Federal Election Commission, United States of America (logo). Link to FEC Home Page
Federal Election Commission

Disclosure Data Weblog

Specific data questions?
Posted by: Bob in Specific Data Problems/Questions
Published: 08:00AM Oct 23, 2009

We're going to try to use this category of the blog to deal with specific questions or problems you find in the data you get from us.  If you find something you don't understand or you think is simply wrong - post a comment here and we'll look into it and report back. 

I'll probably turn some of the comments into new posts -- threads that deal with common problems or issues - but you can also think of this as the tool to use to make us accountable - everyone will see your questions and whether and how and when we respond to them.

This is the sausage-making, so it may not always be pretty, but contrary to the old adage, I think it will be better if everyone can see it happen. . . 

Permalink  |  Comments[49]

Comments:

I probably posted these suggestions in the wrong place initially, apologies...

  1. build XML Schema to go along with and be downloaded from the "Metadata" info pages
  2. use ISO (standard) date/time data formats [ see http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#isoformats ]

this will aid people who are building tools to analyze the data

jeffs

Posted by Prof. Jeff Sonstein on October 27, 2009 at 12:54 PM EDT #

I've come across several records from the 2008 itcont table that are listed as type 15E, but appear to me to be 15C. Could you verify whether or not these are correct? Transaction Numbers: 4286294 4286295 4286296 4286297 4286298 4286299 4286300 4286301 4286302 4286303 4286304 4286305 4286306 4286307 4286308 4286309 4286310 4286311 4286312 4286313 4286314 4286318 4286319 4286320 4286321 4286322 4286323 4286324 0473294 0473296 0473297 4132190 0709594 4286294 4286295 4286296 4286297 4286298 4286299 4286300 4286301 4286302 4286303 4286304 4286305 4286306 4286307 4286308 4286309 4286310 4286311 4286318 4286319 4286320 Thanks for your help.

Posted by Carolyn on November 13, 2009 at 10:31 AM EST #

Carolyn, You're right - these should be 15C transactions (i.e. contributions from the candidate) rather than contributions earmarked through some other person or organization (15E). They're being corrected in our database now.

Posted by Bob on November 13, 2009 at 11:30 AM EST #

Can you explain why totals in summary reports don't match up the totals when you total up itemized contributions? For example, http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_06+H6TX22101 says Non-Party (e.g. PACs) or Other Committees: $31,740 But if you click through on the hyperlink http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/can_give/2005_H6TX22101 and total up the rows, I get $335 in independent expenditures and $33,986 in contributions. I don't understand why there's a discrepancy and haven't found anything on the site that explains this.

Posted by Steve on November 18, 2009 at 08:54 PM EST #

Steve, take a look at this post where I tried to answer your question - http://www.fec.gov/blog/disclosure/entry/reconciling_summaries_and_details Let me know if you have other questions.

Posted by Bob on November 19, 2009 at 03:25 PM EST #

I've come across a donation from an individual to a candidate for $200,000 in the 2010 individual donors data (transaction number 0743354). I checked the report image (number 29993407794) and it does list $200,000 as the amount, but it seems like this must be an error, or a donation well beyond the legal limit. Do you have any idea what might be going on here? Thanks!

Posted by Carolyn on January 11, 2010 at 05:37 PM EST #

Hi Carolyn, The FEC sent a letter to the committee in late December asking about that transaction ($200,000 from an individual) among others. The committee should be filing an amendment to correct or clarify the information and we'll update the files with that information when we receive it. Hope this helps

Posted by Bob on January 12, 2010 at 09:05 AM EST #

Can you advise why in the report link below, this contributor (Brodsky) has reported $10,000 given in one election cycle to one candidate? $4800 to General and $400 to Primary. Even if it got re-distributed across General and Primary, it would still be over the limit - right? What am I missing? http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?29934256152

Posted by Emily Calhoun on January 21, 2010 at 07:26 PM EST #

Emily, When I looked at the contributions you highlighted I noticed that they were listed as contributions for different election cycles - some for 2010, some for 2012 and even at least one for 2014. The rule says the committee may accept these contributions for future races, but it must maintain a cash balance that shows it has not spent the money in a different campaign - so they can keep these contributions but they can't spend them until the cycle for which they were given.

