
certain information about the electioneering communication, including
the election to which the electioneering communication pertains. 52
U.S.C. 30104(f); 11 CFR 104.20(b)-(c). As with independent
expenditures, each state's presidential primary election is considered
a separate election for purposes of determining whether an
electioneering communication is ``publicly distributed'' within the
pre-election reporting window. See Advisory Opinion 2003-40 (U.S. Navy
Veterans' Good Government Fund) at 3-4.
The Commission's current regulations do not specifically address
how the public distribution criteria and other reporting requirements
apply to independent expenditures or electioneering communications that
are made in the context of a presidential primary election and that are
distributed in multiple states. In particular, the regulations do not
specify which state's primary election date is relevant for determining
whether the communication falls within the 24-hour reporting window
(for independent expenditures) or the 30-day definitional window (for
electioneering communications).
In a 2012 advisory opinion, the Commission considered how the
independent expenditure reporting requirements applied to independent
expenditures that supported or opposed a presidential primary candidate
and were distributed nationwide without referring to any specific
state's primary election. See Advisory Opinion 2011-28 (Western
Representation PAC). In that advisory opinion, the Commission concluded
that a political committee making such an independent expenditure
should divide the cost of the independent expenditure by the number of
states that had not yet held their primary elections, and should use
the resulting amounts to determine whether the committee must file 24-
and 48-hour reports and for which states. Id.
In 2014, the Commission made available for public comment three
alternative draft interpretive rules on this topic. Draft Notices of
Interpretive Rule Regarding Reporting Nationwide Independent
Expenditures in Presidential Primary Elections (Jan. 17, 2014) (``Draft
Interpretive Rules''), www.fec.gov/law/policy/nationwideiereporting/draftnationwideiereporting.pdf.\4\ Draft A would have followed the
approach set forth in Advisory Opinion 2011-28 (Western Representation
PAC), instructing persons making a nationwide independent expenditure
to divide the cost of the nationwide independent expenditure by the
number of states with upcoming presidential primary elections. Draft B
would have instructed persons making a nationwide independent
expenditure to report it as a single expenditure without indicating a
state where the expenditure was made, instead using ``memo text'' \5\
to indicate that the independent expenditure was made nationwide. Draft
B also would have instructed filers to use the first day of the
candidate's national nominating convention as the election date for
determining whether they must file 24- and 48-hour reports. Finally,
Draft C would have provided the same reporting guidance as Draft B,
except that Draft C would have instructed filers to use the date of the
next presidential primary election (rather than the beginning of the
national nominating convention) as the election date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Draft Interpretive Rules referred to the type of
independent expenditures that are the subject of this proposed
rulemaking as ``nationwide independent expenditures.'' As discussed
below, however, the Commission has not yet determined the number of
states in which an independent expenditure or electioneering
communication must be distributed to fall under the proposed rules.
Accordingly, such communications are referred to in this Notice as
``multistate''--rather than ``nationwide''--independent expenditures
and electioneering communications.
\5\ ``Memo text'' refers to a means of including additional
information or explanation about a receipt or disbursement on a
Commission form. See FEC, Campaign Guide for Nonconnected Committees
(2008), https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/nongui.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission received two comments on the Draft Interpretive
Rules.\6\ Both comments generally supported Draft B. Both comments also
argued that the approach in Draft A was unnecessarily complex and would
not provide clear information to the public about the reported
independent expenditures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ These comments are available on the Commission's website at
https://www.fec.gov/law/policy.shtml.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After reviewing the comments and engaging in further deliberation,
the Commission has determined that this issue would be better addressed
through regulatory amendments than through an interpretive rule.
Accordingly, the Commission is now seeking comment on proposed
revisions to its regulations regarding reporting of independent
expenditures and electioneering communications.
[[Page 3999]]
II. Proposed Revisions to 11 CFR Parts 102 and 104--Independent
Expenditures by Authorized Committees of a Candidate
As set forth below, the Commission proposes revisions to section
102.12, concerning principal campaign committees, and section 102.13,
concerning authorized committees. The Commission also proposes
revisions to sections 104.3 and 104.4 regarding authorized committees'
reporting of independent expenditures. The Commission seeks comment on
these revisions, which are intended to clarify the type of activity
that an authorized committee may engage in without ``supporting''
another candidate, as well as to require disclosure of independent
expenditures by authorized committees if such expenditures are
determined to be permissible.
A. Proposed New 11 CFR 102.12(c)(2)(i) and 102.13(c)(2)(i)--Definition
of ``Support''
In both sections 102.12 and 102.13, the Commission is proposing to
redesignate current paragraph (c)(2) as paragraph (c)(2)(ii) and to add
new paragraph (c)(2)(i), which would define the term ``support.'' The
Commission is proposing two alternative provisions for new 11 CFR
102.12(c)(2)(i) and 102.13(c)(2)(i) and seeks comment on whether either
alternative is preferable.
Under either alternative, the regulations would continue to exclude
from the definition of support contributions by an authorized committee
in amounts aggregating $2,000 or less per election to an authorized
committee of any other candidate. Under both alternatives, current
Sec. Sec. 102.12(c)(2) and 102.13(c)(2) would be redesignated as
Sec. Sec. 102.12(c)(2)(ii) and 102.13(c)(2)(ii), respectively.
