30 December 2008
[Federal Register: December 30, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 250)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 79597-79602]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30de08-3]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
11 CFR Parts 100, 101, 102, 104, 110, 113, 400, 9001, 9003, 9031,
9033
Notice 2008-14; Repeal of Increased Contribution and Coordinated
Party Expenditure Limits for Candidates Opposing Self-Financed
Candidates
AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.
ACTION: Final rules.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Election Commission (``Commission'') is removing
its rules on increased contribution limits and coordinated party
expenditure limits for Senate and House of Representatives candidates
facing self-financed opponents. These rules were promulgated to
implement sections 304 and 319 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of
2002, known as the ``Millionaires' Amendment.'' In Davis v. Federal
Election Commission, the Supreme Court held that sections 319(a) and
(b), regarding House of Representatives elections, were
unconstitutional. The Court's analysis also applies to the contribution
and spending limits in section 304 regarding Senate elections. The
Commission, therefore, is removing its rules that implement the
Millionaires' Amendment. However, the Commission is retaining certain
other rules that were not affected by the Davis decision. Further
information is provided in the supplementary information that follows.
DATES: Effective Date: February 1, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert M. Knop, Assistant General
Counsel, or Mr. Neven F. Stipanovic, Attorney, 999 E Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20463, (202) 694-1650 or (800) 424-9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is revising its regulations
to reflect the Supreme Court's decision in Davis v. Federal Election
Commission, 128 S. Ct. 2759 (2008). The Commission is deleting rules
that implemented the Millionaires' Amendment at 11 CFR 100.19(g),
104.19, 110.5(b)(2), and Part 400. It is making technical and
conforming changes to its rules at 11 CFR 100.33, 101.153, 101.1,
102.2(a)(1)(viii), 113.1(g)(6)(ii), 9001.1, 9003.1(b)(8), 9031.1, and
9033.1(b)(10). It is retaining unchanged its rules at 11 CFR
110.1(b)(3)(ii)(C), 116.11, 116.12, and 9035.2(c).
The Commission published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPRM'')
on October 20, 2008, in which it sought public comment on the proposed
rule implementing the Davis decision. See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
on Increased Contribution and Expenditure Limits for Candidates
Opposing Self-financed Candidates, 73 FR 62224 (Oct. 20, 2008). In
addition, the Commission sought public comment on its proposal to
retain 11 CFR 116.11 and 116.12, which concern the repayment of
candidate's personal loans. Id. at 62226. The comment period ended on
November 21, 2008.
The Commission received four comments on the proposed rule,
including a comment from the Internal Revenue Service (``IRS'') stating
that the proposed rules did not conflict with the Internal Revenue Code
or IRS regulations.
For the reasons explained below, the Commission has decided to
delete its rules that implemented the Millionaires' Amendment, and to
retain and revise certain other rules that were not invalidated by the
Davis decision. The
[[Page 79598]]
Commission's final rules are identical to the proposed rules in the
NPRM.
Under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1),
agencies must submit final rules to the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and the President of the Senate and publish them in the
Federal Register at least 30 calendar days before they take effect. The
final rules that follow were transmitted to Congress on December 19,
2008.
Explanation and Justification
The Millionaires' Amendment \1\ of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform
Act of 2002, Public Law No. 107-155 (``BCRA''), increased certain
contribution limits and coordinated party expenditure limits for Senate
and House of Representatives candidates facing opponents who spent
significant amounts of personal funds. When a self-financed opponent
spent personal funds above a certain threshold amount, the
Millionaires' Amendment permitted a candidate to accept individual
contributions under increased contribution limits. 2 U.S.C. 441a(i) and
441a-1(a). When certain other threshold amounts were reached, the
Millionaires' Amendment also allowed national and state political party
committees to make unlimited coordinated party expenditures on behalf
of the candidate in the general election. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Section 304 of BCRA added a new subsection (i) to 2 U.S.C.
441a, which addressed Senate elections. Section 319 of BCRA added a
new section 441a-1 to the Act, which addressed elections for the
House Representatives. The Senate provisions also added new
notification and reporting requirements in 2 U.S.C .434.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court invalidated the Millionaires'
Amendment. In Davis, the Supreme Court reviewed a challenge by a self-
financed candidate who triggered the Millionaires' Amendment in the
2004 and 2006 elections for the House of Representatives. 128 S. Ct.