Posted by Bob Biersack on January 22, 2010 at 09:00 AM EST #

Bob, two follow-ups on your response to Emily above. 1. On the PDF, why does "Election Cycle to Date" say $10,000 (for the three contributions: $2,400 for 2010, $2,400 for 2012 and $400 for 2014)? Does election cycle refer to the time period the money was given rather than to the time period to money was designated for? 2. If I look in the file at ftp://ftp.fec.gov/FEC/indiv10.zip, I see the 2012 and 2014 transactions. I see in ftp://ftp.fec.gov/FEC/indiv_dictionary.txt that column 14 is the primary-general indicator but I don't see anything in the documentation that indicates that money is designated for a time period other than the 2010. Once there are 2012 and 2014 files to download, will these transactions be moved into there? If not, is there any way to determine in machine readable versions of the data which time period the money is designated to?

Posted by Steve on January 22, 2010 at 01:35 PM EST #

Steve, Here is the definition of "election cycle to date" as it appears in the instructions for the form. "The ¿election cycle-to-date¿ total for each entry represents the total amount received from that source since the beginning of the election cycle (starting the day after the last general election through the date of the general election)." There are actually two more contributions from the same donor that appear on the page before the one Emily was looking at, and the total for those 5 contributions is $10,000. We don't move transactions from one file to another based on the election they refer to, but the column you referred to (pgi) should have a value of 2 for 2012 contributions and 4 for 2014 instead of a P for primary or G for general. That looks like something we may need to correct in the indiv10.zip file. These are very good questions - hope this helps.

Posted by Bob Biersack on January 22, 2010 at 02:18 PM EST #

I've noticed several (66) donations in the 2010 Individuals data that appear to be donations from PACs. Should these be in a different table? Transaction Numbers: 0028671 0028672 0028673 0028674 0028675 0028679 0028685 0028686 0028687 0028688 0028689 0028690 0028691 0028694 0028696 0028697 0059843 0085722 0085723 0085724 0085725 0085726 0085727 0085728 0085731 0085732 0085738 0085739 0085740 0085741 0085742 0085743 0085746 0085747 0098246 0174668 0226848 0226849 0226853 0226856 0226857 0226858 0226859 0226861 0226862 0226863 0226864 0226865 0226866 0226870 0226871 0226875 0226876 0226877 0226878 0432691 0531732 0553206 0607001 0614888 0656039 0680768 0794384 0800368 0810633 0810641 Also, what's the best way to post questions about a large number of records like this?

Posted by Carolyn on February 04, 2010 at 02:47 PM EST #

Hi Carolyn, Most of these appear to be from the American Medical Association PAC, disclosing funds received from their state affiliates. The challenge here is that committees sometimes misunderstand the meaning of the transaction codes (15 in this case which stands for contribution from an individual person) and we don't always catch these errors when we review the filings. We'll fix these and the others on your list if the transaction codes are wrong - so they should disappear from the individual contributions file on the FTP server. I guess I think this method for sending us these lists is ok with me - do you have another suggestion? Thanks

Posted by bob Biersack on February 04, 2010 at 03:25 PM EST #

Carolyn, We've completed the deletion process for the transactions you asked about earlier this month - they should not appear in files downloaded this week. Let us know if you have questions. Thanks

Posted by Bob Biersack on February 22, 2010 at 12:08 PM EST #

I've come across 7 more donations that appear to be PAC contributions in the individual contributions data. Transaction Numbers: 0834466 0878060 0833118 0920639 0885234 0898808 0828167. Also, I've come across several donations to Steve Tarvin that appear to be contributions to his own campaign, but are type 15J. Should these be 15C? Transaction Numbers: 0853668 0853669 0853670 0853671 0853672 0853673 0853674 0853675 0853676 0853677 0853678 0853679 0853680 0853681 0853682 Thanks!