Under Alternative A, new Sec. Sec. 102.12(c)(2)(i) and
102.13(c)(2)(i) would state that for the purposes of the regulation,
the term ``support'' includes an independent expenditure by an
authorized committee. (The proposed regulations would clarify that this
does not affect the ability of a national committee of a political
party that has been designated as the principal campaign committee of
that party's presidential candidate to make independent expenditures
supporting or opposing other candidates. See 11 CFR 109.36.\7\) Under
Alternative B, new Sec. Sec. 102.12(c)(2)(i) and 102.13(c)(2)(i) would
state that for the purposes of the regulation, the term ``support''
does not include independent expenditures by an authorized committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Currently, both sections 102.12 and 102.13 state that the
national party committee of a political party that has been
designated as the principal campaign committee of that party's
presidential candidate may contribute to another candidate in
accordance with certain regulations. Section 102.13 states that such
contributions must be made in accordance with 11 CFR part 109,
subpart D (coordinated party expenditures) and part 110
(contribution limits and prohibitions); section 102.12, however,
states only that such contributions must be made in accordance with
11 CFR part 110. Under both alternatives A and B, proposed paragraph
102.12(c)(2) would be revised to include a reference to 11 CFR part
109, subpart D, tracking the existing language in 11 CFR
102.13(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission seeks comment on the two alternatives. Is either
alternative preferable as a matter of statutory interpretation, taking
into account the applicable case law? If both alternatives are
statutorily permissible, is either alternative preferable as a matter
of policy?
For the purposes of sections 102.12 and 102.13, the term
``support'' does not include contributions aggregating $2,000 or less.
Thus, Alternative A would prohibit authorized committees from making
independent expenditures in any amount, while not prohibiting those
committees from making contributions (including coordinated
expenditures and coordinated communications, see 52 U.S.C.
30116(a)(7)(B)(i); 11 CFR 109.20) of up to $2,000 to other candidates.
If the Commission adopts Alternative A, should the Commission also
exclude independent expenditures aggregating $2,000 or less per
election from the definition of support? If the Commission adopts
Alternative B, authorized committees would be allowed to make
independent expenditures in any amount. What are the implications of
authorized committees' potentially using substantial portions of their
resources on independent expenditures?
B. Proposed Revisions to 11 CFR 104.3--Contents of Reports and 11 CFR
104.4--Independent Expenditures by Political Committees
Currently, all political committees--including authorized
committees--must report the name and address of any person who has
received any disbursement in an aggregate amount exceeding $200 within
a certain period, along with the date, amount, and purpose of such
disbursement. 52 U.S.C. 30104(b)(5), (6); 11 CFR 104.3(b)(3), (4).
Additionally, political committees--other than authorized committees--
must provide for each reported disbursement in connection with an
independent expenditure the date, amount, and purpose of the
independent expenditure, a statement indicating whether the independent
expenditure was in support of, or in opposition to, a candidate, the
name and office sought by that candidate, and a certification that the
expenditure was, in fact, independent. 52 U.S.C. 30104(b)(6)(B); 11 CFR
104.3(b)(3)(vii).
If the Commission adopts Alternative B above, the Commission also
proposes to revise 11 CFR 104.3 and 104.4 to provide a mechanism for
authorized committees to report independent expenditures. Specifically,
the Commission proposes revising Sec. 104.3(b)(2) to add independent
expenditures to the categories of itemized disbursements for authorized
committees, and adding new Sec. 104.3(b)(4)(iv) to require authorized
committees to report the same information about independent
expenditures that other political committees must report. Proposed
Sec. 104.3(b)(4)(iv) would bring authorized and non-authorized
committees into parity by requiring that authorized committees report
the same information about independent expenditures that non-authorized
committees are required to report, using the same form (Schedule E).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Because Schedule E is not currently included in the forms
used by authorized committees, the Commission would add that
schedule to Form 3 (for House and Senate candidates) and Form 3P
(for presidential candidates).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission seeks comment on these proposed changes to Sec.
104.3(b)(2) and (4), which are intended to require authorized
committees that make independent expenditures to report the same
information, in the same manner, as all other political committees. If
authorized committees make independent expenditures, should they report
more or less detailed information about those disbursements than other
political committees? Is there another method that the Commission
should use to allow for authorized committees to report independent
expenditures?
The Commission also proposes revisions to 11 CFR 104.4 to refer to
the new paragraphs that it proposes to add to section 104.3, described
above. In Sec. 104.4(a), (b), (c), and (d), the Commission proposes
adding cross-references to 11 CFR 104.3(b)(4)(iv) to reflect the
independent expenditure reporting requirements for authorized
committees, described above. The Commission also proposes revising
Sec. 104.4(b)(1) and (2) to omit the specific references to FEC Form
3X because, as discussed above, authorized committees do not file that
form. These proposed regulatory changes would be in conjunction with
changes to Schedule E and to Forms 3 and 3P. The Commission
[[Page 4000]]
seeks comment on these proposed changes.