2759. The Supreme Court held that the House of Representatives
provision of the Millionaires' Amendment was unconstitutional because
it violated the plaintiff's First Amendment rights. Id. at 2775. The
Supreme Court invalidated the entire BCRA section 319 relating to House
elections, including the increased contribution limits in section
319(a) and its companion disclosure requirements in section 319(b). The
Court reasoned that the Millionaires' Amendment imposed a substantial
burden on the plaintiff's exercise of his First Amendment right to use
personal funds for campaign speech, and that the burden was not
justified by any governmental interest in eliminating corruption or the
perception of corruption. Id. at 2772-73.
The Commission's interim rules implementing the Millionaires'
Amendment were approved on December 19, 2002, and have been in effect
during the 2004 and 2006 election cycles, and the beginning of the 2008
election cycle. See Interim Final Rules on Increased Contribution and
Coordinated Party Expenditure Limits for Candidates Opposing Self-
Financed Candidates (``Interim Final Rules''), 68 FR 3970 (Jan. 27,
2003).
On July 25, 2008, the Commission issued a Public Statement that, in
light of the Davis decision, it would no longer enforce the
Millionaires' Amendment. See Press Release, Public Statement on the
Supreme Court's Decision in Davis v. FEC, July 25, 2008, http://
www.fec.gov/press/press2008/220080725millionaire.shtml. As of June 26,
2008, the increased contribution limits and reporting requirements were
no longer in effect, and political party committees were no longer
permitted to make increased coordinated party expenditures on behalf of
self-financed candidates. Id.
A. Removal of 11 CFR Part 400--Increased Limits for Candidates Opposing
Self-Financed Candidates
The Commission is deleting 11 CFR Part 400 in its entirety because
the statutory foundation of Part 400 was invalidated by the Supreme
Court's decision in Davis.
The Commission's rules at 11 CFR Part 400 had implemented the
Millionaires' Amendment. See Interim Final Rules at 3975. Specifically,
the rules at Part 400: (1) Provided the notification and reporting
requirements for Senate and House of Representatives candidates
(subpart B); (2) explained when the increased contribution limits apply
(subpart C); (3) explained how to calculate the increased contribution
limits (subpart D); and (4) explained how candidates' authorized
committees must dispose of excess contributions (subpart E). In Davis,
the Supreme Court decided that increased contribution limits and
disclosure requirements for House of Representatives candidates in BCRA
sections 319(a) and (b) were unconstitutional. Thus, the Commission's
rules at 11 CFR Part 400 that implemented BCRA sections 319(a) and (b)
are no longer valid.
The Supreme Court in Davis struck down only BCRA sections 319(a)
and (b) governing House of Representatives elections. The Commission,
however, has concluded that the Supreme Court's analysis in Davis also
precludes enforcement of the Commission's rules implementing BCRA
sections 304(a) and (b), which provide increased contribution limits
and disclosure requirements for Senate elections. In Davis, the Court
concluded that increased contribution limits for a House of
Representatives candidate facing a self-financed candidate
impermissibly burdened the First Amendment right of the self-financed
candidates to spend their own money for campaign speech. 128 S. Ct. at
2771. There is no basis to conclude that the constitutional
implications would be different for similarly situated candidates in
Senate elections, governed by BCRA sections 304(a) and (b), than in the
respective House of Representatives elections, governed by BCRA
sections 319(a) and (b).
Two commenters agreed with the Commission that Part 400 is
unenforceable in both Senate and House of Representatives elections.
These commenters explained that the Supreme Court's rationale for
rejecting section 319(a)'s contribution limits for House of
Representatives candidates applied equally to Senate candidates, and
they urged the Commission to remove Part 400 entirely from its
regulations. Another commenter urged the Commission to retain these
rules because the commenter disagreed with the Supreme Court's holding
in Davis.
The Commission's rules at Part 400 implemented the Millionaires'
Amendment provisions for both House and Senate elections. The
Commission, therefore, is deleting 11 CFR Part 400 in its entirety.
B. Amendments to Other Provisions
1. Part 100--Definitions
a. 11 CFR 100.19(g)--File, Filed, or Filing.