Posted by Carolyn on February 23, 2010 at 04:41 PM EST #

Carolyn, Sorry this took so long - I sent your note to the wrong place. It looks like the corrections have been made now. Let us know if you have questions. Thanks

Posted by Bob Biersack on March 05, 2010 at 01:46 PM EST #

It looks like these donations (Transaction Numbers: 0575234, 0575235, 0575236, 0575237) exceed the legal limit, each for $2400 to Dan Lungren. They are coming from a guy and his LP, but the donations from the LP list his name in "employer" (microfilm 29934914063 and 29934914064). Are these subject to the legal limit from an individual or is there an exception because of the LP? Thanks!

Posted by Carolyn on March 16, 2010 at 12:46 PM EDT #

Hi Carolyn, The two entries in your set that show MKB Partners as the last name are the reporting of contributions coming from a partnership. The two with the individual's name are the memo notations for which partner is responsible for the contribution. The two partnership entries should not be included in the individuals file, and we'll delete them. Thanks

Posted by Bob Biersack on March 16, 2010 at 02:45 PM EDT #

In the 2010 Individuals data there's a donation for $175,700 to Emily's List Women Vote (transaction number 1056883). Is this a mistake? Thanks

Posted by Carolyn on March 23, 2010 at 05:25 PM EDT #

I've come across 4 more donations that appear to be PAC contributions in the individual contributions data. Transaction Numbers: 1057026, 0960627, 1028822 and 0960654 Thanks

Posted by Carolyn on March 24, 2010 at 01:25 PM EDT #

Thanks Carolyn, These transactions should be corrected now. They are all examples of committees making mistakes in their filings, including contributions from PACs in the section of the filing that should only include contributions from individual people. We have changed our transaction code from "15" in the originals to "18K" to properly reflect that the contributions came from committees.

Posted by Bob Biersack on March 25, 2010 at 10:57 AM EDT #

Carolyn, A few days ago you asked about a specific transaction you saw in the individual contributions file with an amount of $175,700. That entry is a correct representation of what was submitted to us. You can find all of the submissions by this organization here - http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?C00473918

Posted by Bob Biersack on March 26, 2010 at 01:08 PM EDT #

I have a question about the information reported in the pas file-- the Candidate Affiliated with the transaction ("Candidate Identification Number (ITEM-CAND)" or the second Candidate ID in the record (not the "Other Identification Number"). The ITEM-CAND sometimes seems to reference a different candidate than candidates associated with the filer or the target; this seems especially true in the 1982(6,910 records), 1984(15,673 records), and 1986 (18,325 records). Could you elaborate about what the Candidate Identification number means in this instance?

Posted by Harriet on April 01, 2010 at 12:51 PM EDT #

(continued) For example, the 1984 file associates Dan Burton("H2IN06023") with a series of IE against Democratic candidates made by the National Conservative PAC (C00024687). A nexis search shows no connection between Congressman Burton and the National Conservative PAC (see, e.g. 283032664677). I thought this may be some peculiarity of the IE/CC transactions, but there are several contributions to registered filers(24K) that also have a candidate associated with them that is seemingly unrelated to the filer or the recipient.

Posted by Harriet on April 01, 2010 at 12:52 PM EDT #

Harriet, You've apparently found some errors in the 'pass' files for those early election cycles. The basic elements in each itemized transaction that identify parties to the transaction are the filer ID and the "other ID." The 'item-cand' field was added later under program control in order to make the file easier to use by including both a committee number and a candidate number if the transaction was a contribution to a campaign. In the case of independent expenditures, like the NCPAC transactions you've highlighted the 'other identification number' is the correct value for the candidate for or against whom the expenditure was made, and the process failed to clear an earlier value for the 'item-cand' field as it created these records. Thanks for being careful and thorough, and I'm sorry for the error. We'll try to correct these.

