Federal Election Commission Main Page
April 23, 1982
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
ADVISORY OPINION 1982-23
Michael R. Edelman
Treasurer
Westchester Citizens for Good Government
20 South Broadway
Yonkers, New York 10701
Dear Mr. Edelman:
This responds to your letter of March 17, 1982, requesting
an advisory opinion on behalf of the Westchester Citizens for
Good Government ("the Committee") concerning application of the
Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended ("the Act") to
whether a political committee can earmark a $3,800 contribution
through a local party committee to a Federal candidate.
In your request you state that the Committee was originally
organized, and registered with the Commission, in 1981 to make
independent expenditures advocating the defeat of "certain
incumbent Congressmen in Westchester County." However, the
Committee made no substantial expenditures in this regard and
would like to terminate its activity while simultaneously
contributing its remaining funds (approximately $3,800) to the
Westchester County Republican Committee1/ "to be used by its
candidate in the 24th Congressional District" of New York. The
Commission understands from your request that the Committee
proposes to make a general election contribution on behalf of the
congressional candidate, presently unidentified, who receives the
1982 Republican nomination for the 24th Congressional District of
New York.
1/The Westchester County Republican Committee is a local party
committee not registered with the Commission.
The contribution limitations in 2 U.S.C. SS 441a would permit
the Committee to contribute $1,000 with respect to the general
election of any candidate for Federal office. See 11 CFR 110.1
for the rules applicable to contributions made with respect to
any election. The Commission's regulations permit the Committee
to earmark or otherwise direct its contribution through an
intermediary or conduit to a candidate for Federal office. See
11 CFR 110.6. The earmarked contribution is attributed to the
Committee and not to any intermediary provided that the
intermediary exercises no direction or control over the
Committee's designation of the recipient candidate. If any
control of the contribution decision is exercised by the
intermediary, then the contribution is attributed to both the
intermediary and the original contributor's contribution
limitations. In the present case, the Committee may earmark a
maximum of $1,000 through the Westchester County Republican Party
Committee for the general election campaign of the 1982
Republican congressional candidate in that district.
Additionally, if permitted by state law, the Committee could
contribute its entire $3,800 to the local party committee, or for
any other lawful purpose, provided that no more than $1,000 was
earmarked for any one Federal candidate.
The Commission has allowed a contribution to be earmarked
for an undetermined Federal candidate where the facts indicated
that the candidate was identifiable as to specific office, party
affiliation, and election cycle. In Advisory Opinion 1977-16
(copy enclosed), the Commission permitted a search committee to
form, accept contributions and make expenditures on behalf of a
candidate not yet in existence. Therefore, the Committee may
earmark, and the local party committee may act as intermediary,2/
a general election contribution not in excess of $1,000 for the
1982 Republican candidate in the 24th District. If the
Committee chooses to earmark up to $1,000 for the Republican
candidate in the 24th Congressional District, it could use its
remaining funds for any lawful purpose. In addition, the
Committee may disburse its remaining funds and terminate in the
same report. See 11 CFR 102.3.
The Commission expresses no opinion as to the application of
any New York State Statute in the event that the Committee makes
contributions that are not subject to the limits of the Act and
regulations, since an opinion on such a statute is beyond its
jurisdiction.
2/The time limits for transferring contributions by the
intermediary to the intended recipient would be suspended until
the name of the candidate is known. See 11 CFR 102.8.
This response constitutes an advisory opinion concerning
application of the Act, or regulations prescribed by the
Commission, to the specific transaction or activity set forth by
your request. See 2 U.S.C. SS 437f.