FEC Adopts New Sample Donor Response Form for LLCs

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) announced a new sample donor response form for contributions made by limited liability companies (LLCs).

Committees are required to report certain attribution information for contributions from LLCs. To assist committees and encourage compliance the FEC adopted the new sample donor response form, which was announced on April 16.

The form will help satisfy a committee requirement to show its “best efforts” to obtain, maintain, and submit information mandated by law. By requesting completion of the sample form by the donor following the receipt of the contribution, a committee is in a stronger position to be in compliance.

Current regulations require LLCs provide accurate and complete attribution information to the recipient committee at the time that a contribution is made. The LLC must also affirm to the recipient committee that the LLC is eligible to make the contribution.

On April 10, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, aimed to ensure individuals provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.

The bill prohibits states from accepting and processing an application to register to vote in a federal election unless the applicant presents documentary proof of U.S. citizenship. The bill also requires states to establish an alternative process under which an applicant may submit other evidence to demonstrate U.S. citizenship.

Additionally, the legislation allows for a private right of action against an election official who registers an applicant who fails to present documentary proof of U.S. citizenship. The SAVE Act, which specifies the documents deemed as acceptable proof, will now be considered by the Senate.

On April 11, New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham vetoed a lobbying disclosure bill aimed at increasing disclosure.

House Bill 143 required lobbyists provide more details about the specific legislation lobbied, whether legislation was supported or opposed and if their positions changed, and the names of a lobbyist’s employer that lobbied on the legislation, either directly or through the registered lobbyist. The bill also required that if a lobbyist or lobbyist’s employer commenced lobbying on legislation after the adjournment of a legislative session, a lobbying activity report would have been required to have been filed prior to the end of the time period in which the governor could have acted on legislation.

In her House Executive Message No. 21 vetoing the bill, the governor wrote, “ While I support the intent of this legislation, [House Bill] 143 needs work. For example, it imposes an onerous requirement that lobbyists or their employers file these reports within forty-eight hours of commencing the lobbying activity – including any time their ‘position on legislation has changed’- irrespective of weekends and holidays.”

The bill would have also required lobbying reports be preserved for a period of 10 years.

A new bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives would prohibit former members and elected officers of the U.S. Congress from lobbying Congress at any time after leaving office.

The legislation,  the Halt Unchecked Member Benefits with Lobbying Elimination (HUMBLE) Act, would also ban members of Congress from owning or trading individual stocks; prevent members from serving on corporate boards while they are serving in Congress; eliminate access to members-only perks for former members; and eliminate automatic pay raises for members.

Additionally, the HUMBLE ACT, introduced in the House on April 3 by Rep. Angie Craig,  prohibits the use of taxpayer funds for first-class airline tickets, including for legislative branch employees, and only permits coach-class accommodations.

The Council of the District of Columbia approved temporary legislation barring the public from hearing or seeing many types of the council’s deliberations.

In a trio of companion legislation, which declare the existence of an emergency with respect to the need to amend the Open Meetings Act of 2010, the definition of meeting is changed. The legislation provides for a public body’s ability to be privately briefed about potential terrorist or public health threats so long as no official action is taken, exempts from the act meetings between the council and the mayor provided that no official action is taken at such meeting,  and provides that a meeting will be deemed open to the public if the public body takes steps reasonably calculated to allow the public to view or hear the meeting while the meeting is taking place, or, if doing so is not technologically feasible, as soon thereafter as reasonably practicable.

The legislation adopted on April 1 lasts for 90 days under its emergency basis. The mayor still has the ability to veto the legislation. On April 22, the council will hold a public hearing to consider a permanent version of the bill.

On April 1, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its audit of federal lobbying compliance for 2024.

For the audit, the GAO reviewed a stratified sample of 100 quarterly disclosure reports filed for the third and fourth quarters of calendar year 2023 and the first and second quarters of calendar year 2024. They also reviewed random samples of 160 LD-203 reports for the year-end 2023 and midyear 2024 reports.

Among its findings, the GAO concluded 93% of filers of lobbying disclosure reports were able to provide documentation to support reported income and expenses, 5% of LD-203 reports were missing reportable contributions, and 97% of lobbyists who filed new registrations also filed LD-2 reports as required for the quarter in which they first registered. The audit estimates at least 21% of all lobbying disclosure reports did not properly disclose formerly held covered positions.

The 54-page report is titled “2024 Lobbying Disclosure: Observations on Compliance with Requirements.”

On March 27, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) held its scheduled meeting, but with only four commissioners instead of six and without a chairperson. Ellen Weintraub, who was just elected as chair on December 12 of last year, was not present and is currently not listed on the FEC’s website as a current commissioner.