The Commission is deleting paragraph (g) from 11 CFR 100.19 because
the statutory foundation of this provision has been invalidated by the
Supreme Court's decision in Davis. Section 100.19 defines ``file,
filed, or filing'' and specifies when a document is considered timely
filed. Paragraph (g) had stated that a candidate's notification of
expenditures from personal funds under 11 CFR 400.21 and 400.22 is
considered timely filed if sent by facsimile or electronic mail to all
appropriate parties within 24 hours of the time the thresholds set
forth in 11 CFR 400.21 and 400.22 are exceeded, thereby triggering the
reporting requirement.
As explained above, the Commission is deleting 11 CFR Part 400 in
its entirety because the Supreme Court invalidated the Millionaires'
[[Page 79599]]
Amendment. The Commission is deleting paragraph (g) from section 100.19
because the candidate's notifications under 11 CFR 400.21 and 400.22
are no longer required.
b. 11 CFR 100.33--Personal Funds.
The Commission is revising the definition of ``personal funds'' in
11 CFR 100.33 by deleting the cross-reference to section 400.2, which
the Commission is removing through this rulemaking. The Commission is
retaining the remainder of section 100.33 because the definition of
``personal funds'' in section 100.33 applies generally to other Title 2
rules that use the term ``personal funds.'' \2\ See Interim Final
Rules, 68 FR at 3972. The Commission also notes that the definition of
``personal funds'' at 11 CFR 9003.2(c)(3), which applies to Title 26 of
the United States Code, remains unchanged. See 73 FR at 62227.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See e.g., 11 CFR 100.83(c), 106.3(b)(1), and 110.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. 11 CFR 101.1--Candidate Designations
The Commission is deleting the sentence in paragraph (a) of 11 CFR
101.1 that required Senate and House of Representatives candidates to
state, on their Statements of Candidacy on FEC Form 2 (or, if the
candidates are not required to file electronically, on their letters
containing the same information), the amount by which the candidates
intended to exceed the threshold amount as defined in 11 CFR 400.9. The
Davis decision invalidated the statutory foundation for this
requirement.
3. 11 CFR 102.2--Statement of Organization: Forms and Committee
Identification Number
The Commission is retaining and revising 11 CFR 102.2(a)(1)(viii),
which had required principal campaign committees to provide both their
electronic mail addresses and their facsimile numbers on FEC Form 1.
Paragraph (viii) was promulgated by the Interim Final Rules to
facilitate the notification of expenditures from personal funds under
Part 400. See Interim Final Rules, 68 FR at 3972. Although the
notifications under Part 400 are no longer required, the electronic
mail addresses provided by committees facilitates the exchange of
information between committees and the Commission for other purposes
under the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (``FECA'').
Continuing to require committees' electronic mail addresses, therefore,
will continue to benefit the committees as well as the Commission.
Consistent with its delegated authority to require political committees
to provide an ``address'' when filing a statement of organization under
2 U.S.C. 433(b)(1), the Commission is retaining the requirement that
committees report their electronic mail addresses on FEC Form 1. The
Commission, however, is deleting the requirement that committees
provide their facsimile numbers because it does not routinely
communicate with committees via facsimile machine.
4. 11 CFR 104.19--Special Reporting Requirements for Principal Campaign
Committees of Candidates for Election to the United States Senate or
United States House of Representatives
The Commission is removing and reserving 11 CFR 104.19 because the
statutory foundation of this section was invalidated by the Supreme
Court's decision in Davis. Section 104.19 had required principal
campaign committees of Senate and House of Representatives candidates
to report information necessary to calculate their ``gross receipts
advantage,'' which is defined at 2 U.S.C. 441a(i)(1)(E) (Senate) and
441a-1(a)(2)(B) (House of Representatives). This reporting requirement
was promulgated to ensure that the candidates in the same House or
Senate election had sufficient and timely information to calculate the
``opposition personal funds amount'' under 11 CFR 400.10. See Interim
Final Rules, 68 FR at 3972.
