In the interesting article on his website (see p.4), Bob Bauer argues
against Foley's and Tobin's effort to recommend concrete criteria (BCRA's
definition of "federal election activities") for the "major purpose" test
that the FEC uses to help decide whether a Section 527 political
organization or other nonprofit group is a political committee under FECA.
In making his case, Bauer emphasizes that Congress "did not elect" to apply
the definition of federal election activities in Section 431 (20)(A)
"outside the context of political parties" which have a "close relationship"
with "candidates and officeholders."

But this is not completely accurate. In section 441 (i)(e)(4),Permitting
Certain Solicitations, Congress referred specifically to the federal
elections activities definition in providing that candidates and
officeholders could not solicit not more than $20,000 per year on behalf of
501c nonprofit organizations (and from individuals only, not corporations or
unions) for two of the four defined federal election activities (voter
registration within 120 days of an election and voter id, get-out-the-vote,
generic campaign activity). Candidates and officeholders could not solicit
anything at all for 501c groups whose activities or principal purpose
involved the third activity -- public communications promoting or attacking
candidates. (The fourth federal election activity, services by party
officials spending more than a quarter of their time on federal elections,
is not applicable to 501c nonprofit groups). In this section, there is no
mention of -- and no mention of or provision for -- candidate/officeholder
solicitations of any kind for the 527 groups at issue.

Thus, contrary to Bob's argument, Congress used the definition of federal
election activities not soley to refer to restrictions on political parties,
but also as criteria for determining permissions and limitations for
candidate/officeholders solicitations for nonprofit organizations. Whatever
one thinks of the result, it does not seem inappropriate for Tobin and Foley
to suggest similar criteria (which they do not claim to be legally mandatory
from BCRA) as they attempt to develop means of regulating 527s and other
nonprofits primarily engaged in influencing elections.




Steve Weissman
Associate Director for Policy
Campaign Finance Institute
1990 M. St. NW Suite 380
Washington, DC 20036
202-969-8890
sweissman@cfinst.org

Steve Weissman
Associate Director for Policy
Campaign Finance Institute
1990 M. St. NW Suite 380
Washington, DC 20036
202-969-8890
sweissman@cfinst.org