III. Proposed Revisions to 11 CFR 104.3 and 104.4--Reporting Multistate
Independent Expenditures by Political Committees
As set forth below, the Commission proposes revisions to section
104.3, concerning the content of independent expenditure reports by
political committees, and section 104.4, concerning the timing of
independent expenditure reports by political committees. The Commission
seeks comment on these revisions, which are intended to clarify the
reporting obligations of a political committee when it makes a
multistate independent expenditure. The Commission is considering three
alternative proposals and seeks comment on which alternative would be
preferable.
A. Alternative A
1. Proposed New 11 CFR 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C)--Content of Reports
In section 104.3, the Commission proposes adding new paragraph
(b)(3)(vii)(C), which would require that when a political committee
makes an independent expenditure in support of or in opposition to a
candidate in a presidential primary election, and the communication is
publicly distributed or otherwise disseminated in more than a specified
number of states but does not refer to any particular state, the
political committee must report the independent expenditure as a single
expenditure and use memo text to indicate the states where the
communication is distributed. The Commission would also redesignate
current paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(C) as paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(D).
The Commission seeks comment on the proposed new provision. Would
the proposed paragraph provide sufficient guidance to political
committees reporting multistate independent expenditures? Is the
proposed provision necessary or desirable to provide full, accurate,
and timely disclosure to the public regarding multistate independent
expenditures that are made by political committees?
If the Commission amends section 104.3(b)(4) to account for
independent expenditures by authorized committees as described above in
Section II.B, the Commission would propose to include regulatory text
in revised section 104.3(b)(4) providing that the reporting
requirements for authorized committees that make independent
expenditures would mirror the reporting requirements for all other
political committees that make independent expenditures. The Commission
seeks comment on whether these proposed requirements should apply to
multistate independent expenditures made by authorized committees.
The Commission also seeks comment on the number of states that
would be the threshold for a communication to fall within the new
paragraph. Requiring an independent expenditure to be ``nationwide''--
i.e., disseminated in all fifty states plus the District of Columbia
(and possibly Puerto Rico, Guam, and American Samoa)--would exclude
some independent expenditures that are distributed in a large number of
states (e.g., the entire continental United States). This would
significantly limit the benefits and application of the proposed
reporting rule. Alternatively, applying the new provision to
independent expenditures that are disseminated in only a handful of
states might result in independent expenditures that are targeted to a
specific state's primary--but partially distributed in neighboring
states that share its media markets--being misleadingly reported as
``multistate'' communications. In how many states should an independent
expenditure have to be distributed to fall within the proposed new
reporting rule? Should the rule specify a particular number of states,
or are there other ways to effectively delineate the communications
that would be reported as multistate independent expenditures?
The proposed new paragraph would represent a change from the
Commission's previous guidance on this issue. In Advisory Opinion 2011-
28 (Western Representation PAC), the Commission instructed a political
committee to allocate the cost of a multistate independent expenditure
among all the states where the communication was distributed. None of
the persons who commented on the Draft Interpretive Rules supported
retaining that approach, and the Commission is not proposing it here.
Nonetheless, are there advantages to that approach that the Commission
should consider in crafting the new rule?
If the proposed new paragraph is adopted, the Commission recognizes
that implementing it would likely require modifying the instructions
for the Commission's Schedule E form. The Commission anticipates that
these modified instructions would provide political committees
flexibility on how to report the states where the multistate
independent expenditure is distributed. For example, the instructions
would permit the memo text for a multistate independent expenditure to
indicate that the independent expenditure was distributed
``nationwide,'' in ``all fifty states,'' in ``IN, OH, WI, MI, MN, IL,
PA, MO,'' or in ``all states except Alaska and Hawaii,'' etc. Would
such instructions provide sufficient guidance and flexibility to
filers? Should the Commission provide more specific guidelines on how
political committees should indicate the states where multistate
independent expenditures are distributed? Should the proposed new
regulation address this issue specifically? If so, how?
2. Proposed New 11 CFR 104.4(f)(2)--Timing of Reports
In section 104.4, the Commission is proposing to redesignate
current paragraph (f) as paragraph (f)(1) and add new paragraph (f)(2),
concerning when a political committee must file a 24- or 48-hour report
for a multistate independent expenditure.
Following the approach proposed in Draft Interpretive Rule B, a
political committee that makes a multistate independent expenditure
would report it as a single expenditure, as discussed above, and the
political committee would use the date of the national nominating
convention for the clearly identified candidate's party as the date of
the election to determine whether the independent expenditure is within
the 20 days before the election and is therefore subject to the 24-hour
reporting requirement under 52 U.S.C. 30104(g)(1).
The Commission seeks comment on this proposal. Does it provide
sufficient guidance to political committees as to how to determine
whether they must file 24-hour or 48-hour reports for multistate
independent expenditures? Is this proposal preferable to the
Commission's existing guidance under Advisory Opinion 2011-28 (Western
Representation PAC)? Would this proposal enhance the public's access to
full, accurate, and timely information about multistate independent
expenditures?
B. Alternative B
1. Proposed New 11 CFR 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C)--Content of Reports
In section 104.3, the Commission proposes making the same changes
as described above under Alternative A, adding new paragraph
(b)(3)(vii)(C) and redesignating current paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(C) as
paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(D).