5. 11 CFR 110.1(b)(3)(ii)(C)--Net Debts Outstanding
The Commission is retaining 11 CFR 110.1(b)(3), which restricts the
ability of candidates and their authorized committees to accept
contributions after the election. Together with sections 116.11 and
116.12, paragraph (b)(3) of section 110.1 implements 2 U.S.C. 441a(j),
the statutory provision added by BCRA that restricts the repayment of
candidate's personal loans after the election. See Explanation and
Justification, below, for 11 CFR 116.11 and 116.12.
Candidates and their authorized committees cannot accept
contributions for an election after the election is over unless the
candidate still has net debts outstanding from that election. 11 CFR
110.1(b)(3)(i). This rule was promulgated long before BCRA added the
loan repayment restriction in 2 U.S.C. 441a(j). After the election is
over, candidates and their authorized committees may accept
contributions up to the amount of their ``net debts outstanding,'' as
defined in 11 CFR 110.1(b)(3)(ii). To conform with the fundraising
restrictions in 11 CFR 116.11, the Commission added paragraph (C) to
section 110.1(b)(3)(ii), which excludes the amount of personal loans
that exceed $250,000 from the definition of ``net debt outstanding.''
See Interim Final Rules, 68 FR at 3973. The Commission is retaining the
rule at 11 CFR 110.1(b)(3)(ii)(C) for the same reasons it is retaining
the current rules at 11 CFR 116.11 and 116.12, as explained below.
6. 11 CFR 110.5--Biennial Contribution Limitations
The Commission is deleting paragraph (b)(2) of section 110.5
because the statutory foundation for this provision has been
invalidated by the Supreme Court's decision in Davis. Paragraph (b)(2)
stated the circumstances under which the biennial limits on
contributions by individuals do not apply to contributions made under
11 CFR Part 400. As explained above, the Commission is removing 11 CFR
Part 400 because the Davis decision invalidated the Millionaires''
Amendment. Accordingly, the exception to the individual contribution
limits under section 110.5(b)(2) is no longer valid. The Commission,
therefore, is deleting 11 CFR 110.5(b)(2).
The Commission is also amending 11 CFR 110.5 paragraphs (b), (d),
and (e), by revising the spelling of the word ``bi-annual'' to
``biennial.'' This change makes the spelling consistent with the title
of section 110.5, which uses the word ``biennial.''
7. 11 CFR 116.11 and 116.12--Repayment of Candidate Loans
The Commission is retaining sections 116.11 and 116.12 of the
regulations that concern the repayment of candidates'' personal loans
made to their campaign committees. The Commission sought public comment
on retaining these provisions in light of the Supreme Court's decision
in Davis. No comments were received.
BCRA added a new provision prohibiting candidates and their
authorized committees from using contributions made after the election
to repay loans from the candidates to their own authorized committees
to the extent the contributions total over $250,000. See 2 U.S.C.
441a(j). These loans are referred to as ``personal loans.'' The
Commission's current rules at 11 CFR 116.11 and 116.12 implement 2
U.S.C. 441a(j). Section 116.11 prohibits an authorized committee from
using contributions made after an election to repay any personal loan
by a candidate that exceeds $250,000. Section 116.12 addresses the
repayment
[[Page 79600]]
of candidate's personal loans that, in the aggregate, are equal to or
less than $250,000.
The Commission concludes that the Davis decision did not invalidate
the personal loan provision in BCRA and, thus, it is retaining the
rules that implement that provision. The Commission does not have
authority, on its own, to declare a duly enacted law to be
unconstitutional.
The Court in Davis did not address the validity of the personal
loan provision, and the plaintiff did not challenge that provision of
BCRA. 128 S. Ct. 2759. Although that provision is in the same statutory
subsection of BCRA (section 304(a)) as other provisions that the
Supreme Court in Davis held to be unconstitutional, the personal loan
provision is placed in a separate subsection within 2 U.S.C. 441a. This
statutory provision has a wider application than other provisions of
the Millionaires' Amendment. It applies equally to all candidates and
regardless of whether the Millionaires' Amendment provisions also apply
to those candidates. Most notably, while other provisions of the
Millionaires' Amendment apply only to Senate and House of
Representatives candidates, the loan repayment provision applies to
candidates for all Federal offices, including presidential candidates.
