Posted August 23, 2006 by Paul S. Ryan

Unity 08 Political Committee Status is Still a Slam Dunk

The Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21 today filed a second set of comments with the FEC regarding an advisory opinion request by Unity 08 (AOR 2006–20).  Unity 08, a tax-exempt organization under section 527 of the federal tax code, asks the Commission to declare that the organization is not a “political committee” and, consequently, that it is not required to comply with federal political committee contribution limits, source prohibitions and reporting requirements.  Why a second set of comments on the same AOR?  Because Unity 08 has now taken not one, not two, not three, but four bites at the apple in its attempt to convince the FEC that it is not a political committee.

Unity 08 filed its AOR on May 30, 2006.  The Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21 filed comments June 19 in response to that filing.  In a June 21 post on this blog, “Unity 08 Political Committee Status is a Slam Dunk,” we explained: “Though there may be close calls regarding the question of whether a particular organization is a ‘political committee’ under federal campaign finance law, Unity 08 isn’t one of them.  As sure as the sun rises in the east, Unity 08 is a federal ‘political committee.’”  This is just as surely the case two months later.

The FEC’s general counsel agrees and produced a draft advisory opinion 2006–20 on July 13, which was scheduled for consideration by the Commission at its July 20, 2006 meeting.  The general counsel, consistent with our June 19 comments, concluded “that Unity 08 must register as a political committee and therefore is subject to the reporting requirements and limitations and prohibitions of the Act.”

But the day before the Commission’s July 20 meeting, Unity 08 submitted two comments objecting to the general counsel’s draft advisory opinion.  Then, at its July 20 meeting, the Commission deferred consideration of the general counsel’s draft until its meeting on August 29.

On August 16, Unity 08 filed an extensive supplement to its AOR, in yet another attempt to sway the Commission before its August 29 meeting.  The Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21 filed supplemental comments today, addressing new arguments raised by Unity 08 in its three most recent filings with the Commission.

We make clear in our latest comments that Unity 08’s supplemental comments change nothing with respect to the FEC general counsel’s correct conclusion that Unity 08 is a federal “political committee.”

Unity 08 states in its original AOR, in its AOR supplement, and on its Web site, that its primary goal is to elect a Unity Ticket for President and Vice President in 2008.  Unity 08’s Web site, for example, states (as of today) that “Unity08 is a citizens’ movement to get our country back on track by nominating and electing a Unity Ticket in the ‘08 presidential election to promote leadership, not partisanship.”

FECA’s definition of “political committee,” on its face, applies to 527 organizations like Unity 08, which have as their major purpose raising and spending funds to influence federal elections.  Contrary to Unity 08’s assertions, for the reasons detailed in our comments and in our earlier blog post, the FECA definitions of “political committee” and “expenditure” are not limited to the “express advocacy” standard when applied to organizations like Unity 08 with a “major purpose” of influencing federal elections.

Because Unity 08’s goal is electing a Unity Ticket for president and vice president in 2008, all of its disbursements are “for the purpose of influencing” a federal election and clearly meet the statutory definition of “expenditure.”  Therefore, when Unity 08’s spending exceeds $1,000, the organization will have met the statutory test for “political committee” status and, at that time, must register with the FEC as a “political committee.”  Federal statutes, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, demand this result—and the FEC should advise Unity 08 accordingly.