2. Proposed New 11 CFR 104.4(f)(2)--Timing of Reports
Similar to Alternative A, in section 104.4, the Commission is
proposing to
[[Page 4001]]
redesignate current paragraph (f) as paragraph (f)(1) and add new
paragraph (f)(2), concerning when a political committee must file a 24-
or 48-hour report for a multistate independent expenditure. However,
under Alternative B, which follows the approach proposed in Draft
Interpretive Rule C, the political committee would determine whether
the independent expenditure is within the 20 days before the election
and is therefore subject to the 24-hour reporting requirement under 52
U.S.C. 30104(g)(1) by using as the date of the election the date of the
next upcoming presidential primary among the presidential primaries to
be held in the states in which the independent expenditure is
distributed or disseminated.
The Commission seeks comment on this proposal. Does it provide
sufficient guidance to political committees as to how to determine
whether they must file 24-hour or 48-hour reports for multistate
independent expenditures? Is this proposal preferable to the
Commission's existing guidance under Advisory Opinion 2011-28 (Western
Representation PAC)? Would this proposal enhance the public's access to
full, accurate, and timely information about multistate independent
expenditures?
C. Alternative C
1. Proposed New 11 CFR 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C)--Multistate Independent
Expenditures
As with Alternatives A and B, for Alternative C the Commission
proposes to amend section 104.3 by adding new paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(C).
For Alternative C, however, the new paragraph would provide that for
any independent expenditure in support of or in opposition to a
candidate in a presidential primary election, where the communication
is publicly distributed or otherwise disseminated in more than a
specified number of states but does not refer to any particular state,
the political committee must report the independent expenditure
according to new section 104.4(f)(2), discussed below. The Commission
would also redesignate current paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(C) as paragraph
(b)(3)(vii)(D).
2. Proposed New 11 CFR 104.4(f)(2)--Reporting Multistate Independent
Expenditures
As with Alternatives A and B, for Alternative C the Commission
proposes to amend section 104.4 by redesignating current paragraph (f)
as paragraph (f)(1) and adding new paragraph (f)(2). Under Alternative
C, new paragraph (f)(2) would bring together all of the aggregation and
reporting requirements for multistate independent expenditures in one
paragraph. New section 104.4(f)(2) would set forth the requirements for
determining whether and when a 24- or 48-hour report is required, along
with the specific information to be included in such a report.
In contrast to Alternatives A and B, which would require a
political committee to determine whether a 24-hour report is required
based on the total amount of the independent expenditure, Alternative C
would require political committees to allocate the amount of the
expenditure among the states where it is distributed whose primary
elections have yet to occur. Political committees who file
electronically would be able to rely on the new electronic filing
system that the Commission expects to introduce before the 2020
election cycle or third-party electronic filing software to do this
calculation. If this alternative is adopted, the Commission also
proposes to make a calculator available on its website to aid political
committees that do not file electronically in making the necessary
allocations.
Under Alternative C, a political committee would disregard any
states where the communication was distributed but where the
presidential primary election has already occurred, and would allocate
the total amount of the independent expenditure among the remaining
states, according to a ratio based on the number of U.S. House of
Representatives districts apportioned to each state.
For purposes of determining whether the independent expenditure is
within the 20 days before the election and is therefore subject to the
24-hour reporting requirement under 52 U.S.C. 30104(g)(1), the
political committee would use the date of the next upcoming primary
election among the states where the independent expenditure was
distributed. If that date is more than 20 days away from the date of
the expenditure and the amount allocated to that state causes the
political committee's aggregate spending in that state to exceed
$10,000, the committee would be required to file a 48-hour report. If
that date is between 1 and 20 days away and the amount allocated to
that state causes the political committee's aggregate spending in that
state to exceed $1,000, the committee would be required to file a 24-
hour report.
Information about the dates of the major-party presidential primary
elections and the number of House districts apportioned to each state
would be incorporated into the Commission's electronic filing system,
so a political committee that filed electronically would be able to
enter the date and amount of the independent expenditure and the states
where it was distributed, and the software would do the calculation to
determine whether any reports were required. The same information would
be provided on the Commission's website for the benefit of any
political committees that do not file electronically, in the form of a
calculator that would perform the allocation calculation when a
political committee enters the amount and date of a communication and
the states in which it is publicly distributed.
Example: A political committee spent $40,000 on an independent
expenditure broadcast in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and Oklahoma on
March 15, where the next upcoming primary election was going to be in
Oklahoma on March 20. There are a total of 53 House districts in those
four states: 9 in Arizona, 3 in New Mexico, 5 in Oklahoma, and 36 in
Texas. On the date the communication was distributed, all four states
where it was distributed had yet to hold their presidential primary
elections. Therefore the political committee would allocate the $40,000
according to each state's proportion of House districts out of the 53
total: $6,792 for Arizona (40,000 x (9/53)), $2,264 for New Mexico
(40,000 x (3/53)), $3,773 for Oklahoma (40,000 x (5/53)), and $27,169
for Texas (40,000 x (36/53)). Because the next upcoming primary
election where the communication was distributed would be within 20
days, in Oklahoma, and the political committee would have spent more
than $1,000 in that state, a 24-hour report would be required.
