AO 2024-14: The cost for hybrid television ads may be evenly split between a party and a candidate

A party committeeand the principal campaign committeeof a candidate may evenly split the cost of a hybrid television advertisement when the time and space devoted to the candidate does not exceed the time and space devoted to generically referenced candidates within the advertisement.

Background

DSCC and Rosen for Nevada, the principal campaign committee of Senator Jacky Rosen, ask if they may split equally the costs of hybrid television advertising disseminated in Nevada. The advertisements are described as clearly identifying the Senator and equally promoting the Senator's candidacy and generic candidates of the Democratic party.

Analysis

Although FEC regulations and past advisory opinions do not definitively address the appropriate allocation of payments for the proposed type of communication, the Commission noted that no in-kind contributionresults where two or more committees properly attribute the costs of a given communication. The regulation at 11 CFR 106.1(a) states that expenditures made on behalf of more than one clearly identified candidate "shall be attributed to each such candidate according to the benefit reasonably expected to be derived." For a broadcast communication, the attribution is "determined by the proportion of space or time devoted to each candidate" compared to the total space or time devoted to all candidates. This regulation does not strictly apply in this case, however, as it does not contemplate an expenditure made on behalf of one clearly identified candidate and other generically referenced candidates.

The Commission has previously addressed a similar issue in AO 2006-11 (Washington Democratic State Central Committee), which concluded that hybrid mass mailings advocating for a clearly identified candidate as well as generically referenced candidates of the same party must have no less than 50 percent of the costs paid for by the clearly identified candidate, because advocacy of the clearly identified candidate was the most salient feature of such a communication.

The Commission concluded that the framework utilized in AO 2006-11 provides an appropriate way to allocate the costs as proposed, with portions of the advertisement that feature Senator Rosen being allocated as candidate advocacy, and at least 50 percent of costs paid for by the Senator's campaign.

Date Issued: October 10, 2024; Length: 10 pages

Citations

Regulations

11 CFR 106.1(a)
Allocation of expenses between candidates

11 CFR 109.21
What is a "coordinated communication"?

Advisory opinions

AO 2006-11
Washington Democratic State Central Committee

Resources

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.