HOME / PRESS OFFICE

FEC Home Page

For Immediate Release
December 5, 2005
Contact: Kelly Huff
Bob Biersack
Ian Stirton
George Smaragdis
COMPLIANCE CASE MADE PUBLIC
 

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

1.

MUR 5026

RESPONDENTS:

(a)   Zimmer 2000, Inc. (NJ), Maria Chappa, treasurer   

(b)   Fox Media Consulting LLC

(c)   Tom Blakely

(d)  Jamestown Associates LLC

(e)   Larry Weitzner

(f)    New Jersey Citizens for Tax Reform “NJCTR” (FKA         Citizens for Tax Reform)

(g)   Dick Zimmer

(h)   Megan Jencik

COMPLAINANT:

David Plouffe, Executive Director, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee

SUBJECT:

Corporate contributions; failure to report contributions

DISPOSITION:

(a)        Probable cause to believe, but took no further action*[re: knowing and willful corporate contributions and failure to report contributions]

(b-e)    Probable cause to believe, but took no further action* [re: knowing and willful corporate contributions]

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

(g-h)    Took no action*

           The complaint alleged that Zimmer 2000, along with a number of other entities and individuals, participated in a scheme to coordinate radio and direct mail advertisements opposing Dick Zimmer’s opponent for New Jersey’s 12th district. All respondents other than NJCTR replied that the complaint failed to present evidence that the advertisements at issue contained express advocacy and that the alleged coordination was not sufficient to convert the issue advocacy advertisements into contributions. NJCTR did not submit a response to the complaint. The Commission found probable cause to believe that Zimmer 2000, Inc., Larry Weitzner, Jamestown Associates, Tom Blakely, and Fox Media Consulting violated the law, but used its prosecutorial discretion to take no further action. Statements of Reasons were issued by Chairman Thomas and Commissioners Mason, McDonald and Weintraub.

DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD:

 

Documents from this matter are available from the Commission’s web site at http://www.fec.gov by entering 5026 under case number in the Enforcement Query System.  They are also available in the FEC’s Public Records Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.

     

1.

MUR 5367

RESPONDENTS:

(a)   U. S. Representative Darrell Issa (CA/49)

(b)   Rescue California…Recall Gray Davis, Vona Copp,    treasurer

COMPLAINANT:

Raquelle de la Rocha

SUBJECT:

Non-federal funds raised, spent and received by a federal candidate; corporate contributions; excessive contributions

DISPOSITION:

(a-b)    Reason to believe, but took no further action* [re: Non-federal funds raised, spent and received by a federal candidate]   

           The complainant alleged that Representative Darrell Issa violated the law by soliciting non-federal funds on behalf of Rescue California…Recall Gray Davis. Rescue California, an unincorporated state ballot measure committee organized under section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code, fought to remove former California Governor Gray Davis from office through a recall process. Representative Issa stated that he did not violate the Act because, as a candidate for state office, his fundraising activities on behalf of Rescue California fall within the exception to the non-Federal funds ban. The Commission found reason to believe that both respondents violated the law. Since then, the Commission concluded in AO 2004-25 that the anti-corruption purpose of section 441i(e) is not furthered by restricting federal officeholders from donating their personal funds. Representative Issa provided information which demonstrated that he used his personal funds to make donations by the Greene Properties (a closely held corporation he owns with his wife). The Commission decided to take no further action.  A Statement of Reasons was issued by Commissioner Weintraub.

DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD:

 

Documents from this matter are available from the Commission’s web site at http://www.fec.gov by entering 5367 under case number in the Enforcement Query System.  They are also available in the FEC’s 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.

# # #