The Commission acknowledges that the proposed allocation
calculation may seem complex, but notes that this proposal would allow
political committees to take advantage of advancing technology to
relieve them of the burden of determining whether and when to report
multistate independent expenditures. A political committee would need
only enter the date and total amount of an independent expenditure and
the states in which it was publicly distributed, and the electronic
filing system or calculator would determine whether a 24- or 48-hour
report was required and what amount to allocate to each state. The
Commission would not implement Alternative C until the new electronic
filing system and calculator were in place so as to avoid requiring any
political committee to perform the allocation calculation manually.
[[Page 4002]]
Would Alternative C satisfy the Act's provisions for reporting
independent expenditures? Would this approach enhance the public's
access to full, accurate, and timely information about multistate
independent expenditures? Would this proposal provide sufficient
guidance to political committees as to how to determine whether they
must file 24-hour or 48-hour reports for multistate independent
expenditures and what information to include in such reports? Is this
proposal preferable to the Commission's existing guidance under
Advisory Opinion 2011-28 (Western Representation PAC)? Does the
feasibility of this proposal depend on whether a political committee
files electronically, and if so, is the number of political committees
that make multistate independent expenditures but do not file
electronically significant?
The Commission seeks comment on whether it is appropriate or
desirable to use House representation, which is based on population, as
a basis for allocation. Does the use of House districts assume that the
entire population of a state receives the communication, and does that
question make a difference in how independent expenditures should be
reported? Does this proposed use of House districts to determine
whether and when independent expenditures must be reported differ
materially from proposed Alternatives A and B?
The Commission also seeks overall comment on which of the three
alternatives (A, B or C) is preferable with respect to (1) the burden
on the political committees that must report their multistate
independent expenditures, and (2) the usefulness of the information
disclosed to the public. Are there other approaches that might be
preferable to any of these proposed alternatives?
IV. Proposed Revision to 11 CFR 109.10--Reporting Multistate
Independent Expenditures by Persons Other Than Political Committees
In 11 CFR 109.10(e)--which addresses the content of independent
expenditure reports filed by persons other than political committees--
the Commission proposes to reference the requirements for reporting
multistate independent expenditures that the Commission proposes to add
to section 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C) or in new section 104.4(f)(2).
Specifically, revised section 109.10(e)(1)(iv) would provide that when
a person other than a political committee makes an expenditure meeting
the criteria set forth in section 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C) (i.e., an
independent expenditure that supports or opposes a presidential primary
candidate and that is distributed in more than the specified number of
states but does not refer to any particular state), the person must
report the expenditure pursuant to the provisions of section
104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C) or section 104.4(f)(2).
The Commission requests comments on this proposed revision to 11
CFR 109.10. Should the reporting requirements for multistate
independent expenditures made by persons other than political
committees parallel the reporting requirements for multistate
independent expenditures made by political committees? Although
Advisory Opinion 2011-28 (Western Representation PAC) and the Draft
Interpretive Rules did not address how persons other than political
committees should report multistate independent expenditures, is there
any legal or policy reason that the reporting requirements for
political committees and for other persons should differ in the context
of multistate independent expenditures? Does the proposed revision to
section 109.10 clarify the reporting obligations of persons who make
multistate independent expenditures? Is the proposed revision to
section 109.10 necessary or desirable to provide full, accurate, and
timely disclosure to the public regarding multistate independent
expenditures made by persons other than political committees? Would the
proposed revision reduce or increase the administrative burden on such
persons? If the proposed revision does increase the administrative
burden on such persons, is that burden outweighed by the usefulness of
the information disclosed to the public?
V. Proposed Revision to 11 CFR 104.20--Electioneering Communications
In section 104.20(c), which concerns the content of reports
regarding electioneering communications, the Commission proposes to add
a new paragraph (c)(6) and redesignate current paragraphs (c)(6)-(9) as
paragraphs (c)(7)-(10). Proposed new paragraph (c)(6) would apply when
the relevant election (which the reporting person is required to
disclose pursuant to paragraph (c)(5)) is a presidential primary
election and the electioneering communication is distributed in more
than a specified number of states but does not refer to any particular
state's primary election.
In such situations, this new paragraph would parallel the new
reporting requirements for multistate independent expenditures as
discussed above, either new section 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C) if Alternative
A or B is adopted, or new section 104.4(f)(2) if Alternative C is
adopted. If Alternative A or B is adopted, new paragraph (c)(6) would
provide that the reporting person must report the electioneering
communication as a single communication and use a memo text to indicate
the states in which the communication constitutes an electioneering
communication (as defined in 11 CFR 100.29(a)).
If Alternative C is adopted, new paragraph (c)(6) would provide
that the reporting person must allocate the cost of the communication
among the states where it is publicly distributed and whose
presidential primary elections have not yet occurred as set forth in
new section 104.4(f)(2). The proposed revision would thus treat
multistate electioneering communications similarly to multistate
independent expenditures, as discussed above.
