News Releases, Media Advisories

FEC Home Page

For Immediate Release
January 30, 2003
Contact: Kelly Huff
Ron Harris
Bob Biersack
Ian Stirton
ADR PROGRAM RESOLVES CASES
WASHINGTON -- The Federal Election Commission is making public three additional cases resolved in the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program. This brings to 49 the total number of cases released thus far. The program’s goal is to expedite resolution of some enforcement matters, reduce the cost of processing complaints, and enhance overall FEC enforcement. Closed ADR negotiated settlement summaries are available in the FEC’s Press and Public Records offices.

For a case to be considered for ADR treatment, a respondent must express willingness to engage in the ADR process, agree to set aside the statute of limitations while the case is pending in the ADR Office, and agree to participate in bilateral negotiations and, if necessary, mediation.

Bilateral negotiations through ADR are oriented toward reaching an expedient resolution with a mutually agreeable settlement that is both satisfying to the respondent(s) and in compliance with the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). Resolutions reached through direct and, when necessary, mediated negotiations are submitted to the Commissioners for final approval. If a resolution is not reached in bilateral negotiation, the case proceeds by mutual agreement to mediation. It should be noted that cases resolved through ADR are not precedential.

 

1. ADR #042 (See MUR 5133R)
RESPONDENTS: (a) Darland Corporation

(b) Iowa Pipeline Associates, Inc.

(c) Pinnacle Bank

(d) Par Electrical Contractors, Inc.

SOURCE: Anne Boyle, Chairperson, Nebraska Democratic Party
SUBJECT: Corporate contributions
NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT: (a) $300 civil penalty*

(b) $375 civil penalty*

(c) $300 civil penalty*

(d) $300 civil penalty*

(a-d) All respondents, in effort to avoid repetition of the violation, agreed to adopt and distribute within 30 days following the effective date of their agreements a policy prohibiting corporate contributions to election campaigns and advising any officer or director of the corporation that they are prohibited from consenting to any contribution or expenditure by the corporation to an election campaign.

2. ADR #067
RESPONDENT: John D. Ong
SOURCE: Pre-MUR 404 – Complainant: Sua sponte
SUBJECT: Exceeding the $25,000 annual contribution limit (1997 and 1999)
NEGOTIATED

SETTLEMENT:

$15,000 civil penalty*
3. ADR #071
RESPONDENT: Jesse L. Jackson, Jr.
SOURCE: Pre-MUR 405 – Complainant: Sua sponte
SUBJECT: Commingle campaign activity with personal business
NEGOTIATED

SETTLEMENT:

The respondent acknowledged that the commingling of campaign activities with private outside business matters is inconsistent with House rules and the FECA. In an effort to clarify the reporting responsibilities of campaign committees and further understanding of the FECA, the respondent will direct staff from his authorized committee to attend, sometime in the next 12 months, a FEC sponsored seminar for candidate committees. On advice of the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, the respondent subsequently refunded all contributions from the participants of the book signing. The respondent subsequently divested $37.50 representing the amount that accrued from the sale of the subject volume and on advice from the House Committee, contributed the $37.50 to a local charity in his district.

 

# # #