FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION "17V]';I US K Si RELUNWI W\SING TON,).C. 20461 CERTIFIED NtAIL RETUR I RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. John Dolan March 17 1977 National Conservative Political Action Committee 1911 N. Fort Myer Drive Suite 906 Arlington; VA 22209 Re MUR 299 (76)A Dear ,!r. Dolan, On February 3, 1977, the Commission voted to terminate its inquiry into violations of the Federal Election Canpaign Laws by Burcham for Congress Committee and the National Conservative Political Action Comsmittee alleged in the enclosed complaint. Accordingly, the Com-mission intends to close its file on this matter. If you have any questions, please contact David Spiegel (telephone no. 202/382-4055). The file reference number. is 299 (76)A. Sincerey yours, W'1illiam C, Oldaker General Counsel Enclosures: General Counsel Report; Certification of Commission determination; Complaint FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 1%.'Q5KS 1\(IONI F W 2N't IU2%I,, SdRItf NWV CERTIFIED MAIL RtTUR'] RECEIPT REQUESTED 11r. William Remsburg March 17, 1977 Treasurer Burcharm for Congress Conmittee 5809 Landover Road Cheverly.. Md. 20795 Re MUR 299 (76) Dear Mr. Remsburg: On February 3, 1977, the Conission voted to terminate its inquiry into the violations of the Federal Election Campaign Laws by Burcham for Congress Committee and the National Conservative Political Action Comn.ittee alleged in the enclosed complaint. Accordingly the Commission intends to close its file on this matter. If you have any questions, please contact David Spiegel (telephone no. 202/382-4055). The file reference number is 'IIUR 299 (76). Sincerely yours, William Oldaker General Counsel Enclosures: General Counsel Report; Certification of Commission determination; Complaint & In Ilk7,,64V * 0 * FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 1 2S k SIRti N.VW WAY.\St1\(# ION' D). 20+401 CE:RTIFIED -MAIL March 16( 1977 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED .ir. Charles Sewell Citizens for Soellman Re-election Ileadquarters 6000 Greenbelt Road - Greenbelt, Md. 20770 Re: MUR 299 (76) Dear 11r. Sewell On February 3, 1977, the Commission voted to terminate its inquiry into alleged violations of the Federal Election Campaign Laws by Burcham for Congress Committee and the National Conservative Political Action Co.-mittee. Accordingly, the Co.mission intends to close its file on this matter. TT If you have any questions, please contact David Spiegel (telephone no. 202/382 4055), The file reference number i- IUR 299 (76). Sincerely yours, - . / William Oldaker General Counsel Enclosures: General Counsel Report; Certification of Commission determination ... , , ,I,, o' .,j ' , . ,., i . tL Lt! I- ~AAfL4) FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 1 23 K STR EIT \ W' WASHING ION.!) (. 20463 FEBRUARY 14, 1977 TO: THE RECIPIENTS OF COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS FROM: THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSION SECRETARY1V RE: MUR 299 (76) Attached please find Commissioner Staebler's Dissenting Opinion to find no Reasonable Cause to Believe that a violation of the FECA has occurred in MUR 299 (76) 0 0 MUR 299 (76) DISSENTING OPINION OF COMMISSIONER STAEBLER in this mat- I must dissent from the Commission's decision a viola- ter to find no Reasonable Cause to Believe that tion of the FECA has occurred. spent by The Complaint alleges, inter alia, that monies (NCPAC) the National Conservative Political Action Committee and reported on behalf of Congressional candidate Burcham e s by NCPAC as independent expendur were in actuality the made in cooperation, consultation, or -oncertwith contributions Burcham camo.ain and, therefore, constitute is in ex- within the meaning of the Act,-tn amount of which cess of the iit th General Counsel's The Com4issi ' investi-ation fou.d and had the Report states that NCPAC and the Burcham campaign in-kind follow.ng mat-rial Contacts: th.e campaign received m oney contribu-ons -rom NCPAC; NCPAC loaned -he ca.:paign the salary of one for an agreed-upon purpose; and NCPAC paid of time and :CPAC employee of the campaign for a short period subsequently employed that individual itself. discussions re- The campaign and NCPAC deny that explicit took place. garding the alleged independent expenditures NCPAC made a Based on those denials and on the fact that behalf of other large namber of sLjmilar advertisements on no further candidates, General Counsel concludes that action by the Commission is warranted. • , r. ." 