Because this statutory provision has wider application than the
Millionaires' Amendment, the Commission implemented it by adding new
sections 116.11 and 116.12, rather than by including these rules in 11
CFR Part 400 with the Millionaires' Amendment regulations. See Interim
Final Rules at 3973.
The Commission's decision to retain sections 116.11 and 116.12 is
consistent with its approach in a recent advisory opinion, which was
requested after the Supreme Court invalidated the Millionaires'
Amendment in Davis. See Advisory Opinion 2008-09 (Lautenberg).\3\
Senator Lautenberg loaned money to his principal campaign committee in
connection with his primary election. The Senator asked the Commission
whether the personal loan provision applied to his personal loan in
light of the Davis decision. The Commission concluded that it did apply
because the Davis decision did not address the constitutionality of the
personal loan provision. 128 S. Ct. 2759. The Commission explained
that, unlike the BCRA provisions found to be unconstitutional in Davis,
the personal loan provision applies equally to all candidates,
regardless of whether they or their opponents have triggered the
Millionaires' Amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Advisory Opinion 2008-09 (Lautenberg) is available at http:/
/saos.nictusa.com/saos/searchao.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission also concluded in Advisory Opinion 2008-09 that the
personal loan provision was severable from the Millionaires' Amendment.
As the Commission explained there, BCRA section 401 provides that the
invalidation of one provision of BCRA will not affect the validity of
any other provisions of BCRA, nor the application of such provisions to
other persons and circumstances. 2 U.S.C. 454. It is a well-settled
principle of statutory construction that ``[u]nless it is evident that
the legislature would not have enacted those provisions which are
within its power, independently of that which is not, the invalid part
may be dropped if what is left is fully operative as a law.'' Buckley
v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 108-109 (1976) (quoting Champlin Refining Co. v.
Corporation Commission, 286 U.S. 210, 234 (1932)). In Buckley, the
Supreme Court struck down certain provisions of FECA's section 202, but
expressly upheld other provisions within the same subsection of the
statute.
In Advisory Opinion 2008-09, the Commission found that it was not
at all ``evident'' from the text, function, or legislative history of
the Millionaires' Amendment that Congress intended the personal loan
provision to be inextricably tied to the increased contribution limits
of section 304(a) of BCRA. Section 304(a) was codified in two separate
provisions of 2 U.S.C. 441a, one providing for the increased
contribution limits and the other limiting repayment of personal loans.
Functionally, the personal loan provision can operate effectively
without the provisions invalidated by the Supreme Court in Davis.
Because the loan repayment provision's operation does not depend upon
the invalidated increased contribution limits or reporting provisions,
its validity is not affected by their invalidation. Moreover,
legislative history shows that Congress in several instances addressed
the personal loan provision separately from the unconstitutional
provisions regarding increased contribution limits. See, e.g., 147
Cong. Rec. S2450-51 (daily ed. Mar. 19, 2001) (statement of Senator
Domenici); 147 Cong. Rec. S2461-62 (daily ed. Mar. 19, 2001) (statement
of Senator Domenici).
The Commission, therefore, is retaining the rules at 11 CFR 116.11
and 116.12 that restrict the repayment of personal loans made by
candidates to their authorized committees.
C. Technical and Conforming Amendments to Other Regulations
1. 11 CFR 100.153--Routine Living Expenses; 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(ii)--
Personal Use.
The Commission is amending 11 CFR 100.153 and 113.1(g)(6)(ii) by
revising the cross-references to the definition of ``personal funds''
from 11 CFR 110.10(b) to current 11 CFR 100.33. The Commission deleted
11 CFR 110.10(b) in the Interim Final Rules, 68 FR at 3973. The change
reflects the Commission's prior removal of the ``personal funds''
definition from section 110.1(b) to section 100.33.
2. 11 CFR 9001.1--Scope; 11 CFR 9003.1--Candidate and Committee
Agreements; 11 CFR 9031.1--Scope; 11 CFR 9033.1--Candidate and
Committee Agreements
The Commission is making technical amendments to these sections
that update references to its other regulations to reflect the
elimination of Part 400.
