This file contains archived live captions of the open meeting of the Federal Election Commission held on March 23, 2017.  This file is not a transcript of the meeting, and it has not been reviewed for accuracy or approved by the Federal Election Commission.


>> Hello, everyone.  Do we have any late submitted documents.
>> I move to suspend the document to consider the draft supplemental notice of disposition on reg 201406 candidate debates and agenda document the FEC management email policy memorandum.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair.  All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> Opposed?  50.  Next item is the draft supplemental notice of disposition on the candidates and debates.
>> Thank you, Chairman Walter.  In September 2014 the commission received a petition for rulemaking regarding the regulation at 110.13 C is petition asked the commission to amend that regulation.  To include sponsors of election vice presidential and presidential debates to include a threshold in the debates and second to require sponsors of general election, presidential and vice presidential debate to have a set of objective unbiased criteria for debate participation that do not require candidate to satisfy a polling threshold on November 20, 2015 the commission published in the Federal Register a notice of disposition in which it explained why it would not initiate rulemaking.  This year the U.S. district court for the District of Columbia failed to consider the presented evidence and explain its decision.  Court ordered to reconsider the disposition of the petition and issue a new decision consistent with the court's opinion by April 3rd.  The draft document is a supplemental notice of disposition explaining consistent with the court's order.  Why the commission has decided not to initiate a rulemaking at this time.  We'd be happy to address any questions that you may have.
>> Thank you, ma'am.  Any comment?  At this time?  No comment?  Do I hear a motion orÊ Weintraub.
>> I just want to say I'm not going to be able to support this I have said before I think we ought to do a rulemaking on this.  I think one thing that became clear certainly in the last cycle is that there are a lot of people out there who would like to have more choices and like to see the process opened up for how we elect our highest officials in the land and I think that's something that we really ought to take a look at.  We have not taken a hard look at these regulations in long time and I think it's overdue.  So with due respect to my colleagues I will be dissenting.
>> Any further comment?  None.  Do I hear a motion?
>> Mr.ÊChairman, IÊ from what I understood that the counsel may have a small technical edit they might recommend.  Thank you.
>> Thank you, commissioner, when it get to the point of moving approval ODC would recommend and my understanding is this is acceptable all the commissioners who intend to vote in favor of the motion.  There's a footnote three that we recommend relocating that from where it is now to the end of the sentence at page 21 line 10.  So it'd be after the wordÊ"stage".  Simply moving it.  Not changing it.
>> Make a motion to that effect orÊ
>> Thank you, Mr.ÊChairman, I move approval of the document which pertains to reg 201406 candidate debates that we move approval of the draft supplemental notice of disposition with the change suggested here at the table by officer of general counsel to footnote three to page 21.
>> Thank you.  Any debate?  Any questions? If not all in favor?
>> Aye.  Aye.
>> All opposed.
>> No.
>> The ayes have it.  41 with Commissioner Weintraub opposing it and myself, the vice chair, Commissioner Goodman and the other commissioners in favor.
>> (Sneezes).
>> Let's the next item was the memorandum on the Colorado republican committee CRC A 1312.  Are we holding that over to the next meet something.
>> We received some last minute information from the counsel for the Colorado republican committee.  I believe it came in on Tuesday.  I focused on it yet it included for example many scripts that peaked my interest in some of the express advocacy analysis on other mailers that may be covered by this audit and the conclusions in this audit report and so I just need more time to review both the submission this week from counsel and I believe audit is also provide copies of the 77 direct mail pieces that are covered by the audit itself.
>> Okay.  Thank you.  Anyone else?  Okay, the matter will be held over to the next might.  The next item is proposed final audit report on kindÊ excuse me, on kind for Congress committee.  And A 1502.  And as I understand it that matter has been resolved and we can go off.  So that matter's completed.  The next is proposed final audit report on the Kansas A 1308.  That's been resolved as well?  Moving quick ly.
>> We run a tight ship.
>> Sometimes.  Next is chief FOIA officer report.  AndÊ Commissioner Goodman?
>> Mr.ÊChairman, this is a report that apparently the commission owes the Department of Justice every year to report on its fiscal year FOIA functions and I am going to remove my objection to this report so that it can go to the Department of Justice.  However, I did want to call the commission's attention to it and I didn't want this to be one of those reports that quietly went from the agency to the Department of Justice without some attention to it because I think there's some very important information in it.  And some data.  And I won't belabor those.  Everyone can review the report and look at the functionality of this agency's FOIA function.  I did note one thing thatÊ oneÊ statement in it that the agency is making and that's that the agency has not done a thorough review of its FOIA function.  In quite some time I know that we've had some FOIA discussions regarding specific FOIAs recently.  I've been told that in light of those some policies and practices are changing in the office of general counsel with respect to how we handle FOIAs in process FOIAs.  And I believe that focusing on this report and the data that's in this report should be a time of inflection for the commission on how the commission in the face of the office of the general counsel regard the functioning of our FOIA office.  We have never adopted a formal directive or policy recording our FOIA functions.  And we have never even formally appointed a chief FOIA officer in the agency which is called upon by the regulation.  So I will be addressing FOIA in more detail in the coming months, but I believe that I would encourage all commissioners to read this report that the Department of Justice carefully and I believe that itÊ it supports a more hands on approach by the commission.  So at this point I will remove my objection, let this report go to the Department of Justice.