The Commission seeks comment on the proposed revision to section
104.20. Should multistate electioneering communications be treated
similarly to multistate independent expenditures, or are there
differences between the two types of communications or the persons that
make them that would call for different reporting requirements? Should
the same number of states constitute the threshold for multistate
independent expenditures and multistate electioneering communications?
Should the cost of an electioneering communication be allocated among
the states where the communication is publicly distributed for
reporting purposes?
Would the proposed new paragraph increase or decrease the
administrative burden on persons reporting electioneering
communications? If the proposed revision does increase the
administrative burden on such persons, is that burden outweighed by the
usefulness of the information disclosed to the public? Would the
proposed revision provide sufficient information on how persons making
multistate electioneering communications should disclose them? Is the
proposed revision necessary or desirable to provide full, accurate, and
timely disclosure of information about multistate electioneering
communications to the public?
Certification of No Effect Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) (Regulatory
Flexibility Act)
The Commission certifies that the attached proposed rules, if
adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The proposed rules would
[[Page 4003]]
clarify whether authorized committees may make independent expenditures
and provide a mechanism for authorized committees to report independent
expenditures. The proposed reporting requirements would only affect
authorized committees that choose to make independent expenditures.
Moreover, authorized committees are already required to report all
disbursements, as well as the name and address of any person who has
received any disbursement in an aggregate amount exceeding $200 within
a certain period, along with the date, amount, and purpose of such
disbursement. Thus, the proposed rules would not materially change the
amount of information reported, but rather would change how
disbursements for independent expenditures are identified on reports.
The proposed rules would also provide for consolidated reporting of
certain independent expenditures and electioneering communications that
the Commission's current reporting guidance indicates should be
allocated among elections in multiple states. The Commission
anticipates that the proposed consolidation of these reports would
generally result in a modest reduction of the administrative burdens on
reporting entities, and it would not impose any new reporting
obligations. Thus, to the extent that any entities affected by these
proposed rules might fall within the definition of ``small businesses''
or ``small organizations,'' the economic impact of complying with these
rules would not be significant.
List of Subjects
11 CFR Part 102
Political committees and parties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
11 CFR Part 104
Campaign funds, Political committees and parties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
11 CFR Part 109
Elections, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Federal Election
Commission proposes to amend 11 CFR chapter 1, as follows:
PART 102--REGISTRATION, ORGANIZATION, AND RECORDKEEPING BY
POLITICAL COMMITTEES (52 U.S.C. 30103)
0
1. The authority citation for part 102 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 52 U.S.C. 30102, 30103, 30104(a)(11), 30111(a)(8),
and 30120.
0
2. Revise paragraph (c)(2) of Sec. 102.12 to read as follows:
Sec. 102.12 Designation of principal campaign committee (52 U.S.C.
30102(e)(1) and (3)).
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Alternative A
(2)(i) For purposes of paragraph (c) of this section, the term
support includes an independent expenditure by an authorized committee.
(ii) For purposes of paragraph (c) of this section, the term
support does not include contributions by an authorized committee in
amounts aggregating $2,000 or less per election to an authorized
committee of any other candidate.
(iii) Nothing in paragraph (c)(2) of this section affects the
ability of a national committee of a political party that has been
designated as the principal campaign committee of that party's
presidential candidate to contribute to or make independent
expenditures in support of another candidate in accordance with 11 CFR
part 109, subpart D, and 11 CFR part 110.
Alternative B
(2) For purposes of paragraph (c) of this section, the term support
does not include:
(i) Independent expenditures by an authorized committee in any
amount; or
(ii) Contributions by an authorized committee in amounts
aggregating $2,000 or less per election to an authorized committee of
any other candidate, except that the national committee of a political
party which has been designated as the principal campaign committee of
that party's presidential candidate may contribute to another candidate
in accordance with 11 CFR part 109, subpart D, and part 110.
0
3. Revise paragraph (c)(2) of Sec. 102.13 to read as follows:
Sec. 102.13 Authorization of political committees (52 U.S.C.
30102(e)(1) and (3)).
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Alternative A
(2)(i) For purposes of paragraph (c) of this section, the term
support includes an independent expenditure by an authorized committee.
(ii) For purposes of paragraph (c) of this section, the term
support does not include contributions by an authorized committee in
amounts aggregating $2,000 or less per election to an authorized
committee of any other candidate.
(iii) Nothing in paragraph (c)(2) of this section affects the
ability of a national committee of a political party that has been
designated as the principal campaign committee of that party's
presidential candidate to contribute to or make independent
expenditures in support of another candidate in accordance with 11 CFR
part 109, subpart D, and 11 CFR part 110.
Alternative B
(2) For purposes of paragraph (c) of this section, the term support
does not include:
(i) Independent expenditures by an authorized committee in any
amount; or
(ii) Contributions by an authorized committee in amounts
aggregating $2,000 or less per election to an authorized committee of
any other candidate, except that the national committee of a political
party which has been designated as the principal campaign committee of
that party's presidential candidate may contribute to another candidate
in accordance with 11 CFR part 109, subpart D, and 11 CFR part 110.
PART 104--REPORTS BY POLITICAL COMMITTEES AND OTHER PERSONS (52
U.S.C. 30104)
0
4. The authority citation for part 104 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 52 U.S.C. 30101(1), 30101(8), 30101(9), 30102(i),
30104, 30111(a)(8) and (b), 30114, 30116, 36 U.S.C. 510.