Certification of No Effect Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) (Regulatory
Flexibility Act)
The Commission certifies that the attached final rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The basis for this certification is that few, if any, small
entities will be affected by this rulemaking, which applies only to
Federal candidates and their campaign committees, and political
committees of political parties. Such committees are not ``small
entities'' under 5 U.S.C. 601. Candidate and party committees are not
independently owned and operated because they are not financed and
controlled by a small identifiable group of individuals; rather, they
rely on contributions from a variety of persons to fund the committee's
activities. The Democratic and Republican parties also have a major
controlling influence within the political arena and are dominant in
their field. However, to the extent that any party committees
representing major or minor political parties or any other political
committees might be considered ``small entities,'' the number that
would be affected by this rule is not substantial.
The final rule also does not add any new substantive provisions to
the current regulations, but rather it removes or retains existing
regulations. Therefore, the attached final rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
[[Page 79601]]
List of Subjects
11 CFR Part 100
Elections.
11 CFR Part 101
Political candidates, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
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 110
Campaign funds, Political committees and parties.
11 CFR Part 113
Campaign funds.
11 CFR Part 400
Campaign funds, Elections, Political candidates, Political
committees and parties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
11 CFR Part 9001
Campaign funds.
11 CFR Part 9003
Campaign funds, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
11 CFR Part 9031
Campaign funds.
11 CFR Part 9033
Campaign funds, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Commission is amending
Subchapters A, C, E, and F of Chapter I of Title 11 of the Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 100--SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS (2 U.S.C. 431)
0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431, 434, 438(a)(8), and 439a(c).
Sec. 100.19 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 100.19, paragraph (b) is amended by removing the reference
to ``(g)'' and adding in its place ``(f)'' in paragraph (b)
introductory text and (b)(2), and by removing paragraph (g).
0
3. Section 100.33 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 100.33 Personal funds.
Personal funds of a candidate means the sum of all of the
following:
(a) Assets. Amounts derived from any asset that, under applicable
State law, at the time the individual became a candidate, the candidate
had legal right of access to or control over, and with respect to which
the candidate had--
(1) Legal and rightful title; or
(2) An equitable interest;
(b) Income. Income received during the current election cycle, of
the candidate, including:
(1) A salary and other earned income that the candidate earns from
bona fide employment;
(2) Income from the candidate's stocks or other investments
including interest, dividends, or proceeds from the sale or liquidation
of such stocks or investments;
(3) Bequests to the candidate;
(4) Income from trusts established before the beginning of the
election cycle;
(5) Income from trusts established by bequest after the beginning
of the election cycle of which the candidate is the beneficiary;
(6) Gifts of a personal nature that had been customarily received
by the candidate prior to the beginning of the election cycle; and
(7) Proceeds from lotteries and similar legal games of chance; and
(c) Jointly owned assets. Amounts derived from a portion of assets
that are owned jointly by the candidate and the candidate's spouse as
follows:
(1) The portion of assets that is equal to the candidate's share of
the asset under the instrument of conveyance or ownership; provided,
however,
(2) If no specific share is indicated by an instrument of
conveyance or ownership, the value of one-half of the property.
Sec. 100.153 [Amended]
0
4. Section 100.153 is amended by removing the reference to ``11 CFR
110.10(b)'' and adding in its place ``11 CFR 100.33''.
PART 101--CANDIDATE STATUS AND DESIGNATIONS (2 U.S.C. 432(e))
0
5. The authority citation for part 101 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 432(e), 434(a)(11), 438(a)(8).
0
6. Section 101.1(a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 101.1 Candidate designations (2 U.S.C. 432(e)(1)).
(a) Principal Campaign Committee. Within 15 days after becoming a
candidate under 11 CFR 100.3, each candidate, other than a nominee for
the office of Vice President, shall designate in writing, a principal
campaign committee in accordance with 11 CFR 102.12. A candidate shall
designate his or her principal campaign committee by filing a Statement
of Candidacy on FEC Form 2, or, if the candidate is not required to
file electronically under 11 CFR 104.18, by filing a letter containing
the same information (that is, the individual's name and address, party
affiliation, and office sought, the District and State in which Federal
office is sought, and the name and address of his or her principal
campaign committee at the place of filing specified at 11 CFR part
105). Each principal campaign committee shall register, designate a
depository, and report in accordance with 11 CFR parts 102, 103, and
104.