>> I completely share that view and I wonder if we should form a committee to give some attention to this.  It does need some real consideration.  Especially with a couple issues that have arisen recently.  I think after this might we can talk toÊ
>> I'd be happyÊ
>> Maybe a person can do that and people (no audio) stand back and report.
>> Mr.ÊChairman?
>> Yes.
>> I'm pretty sure we have a chief FOIA officer.
>> A darn fine one if I might say so.  But there was an official designation of the chief FOIA officer it was back in '06 and the function moved to the office of general counsel.  I wasn't (inaudible) provide commission at that time.
>> We don't ever (inaudible) shift the power from one person to another and I think when we look at that (inaudible) there wasn't anything that we could find on that one.  So if there's nothing more than that (no audio) formalized by the policy the (inaudible) (no audio) is where the privilege was asserted by the office of general counsel.  The vote at the commission level was 33 on invoking the privilege which means the (inaudible) did not have four vote sufficient to invoke the privilege and, yet, the privilege was in passive voice asserted on the commission so those are the types of issues, Mr.ÊChairman, you and I have discussed (no audio) I just believe that we ought to, as a commission, look at formalizing some of the procedures and expectations of this program.
>> By the next meeting we'll have a committee formed and be off and running.  Anything further on this matter the next matter is FEC, let's say, reg 204 furthering and continuing the appropriation act 2015.  Commissioner Goodman.
>> I'm sorry.  The EMA management policy.  Mr.ÊChairman, this is notÊ this is not my initiative.
>> No.  I apologize.
>> This is an initiative from the staff director and the secretary's office.  The federal law requires usÊ
>> I'm sorry, I skipped that.  On myÊ for the record there's a policy to withdrawal and resubmission.
>> Was it fair to discuss at this point?
>> Sure.
>> I don't think we have to decide this today however I would note this has been floating with the agency for some time I believe theÊ how long, when wasÊ the withdrawal and resubmission.  When was the first policy floated to the commission.
>> Last summer.  Well, weÊ it actually would be earlier than that.  We've had some informally been circulated for commissioner comment.  I would say we've been working on this since at least some time in 2014.  Maybe earlier.  But I think sometime in 2014.
>> And I believe this is a policy that we are required to have in place by archives to direct and formalize within the agency those documents particularly electronic documents that are to be preserved for posterity and I just think that this was held up for various reasons last year.  And I just think that we ought to move forward and adopt a formal policy as required by statute.  I would note that Commissioner Weintraub has made some constructive suggestions for editing the proposal by staff and I support the memorandum and the additions proposed by Commissioner Weintraub and Mr.ÊChairman, I would just ask that the commissioners focus on this and that perhaps we could get this resolved in April?
>> Commissioner Weintraub.
>> I'm happy to move forward with this.  I appreciate the support of my colleague.  I think staff did an excellent job of putting together a draft policy for us and my only concern was I thought perhaps the definition of capstone officials has gone a bit too narrowly so I propose to expand it to someÊ a few other people in the agency who have substantial responsibility and whose records might be informative to the public at some point in the future when, if anybody was ever interested enough to look.
>> Mr.ÊChairman, I might add that I discussed this with staff in the meantime in absence of a policy, all electronic records are being preserved in the absence of a policy and so I think it behooves us to give staff some direction and the IT department some direction in what the agency will formally require to be kept going forward as well.
>> Okay and I would like to put this over to the next meeting.  Item eight.  The regulation 201410 implementing the consolidated and further continuing appropriations act, 2015.
>> Mr.ÊChairman.
>> Commissioner Goodman.
>> Without objection I would like to discuss the next two items together on the agenda.  I have a resolution for both of them as one resolution.
>> Go ahead.
>> Okay.  The commission has received two petitions urging the commission to undertake rulemakings with respect to political party matters.  
         I see the proposals as related because they both discuss regulation of political parties.  One actually proposes some additional regulation to implement the consolidated and further continuing appropriations act of 2015 which created new national party accounts for the three major committees of both national parties.  In addition, we received a petition from the chairman of the Minnesota democratic FarmerLabor Party supported by many public comments from state and local political parties of all sides. 
Urging some regulatory changes with respect to the regulation of state and local political parties.  And it would be my proposal that the commission, having issued pubÊ notices of public availability with respect to both of those petitions and having received significant comment, meaningful comment, that the commission open a rulemaking with respect to political parties, and acting on both petitions.  And I have set forth what I believe from the comments that we received.  And I have not discussed this with all commissioners to determine whether there is interest in moving forward now or taking more time on this.  I don't intend to force this to a vote if people need more time to consider it.  So, but I'm certainly open to discussing it now or as we move into April.
>> I think it's really timely.  I'd like to have at least to the next meeting to kind of get through it becauseÊ as I work my way through it in trying to go back through some of these sections.  I'd like a little bit more time but I'm pleased to see it on the agenda.  So is there any further comment at this point?  Consider it on the agenda for the next meeting.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you for bringing thisÊ putting all the work into this.  I think that'sÊ oh, let's see, I guess that's all we have for theÊ are there any administrative matters.
>> There are none, sir.
>> Thank you very much.  The meeting is adjourned. 
>> In fifteen minutes we'll resume with the executive session.