Sec. 104.3 [Amended]
0
5. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(2)(vi) and (b)(2)(vii) as (b)(2)(vii) and
(b)(2)(viii).
0
6. Add new paragraph (b)(2)(vi) and revise paragraphs (b)(3)(vii)(C)
and (D) and (b)(4)(vi) to read as follows:
Sec. 104.3 Contents of Reports.
Alternatives A and B
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(vi) Independent expenditures made by the reporting committee;
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(vii) * * *
(C) For an independent expenditure that is made in support of or
opposition to a presidential primary candidate and is publicly
distributed or otherwise publicly disseminated in more than __ states
but does not refer to any particular state, the political committee
must report the independent
[[Page 4004]]
expenditure as a single expenditure--i.e., without allocating it among
states--and must use memo text to indicate the states in which the
communication is distributed.
(D) The information required by 11 CFR 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(A) through
(C) shall be reported on Schedule E as part of a report covering the
reporting period in which the aggregate disbursements for any
independent expenditure to any person exceed $200 per calendar year.
Schedule E shall also include the total of all such expenditures of
$200 or less made during the reporting period.
(4) * * *
(iv)(A) Each person who receives any disbursement during the
reporting period in an aggregate amount or value in excess of $200
within the calendar year in connection with an independent expenditure
by the reporting committee, together with the date, amount, and purpose
of any such independent expenditure(s);
(B) For each independent expenditure reported, the committee must
also provide a statement which indicates whether such independent
expenditure is in support of, or in opposition to a particular
candidate, as well as the name of the candidate and office sought by
such candidate (including State and Congressional district, when
applicable), and a certification, under penalty of perjury, as to
whether such independent expenditure is made in cooperation,
consultation or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of, any
other candidate or any other authorized committee or agent of such
committee;
(C) For an independent expenditure that is made in support of or
opposition to a presidential primary candidate and is publicly
distributed or otherwise publicly disseminated in more than __ states
but does not refer to any particular state, the political committee
must report the independent expenditure as a single expenditure--i.e.,
without allocating it among states--and must use memo text to indicate
the states in which the communication is distributed.
(D) The information required by 11 CFR 104.3(b)(4)(iv)(A) through
(C) shall be reported on Schedule E as part of a report covering the
reporting period in which the aggregate disbursements for any
independent expenditure to any person exceed $200 per calendar year.
Schedule E shall also include the total of all such expenditures of
$200 or less made during the reporting period.
* * * * *
Alternative C
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(vi) Independent expenditures made by the reporting committee;
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(vii) * * *
(C) For an independent expenditure that is made in support of or
opposition to a presidential primary candidate and is publicly
distributed or otherwise publicly disseminated in more than __ states
but does not refer to any particular state, the political committee
must report the independent expenditure according to 11 CFR
104.4(f)(2).
(D) The information required by 11 CFR 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(A) through
(C) shall be reported on Schedule E as part of a report covering the
reporting period in which the aggregate disbursements for any
independent expenditure to any person exceed $200 per calendar year.
Schedule E shall also include the total of all such expenditures of
$200 or less made during the reporting period.
(4) * * *
(iv)(A) Each person who receives any disbursement during the
reporting period in an aggregate amount or value in excess of $200
within the calendar year in connection with an independent expenditure
by the reporting committee, together with the date, amount, and purpose
of any such independent expenditure(s);
(B) For each independent expenditure reported, the committee must
also provide a statement which indicates whether such independent
expenditure is in support of, or in opposition to a particular
candidate, as well as the name of the candidate and office sought by
such candidate (including State and Congressional district, when
applicable), and a certification, under penalty of perjury, as to
whether such independent expenditure is made in cooperation,
consultation or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of, any
other candidate or any other authorized committee or agent of such
committee;
(C) For an independent expenditure that is made in support of or
opposition to a presidential primary candidate and is publicly
distributed or otherwise publicly disseminated in more than __ states
but does not refer to any particular state, the political committee
must report the independent expenditure according to 11 CFR
104.4(f)(2).
(D) The information required by 11 CFR 104.3(b)(4)(iv)(A) through
(C) shall be reported on Schedule E as part of a report covering the
reporting period in which the aggregate disbursements for any
independent expenditure to any person exceed $200 per calendar year.
Schedule E shall also include the total of all such expenditures of
$200 or less made during the reporting period.
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec. 104.4 by
0
a. In paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d), adding ``and (b)(4)(vi)''
after ``11 CFR 104.3(b)(3)(iv)'';
0
b. In paragraph (b) removing ``FEC Form 3X'' and adding, in its place,
the words ``the applicable FEC Form'';
0
c. Revising paragraph (f) as to read as follows:
Sec. 104.4 Independent expenditures by political committees.
* * * * *
(f) Aggregating independent expenditures for reporting purposes.