* * * * *
PART 102--REGISTRATION, ORGANIZATION, AND RECORDKEEPING BY
POLITICAL COMMITTEES (2 U.S.C. 433)
0
7. The authority citation for part 102 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 432, 433, 434(a)(11), 438(a)(8), 441d.
0
8. In Sec. 102.2, paragraph (a)(1)(viii) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 102.2 Statement of organization: Forms and committee
identification number (2 U.S.C. 433 (b), (c)).
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(viii) If the committee is a principal campaign committee of a
candidate for the Senate or the House of Representatives, the principal
campaign committee's electronic mail address.
* * * * *
PART 104--REPORTS BY POLITICAL COMMITTEES AND OTHER PERSONS (2
U.S.C. 434)
0
9. The authority citation for part 104 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431(1), 431(8), 431(9), 432(i), 434,
438(a)(8) and (b), 439a, 441a, and 36 U.S.C. 510.
Sec. 104.19 [Removed and Reserved]
0
10. Section 104.19 is removed and reserved.
PART 110--CONTRIBUTION AND EXPENDITURE LIMITATIONS AND PROHIBITIONS
0
11. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431(8), 431(9), 432(c)(2), 437d, 438(a)(8),
441a, 441b, 441d, 441e, 441f, 441g, 441h, and 36 U.S.C. 510.
[[Page 79602]]
0
12. In Sec. 110.5, paragraphs (b)(1), (d), and (e) are revised, and
paragraph (b)(2) is removed and reserved to read as follows:
Sec. 110.5 Aggregate biennial contribution limitation for individuals
(2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(3)).
* * * * *
(b) Biennial limitations. (1) In the two-year period beginning on
January 1 of an odd-numbered year and ending on December 31 of the next
even-numbered year, no individual shall make contributions aggregating
more than $95,000, including no more than:
(i) $37,500 in the case of contributions to candidates and the
authorized committees of candidates; and
(ii) $57,500 in the case of any other contributions, of which not
more than $37,500 may be attributable to contributions to political
committees that are not political committees of any national political
parties.
* * * * *
(d) Independent expenditures. The biennial limitation on
contributions in this section applies to contributions made to persons,
including political committees, making independent expenditures under
11 CFR part 109.
(e) Contributions to delegates and delegate committees. The
biennial limitation on contributions in this section applies to
contributions to delegate and delegate committees under 11 CFR 110.14.
PART 113--USE OF CAMPAIGN ACOUNTS FOR NON-CAMPAIGN PURPOSES
0
13. The authority citation for part 113 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 432(h), 438(a)(8), 439a, 441a.
Sec. 113.1 [Amended]
0
14. Section 113.1(g)(6)(ii) is amended by removing the reference to
``11 CFR 110.10(b)'' and adding in its place ``11 CFR 100.33''.
PART 400--[REMOVED]
0
15. Under the authority of 2 U.S.C. 437d(a)(8), part 400 is removed.
PART 9001--SCOPE
0
16. The authority citation for part 9001 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 9009(b).
Sec. 9001.1 [Amended]
0
17. Section 9001.1 is amended by removing the number ``400'' and adding
in its place the number ``300'' in both instances in which ``400''
appears.
PART 9003--ELIGIBILITY FOR PAYMENTS
0
18.The authority citation for part 9003 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 9003 and 9009(b).
Sec. 9003.1 [Amended]
0
19. In Sec. 9003.1, paragraph (b)(8) is amended by removing the number
``400'' and adding in its place the number ``300''.
PART 9031--SCOPE
0
20. The authority citation for part 9031 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 9031 and 9039(b).
Sec. 9031.1 [Amended]
0
21. Section 9031.1 is amended by removing the number ``400'' and adding
in its place the number ``300'' in both instances in which ``400''
appears.
PART 9033--ELIGIBILITY FOR PAYMENTS
0
22. The authority citation for part 9033 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 9003(e), 9033 and 9039(b).
Sec. 9033.1 [Amended]
0
23. In Sec. 9033.1, paragraph (b)(10) is revised by removing the
number ``400'' and adding in its place the number ``300''.
Dated: December 23, 2008.
On behalf of the Commission,
Donald F. McGahn, II,
Chairman, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. E8-31032 Filed 12-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
|