Posted by Bob Biersack on April 01, 2010 at 01:27 PM EDT #

I am seeing two $24,000 contributions in itoth in 2006 from 3T PAC (C00416552) to DCCC (C00000935), but I only see that the DCCC reported receiving one $24,000 contribution from 3T PAC in 2006. Is there something wrong here? Transaction IDs from itoth 2006: 0912024 Type 24K 0918950 Type 24K 0800287 Type 18K

Posted by Erin on April 16, 2010 at 04:38 PM EDT #

Erin, It looks like we incorrectly included both the original filing of the transaction from 3T PAC to the DCCC and also the same transaction from an amendment. Some information about the election to which the transaction relates was changed in the amendment so that's actually the only entry that should appear in the database. We'll delete the entry from the new report (rn 912024)

Posted by Bob Biersack on April 16, 2010 at 04:48 PM EDT #

I've come across 4 more donations that appear to be PAC contributions in the individual contributions data for 2010. Transaction Numbers: 1172611, 1103933, 1164786 and 1173974 Thanks!

Posted by Carolyn on April 27, 2010 at 04:17 PM EDT #

Thanks Carolyn, We've made the corrections. This will happen sometimes when committees put transactions in the wrong section of their filings.

Posted by Bob Biersack on April 28, 2010 at 03:46 PM EDT #

In the 2010 itcont data there's a donation from an individual to Don Benton (RN 1199760) for $33,010, but when I look at the report image (10020200142) the total for this individual is only 2400 (4800 donation and 2400 refund). Is this $33,010 donation correct? Thanks

Posted by Carolyn on May 18, 2010 at 03:20 PM EDT #

You're right Carolyn, there was an entry error for this contribution on Benton's Senate campaign report. Its been corrected now. thanks

Posted by Bob Biersack on May 20, 2010 at 10:19 AM EDT #

I've come across 7 more donations that appear to be PAC contributions in the individual contributions data for 2010. Transaction Numbers: 1415171, 1398140, 1398141, 1398142, 1415172, 1432537 and 1468085 Thanks!

Posted by Carolyn on June 16, 2010 at 10:49 AM EDT #

2 more PAC donations in the 2010 Individual Donors data, transaction numbers 1521040 and 1488517. Thanks

Posted by Carolyn on July 13, 2010 at 03:53 PM EDT #

I've identified several more records that appear to be PAC donations in the 2010 Individual Donors data, transaction numbers: 1537559, 1576119, 1564937, 1564936, 1619723, 1528986, 1590791, 1548247, 1619745, 1565239, 1565278, 1600244, 1600245, 1548438 and 1618308. Thanks!

Posted by Carolyn on August 03, 2010 at 04:25 PM EDT #

In the 2010 Individual Donors data there are nine records that are missing recipient information. Transaction numbers 1798448, 1798446, 1798439, 1798443, 1798441, 1798445, 1798449, 1798447 and 1798440. Thanks!

Posted by Carolyn on August 23, 2010 at 12:35 PM EDT #

I recently saw that Edison Schools, C00413583, gave $15,000 to Joseph Sestak, C00465492, on June 17th, 2010. But in the FEC filing pdf, it says only $1,500. http://images.nictusa.com/pdf/474/10030363474/10030363474.pdf#navpanes=0 Let me know if there is something wrong here so I can change it as well. Thanks!

Posted by Spencer on August 23, 2010 at 05:21 PM EDT #

I've identified 6 more PAC donations in the 2010 individual data, transaction numbers: 1674636, 1791697, 1710746, 1709827, 1721003 and 1654422. Thanks

Posted by Carolyn on August 24, 2010 at 02:49 PM EDT #

Hi Bob, I saw that the NAIOP-PAC (C00233304) gave $15,000 to DeMint for Senate (N00002472) on June 23, 2010 for the General election. I believe this is in violation of the $5,000 limit per election although I don't see any refunds in the records. Microfilm/specific page: 10990872340 Let me know if this contribution has been changed at all. Thanks!