Weintraub had received a letter dated January 31 of this year from President Donald J. Trump informing her he was removing her from the FEC “effective immediately.” While there remains a question of the legality of the firing, the FEC has still been conducting business and holding meetings with just the four commissioners. On January 20, Commissioner Sean J. Cooksey had resigned from the FEC, bringing its number down to five at the time.

The FEC website lists four commissioners with two vacancies: Vice Chairman James E. “Trey” Trainor III and Allen Dickerson, both Republicans, and Shana M. Broussard and Dara Lindenbaum, both Democrats. The FEC requires at least four commissioners to agree on any official action. No more than three commissioners can be from the same party. As it stands, all decisions must be unanimous between the four commissioners. Commissioners are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

At the meeting, Commissioner Dickerson nominated Commissioner Broussard for the position of chair. Following the motion, the commission held over its consideration to a future meeting.

In an Executive Order recently issued by President Donald J. Trump relating to voting in federal elections, the president also directed the U.S. Attorney General to prioritize the enforcement of existing laws both preventing foreign nationals from making political contributions in U.S. elections and prohibiting lobbying by organizations or entities that have received any federal funds.

The majority of the order, entitled Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections, concerns various aspects of voter registration, verification of citizenship of voters, illegal voting, and substantiation of state compliance with federal voting laws.

The order, issued on March 25, directs the U.S. Attorney General to act in consultation with the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury.

Sometime in 2025, a by-election will be coming in Quebec for the provincial riding of Arthabaska for a seat in the province’s National Assembly of Quebec. MNA Éric Lefebvre resigned on March 18 to run with the Conservative Party of Canada for the federal riding of Richmond-Arthabaska (Quebec) for a seat in the Canadian House of Commons.

The by-election date in the Arthabaska electoral division has not yet been determined, according to Elections Quebec. Prime Minister François Legault has six months to call a by-election.

The federal by-election for the electoral district of Halifax (Nova Scotia) to fill a vacancy in the House of Commons has been cancelled.

Originally scheduled for April 14, Elections Canada announced that because A federal general election has been called for April 28, the previously scheduled by-election for the electoral district will be held on that date. Technically, the electoral district may change for the general election and have new electoral boundaries.

Member of Parliament Andy Fillmore, who had occupied the seat, resigned on August 31 of last year to run for Halifax mayor. On March 23, Prime Minister Mark Carney called the snap federal election because his Liberal Party was not able to form a majority government.

On March 23, Prime Minister Mark Carney called a snap federal election for April 28. Carney won the race to become leader of Canada’s ruling Liberal Party earlier this month. In January, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had stepped down, requiring the ruling Liberal Party to hold their election to replace him. A federal election was expected to be held on October 20 of this year, but the Liberal Party was not able to form a majority government, which caused Carney to have to call for this earlier election date.

On March 19, the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, Stéphane Perrault, received official notice from the Speaker of the House of Commons that the seat for Eglinton–Lawrence (Ontario) is vacant. Marco Mendicino resigned his seat in Parliament to become Chief of Staff to newly elected Prime Minister Mark Carney. Under the law, if a vacancy occurs less than nine months before the fixed date for a general election, no by-election is called, and the seat remains vacant until the general election. Therefore, no by-election will be held to fill this vacant seat.

On March 9, former central banker Mark Carney won the race to become leader of Canada’s ruling Liberal Party. Carney won 86% of the votes cast, beating former Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland. In January, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had announced he would step down, which forced the ruling Liberal Party to hold their election to replace him. While a federal election must be held by October 20 of this year, the Liberal Party is not likely to form a majority government, and so Carney is expected to call for an earlier election date.

On March 7, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled Ontario’s law limiting spending by third-party political advertising violates the right to vote guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom.

The court concluded in its decision that, “By design, [the law] creates absolute disproportionality, or a disproportionality that is so marked on its face that it allows political parties to drown out the voices of third parties on political issues from reaching citizens during an entire year of legislative activity.”

Ontario’s Election Finances Act restricts the amount that third parties can spend on political advertising in the year before a provincial election period. Specifically, the law limits spending on third party advertising to $24,000 in any one electoral district and to $600,000 in total during the 12-month period before an election period. While it also regulates political advertising by political parties during the six-month period before an election, they are not subject to the same spending limits or time period restrictions.

The court reasoned, “When political parties face no limitations, curtailing the ability of third parties to use platforms that may be effective in reaching certain voters has the potential to overwhelm the political discourse and drown out third parties, thus interfering with citizens’ access to information letting them weigh and establish their views during an important time in the democratic cycle.”

A third party is any person or entity, other than a registered candidate, registered constituency association, or registered party, engaging in election advertising and may be a corporation, an unincorporated association, or a partnership.