HOME / PRESS OFFICE

FEC Home Page

For Immediate Release
April 9, 2004
Contact: George Smaragdis
Bob Biersack
Ian Stirton
Kelly Huff
COMPLIANCE CASES MADE PUBLIC

WASHINGTON -- The Federal Election Commission has recently made public its final actions on three matters previously under review (MURs). This release contains only disposition information.

1. Pre-MUR 406  
     
  RESPONDENTS: Harris 2000 Campaign Committee, Roger K. S. Liu, treasurer
  COMPLAINANTS: Referral by Robert Y. Watada, Executive Director, State of Hawaii Campaign Spending Commission
  SUBJECT: Corporate contributions; union contributions; excessive contributions
  DISPOSITION: The Commission declined to open a MUR.

The referral alleges that the candidate committee solicited, collected and delivered impermissible contributions to the Democratic National Committee for the Gore-Lieberman campaign. The Commission found that the DNC placed into its federal account only contributions that met the limitations and prohibitions of the Act and that it appears that no impermissible funds entered the federal election process.

  DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD: Documents from this matter are available from the Commissionís web site at http://eqs.sdrdc.com/eqs/searcheqs by entering 5316 under case number. They are also available in the FECs Public Records Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.
     
2. MUR 5089  
     
  RESPONDENTS: (a) Matta Tuchman for Congress, Daralyn E. Reed, treasurer

(b) Deborah Buelna

(c) Linda Coley

(d) Democratic Party of Orange County FEC PAC, Jim Pantone, treasurer

  COMPLAINANTS: Crusader
  SUBJECT: Fraudulent misrepresentation; disclaimer
  DISPOSITION: (a-c) Reason to believe, but took no further action*

[re: fraudulent misrepresentation]

Failed by a vote of 3-3 to find no reason to believe*

[re: disclaimer]

(b-d) No reason to believe*

[re: disclaimer]

The complainant received a direct mailing from the respondent and alleged that it did not contain a proper disclaimer.

The Commission was equally divided on whether the Tuchman campaign violated the Act by failing to place a proper disclaimer on a communication.

Vice Chair Weintraub and Commissioners McDonald and Thomas noted in their Statement of Reasons that the letter expressly advocated the defeat of Tuchmanís opponent and therefore required a disclaimer.

The Commission found that the Tuchman campaign violated the law by fraudulently misrepresenting themselves as writing on behalf of the Orange County Democrats in order to damage their opponent and her party, but decided to take no further action.

  DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD: Documents from this matter are available from the Commissionís web site at http://eqs.sdrdc.com/eqs/searcheqs by entering 5089 under case number. They are also available in the FECs Public Records Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.
     
3. MUR 5251  
     
  RESPONDENTS: (a) Friends of Joe Rogers (f/k/a Friends of Joe Rogers Exploratory Committee), Angela Wilhite, treasurer

(b) Joe Rogers

(c) State of Colorado

(d) Wells Fargo Corporation

  COMPLAINANTS: Steven J. Durham
  SUBJECT: Failure to file a Statement of Organization timely; excessive contribution; failure to properly itemize contributions; corporate contribution
  DISPOSITION: (a) Reason to believe, but took no further action*

[re: failure to file Statement of Organization timely]

Sent admonishment letter.

No reason to believe*

[re: failure to properly itemize contributions; excessive contribution; corporate contribution]

(b) Reason to believe, but took no further action*

[re: failure to file Statement of Organization timely]

Sent admonishment letter.

No reason to believe*

[re: excessive contribution; corporate contribution]

(c) No reason to believe*

[re: excessive contribution]

(d) No reason to believe*

[re: corporate contribution]

The complaint alleges that Joe Rogers Committee failed to file their Statement of Organization in a timely manner; failed to correctly itemize contributions; used state funds for a federal election and received corporate funds. The Commission found that the Rogers Committee filed their Statement of Organizations five weeks late. With regard to the other allegations, the Commission found there was no reason to believe that they failed to itemize contributions, received a corporate contribution, or received an excessive contribution from the state.

  DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD: Documents from this matter are available from the Commissionís web site at http://eqs.sdrdc.com/eqs/searcheqs by entering 5251 under case number. They are also available in the FECs Public Records Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.

*There are four administrative stages to the FEC enforcement process:

1. Receipt of proper complaint 3. "Probable cause" stage
2. "Reason to believe" stage 4. Conciliation stage

It requires the votes of at least four of the six Commissioners to take any action. The FEC can close a case at any point after reviewing a complaint. If a violation is found and conciliation cannot be reached, then the FEC can institute a civil court action against a respondent.

# # #