Posted by Spencer MacColl on September 20, 2010 at 09:45 AM EDT #

Hi, I recently looked at a download from a recent independent expenditures file and I saw that Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies made 2 independent expenditures. However I did not see these listed in the 24/48 hour expenditure table and when I looked up the microfilm and cmte ID, nothing showed up. I am assuming this is a filing error because Crossroads GPS is a 501 c(4) which should be filing under electioneering communications. Thanks if you have any information! cmte id: C90011719 microfilm image number: 10931343945 Date: 9/21/2010 Amount: $226,712 Candidate: Joe Sestak

Posted by Spencer MacColl on September 24, 2010 at 02:44 PM EDT #

You should be able to see the Form 5 now at http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?C90011719

Posted by Paul on September 30, 2010 at 06:46 PM EDT #

I've come across 5 donations in the 2010 Indivs table that appear to be from PACs, transaction numbers: 1899069, 1781798, 1890166, 1899004, 1899065. Thanks

Posted by Carolyn on October 06, 2010 at 08:48 AM EDT #

What is the threshold before contributions appear under Individual Search? I gave each of 3 candidates 2 contributions totaling $210 -- 1 contribution for $100 and 1 for $110. Do they not appear unless an individual contribution totals $200 or more, regardless of the combined total?

Posted by Lee on December 09, 2010 at 11:41 PM EST #

I've come across two excessive donations in the 2010 individuals data (record numbers 2310040 and 2554236) that list a $10,000 contribution to Dino Ross and a $24,000 contribution to Alexander Giannoulias, but the report images on the FEC site show the donations as $1,000 and $2,400, so these appear to be typos in the data. The 2010 individuals data also has three earmarked contributions from the Senate Conservatives Fund to Ken Buck for $155,037, which I presume should be in the pac, not individuals file? Thanks!

Posted by Carolyn on January 13, 2011 at 09:11 AM EST #

I just had a quick question on what is the release times/dates for the Administrative Fines, Candidate Summary and Committee Summary files?

Posted by Cody on January 09, 2012 at 03:00 PM EST #

Cody, The Administrative Fines, Candidate Summary and Committee Summary files are updated each day by 7:00AM Eastern time.

Posted by Paul on January 12, 2012 at 10:38 AM EST #

I've found a contibution in 2012 oth data file where the incorrect OID was entered. the RN is 0402396. The text of the name is the National Democratic congressional committee, but the OID is for the National Republican Congressional committee. Here's the image number: 11931922096

Posted by Debbie Wuthnow on May 08, 2012 at 03:10 PM EDT #

This transaction has been corrected: C00334706 11931922096 24K DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN C00000935 4072720111141734228 These two transactions have been sent to data coding and entry for review: C00042366 28020242559 18K MARSH FOR SENATE C00443382 1121520090001467944; C00250720 11971826117 24K NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL C00000935 4110920111145186455 (amendmen version of transaction @1195256078 above)

Posted by Paul on June 18, 2012 at 09:31 AM EDT #

I too am wondering about the threshold for contributions. I have not seen a reply to the comment a while back now with the following text: "What is the threshold before contributions appear under Individual Search? I gave each of 3 candidates 2 contributions totaling $210 -- 1 contribution for $100 and 1 for $110. Do they not appear unless an individual contribution totals $200 or more, regardless of the combined total?" Please do let us know how that shows.

Posted by sean on July 31, 2012 at 06:37 PM EDT #

Sean, I assume you are doing your search from the Individual Contribution Search page. The individual contribution must be $200 or more to be included in the search.

Posted by Paul on August 16, 2012 at 02:53 PM EDT #

Post a Comment:
  • HTML Syntax: Allowed