41 Page Three 0 0 1 contend that the tests laid out by the Court and Congress necessarily go beyond the literal language of communication concerning a particular expenditure; and that a course of communication between a particular campaign and a poten- tial expender may, at least where the course of communica- between tions concerns financial matters, so establish a nexus com- the two entities as to preclude an expenditure by the mittee from being independent. The instant Complaint, where in-kind contributions, loans, sharing of staff, and occurred on-going, though allegedly non-:inanciaL discussions just between tne campaign and the spending committee,is such a mat-e-. inter- Not onIy would the Supreme Court test allow a narrower orezation or what constitutes "independence"; but, I believe, the Ourposes of the Act requi re the Comnission to draw such of a campaign's a line. a person or group may be made aware financial need, solicited for a contribution (which solici- of the tation almost inevitably will involve a discussion to that soli- issue positions of the candidate), and respond on citation, then later make an independent expenditure contributions behalf of that candidate, then I fear that the by the Supreme li.mits so carefully drawn by Congress and upheld wealthy in- Court will be of little effect. Indeed, it is groups, the dividuals and sophisticated special interest who will very targets of public and Conaressional concern, and be best equipped to take advantage of such a narrow legalistic interpretation of the law. Page Five apply the very narrow, unrealistic test of independence set out in the General Counsel's Report, I believe it makes a mistake of law and judgment with the potential for serious adverse consequences to the political process. For either reason, I dissent. , / -7...'--/J , ,, /. ..... {,, 2sI BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION In the Matter of ) National Conservative Political ) Action Committee ) MUR 299 (76) and ) Burcham for Congress Committee ) CERTIFICATION I, Marjorie W. Emmons, Secretary to the Federal Election Commission, do hereby certify that on February 3, 1977, the Commission determined by a vote of 5-1 that there was no reason to believe that a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, had been committed in the above-captioned matter and that the file should be closed. Voting to close the file were Commissioners Aikens, Harris, Springer, Thomson, and Tiernan. Voting not to close was Commissioner Staebler. Accordingly, the file in this matter has been closed. S ar to e ommsons Secretary to the Commission E BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION In the Matter of ) MUR 299 (76) National Conservative Political ) Action Committee ) and Burcham for Congress Committee ) GENERAL COUNSEL'S REPORT I. Status C On October 29, 1976, Citizens for Spellman, the authorized principal campaign committee of Gladys Noon Spellman, a John 7congressional candidate, filed a complaint against Burcham, Ms. Spellman's opponent. It was alleged that certain independent expenditures made by NCPAC on behalf of the Burcham campaign were in fact contributions and as such violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended. On November 18, 1976, the Commission determined that there was reason to believe a violation of the Act had been committed in the above-mentioned matter. By letters of November 22, 1976, the Commission notified respondents of this action, and consistent with the General Counsel's report to the Canmission, respondents were asked to supply certain specific information -2- regarding expenditures made by NCPAC in support of candidate John Burcham and reported as "independent expenditures." (See attached letters.) II. Allegations National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC) reported making independent expenditures of $23,327.69 in rOctober, 1976, for communications advocating the election of CJohn Burcham. The independence of these disbursements was questioned because of NCPAC's payments on two occasions to a consultant working for the Burcham campaign committee, as well as a loan by respondent to the Burcham campaign committee for a telephone deposit. The Commission found 7reason to believe that such contacts between NCPAC and the N Burcham campaign committee tainted the later media expenditures which were reported as independent, resulting in violations of 2 U.S.C. §434(b) and 2 U.S.C. §44la(a) (2)(A). As for the Burcham for Congress Committee, it was alleged that in failing to report the above-mentioned NCPAC expenditures as transfers, the Burcham committee violated 2 U.S.C. §434(b)(2). In addition the Committee had failed to report a $700 contribution-in-kind from NCPAC. III. Evidence A. NCPAC The Commission received information from NCPAC's attorney on December 8, 1976, which included the following: (1) - a sworn statement from the Committee's Executive Director, John T. Dolan, describing independent expenditures made on behalf of John Burcham and listing personnel involved in planning and authorizing those expenditures; (2) - copies of the contents of the advertise- ments for which the independent expenditures were made; Hanns R. Crane, C7 (3) - a sworn statement from N, who was paid by NCPAC for consulting work he did P- for the Burcham campaign committee. Mr. Dolan's swon, statement provides a description of independent expenditures totalling $40,719.67 in support of John Burcham, all of which was paid directly to those individuals or businesses providing the media services. Mr. Dolan denies any consultation, cooperation or consent from Burcham or his agents with regard to these payments; moreover, he maintains that before NCPAC made the -4 expenditures, Dolan checked to be sure that those persons giving professional consultation as to the advertisements had no association with Burcham.