(1) For purposes of determining whether 24-hour and 48-hour reports
must be filed in accordance with paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section
and 11 CFR 109.10(c) and (d), aggregations of independent expenditures
must be calculated as of the first date on which a communication that
constitutes an independent expenditure is publicly distributed or
otherwise publicly disseminated, and as of the date that any such
communication with respect to the same election is subsequently
publicly distributed or otherwise publicly disseminated. Every person
must include in the aggregate total all disbursements during the
calendar year for independent expenditures, and all enforceable
contracts, either oral or written, obligating funds for disbursements
during the calendar year for independent expenditures, where those
independent expenditures are made with respect to the same election for
Federal office.
Alternative A
(2) For purposes of determining whether 24-hour or 48-hour reports
must be filed in accordance with paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section
and 11 CFR 109.10(c) and (d), if the independent expenditure is made in
support of or opposition to a candidate in a presidential primary
election and is publicly distributed or otherwise publicly disseminated
in more than __ states but does not refer to any particular state, the
date of the election is the first day of the national nominating
convention of the party whose nomination the candidate is seeking.
Alternative B
(2) For purposes of determining whether 24-hour or 48-hour reports
[[Page 4005]]
must be filed in accordance with paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section
and 11 CFR 109.10(c) and (d), if the independent expenditure is made in
support of or opposition to a candidate in a presidential primary
election and is publicly distributed or otherwise publicly disseminated
in more than __ states but does not refer to any particular state, the
date of the election is the date of the next upcoming presidential
primary election among the presidential primary elections to be held in
the states in which the independent expenditure is publicly distributed
or disseminated.
Alternative C
(2) Multistate independent expenditures. (i) If an independent
expenditure is made in support of or opposition to a candidate in a
presidential primary election and is publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated in more than __ states but does not refer to any
particular state, the political committee must allocate the total
amount of the expenditure among each of the states where it is publicly
distributed or disseminated and where the presidential primary election
has yet to occur, according to the number of Congressional districts
apportioned to each such state relative to the total number of
Congressional districts in all such states.
(ii) If the communication is publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated up to and including the 20th day before the next
upcoming presidential primary election in any of the states, and the
amount calculated in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section aggregates to
$10,000 or more with respect to any of the states in that calendar
year, the political committee must file a 48-hour report in accordance
with paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(iii) If the communication is publicly distributed or otherwise
publicly disseminated after the 20th day but more than 24 hours before
12:01 a.m. of the day of the next upcoming presidential primary
election in any of the states, and the amount calculated in paragraph
(f)(2)(i) of this section aggregates to $1,000 or more with respect to
any of the states, the political committee must file a 24-hour report
in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.
(iv) For any report of an independent expenditure included on a
political committee's regular report under paragraph (b)(1) of this
section, or any 48- or 24-hour report of an independent expenditure,
the political committee must indicate the date and amount of the
expenditure, and list the states in which the communication is publicly
disseminated or otherwise publicly distributed.
Sec. 104.20 [Amended]
0
7. In Sec. 104.20:
0
a. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(6) through (c)(9) as paragraphs (c)(7)
through (c)(10).
0
b. Revise the heading and add new paragraph (c)(6) to read as follows:
Sec. 104.20 Reporting electioneering communications (52 U.S.C.
30104(f)).
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Alternatives A and B
(6) If the election identified pursuant to paragraph (c)(5) of this
section is a presidential primary election and the electioneering
communication is publicly distributed or otherwise disseminated in more
than __ states but does not refer to any particular state, the
electioneering communication shall be reported as a single
communication, and the states in which it constitutes an electioneering
communication (as defined in 11 CFR 100.29(a)) shall be indicated in
memo text.
Alternative C
(6) If the election identified pursuant to paragraph (c)(5) of this
section is a presidential primary election and the electioneering
communication is publicly distributed or otherwise disseminated in more
than __ states but does not refer to any particular state, the cost of
the electioneering communication shall be allocated among the states
where it is publicly distributed or otherwise disseminated in
accordance with Sec. 104.4(f)(2)(A).
* * * * *
PART 109--COORDINATED AND INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES (52 U.S.C.
30101(17), 30116(A) AND (D), AND PUBLIC LAW 107-155 SEC. 214(C))
0
8. The authority citation for part 109 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 52 U.S.C. 30101(17), 30104(c), 30111(a)(8), 30116,
30120; Sec. 214(c), Pub. L. 107-155, 116 Stat. 81.
0
9. Revise paragraph (e)(1)(iv) of Sec. 109.10 as follows:
Sec. 109.10 How do political committees and other persons report
independent expenditures?
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
Alternatives A and B
(iv) A statement that indicates whether such expenditure was in
support of, or in opposition to a candidate, together with the
candidate's name and office sought; if the expenditure meets the
criteria set forth in Sec. 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C), memo text must be used
to indicate the states in which the communication is distributed, as
prescribed in that section;
Alternative C
(iv) A statement that indicates whether such expenditure was in
support of, or in opposition to a candidate, together with the
candidate's name and office sought; if the expenditure meets the
criteria set forth in Sec. 104.3(b)(3)(vii)(C), the communication must
be reported in accordance with Sec. 104.4(f)(2);
* * * * *
On behalf of the Commission.
Dated: January 17, 2018.
Caroline C. Hunter,
Chair, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. 2018-01074 Filed 1-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P