PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.3748 / 105th Congress

FEC Reauthorization Act of 1998

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 342.

Official summary

Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Jun 25, 1998

FEC Reauthorization Act of 1998 - Amends the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) to authorize appropriations for the Federal Election Commission for FY 1999. Conditions availability of a specified amount of such funds on the Commission adopting a re-prioritization plan for improving enforcement procedures and preventing the unnecessary dismissal of appropriate enforcement actions. Provides for the appointment of the Commission's staff director and general counsel by an affirmative vote of four Commissioners. Prohibits: (1) the staff director and general counsel of the Commission from serving for more than four consecutive years without reappointment; (2) an individual appointed to finish an unexpired term of office of a staff director or general counsel from serving beyond that term; or (3) a person serving as staff director or general counsel from subsequently serving in any Commission capacity unless reappointed. Sets forth procedures allowing the Commission to find that a person violated FECA provisions involving the reporting of receipts or disbursements and to impose civil monetary penalties. Entitles any person to file a petition with the appropriate U.S. district court to obtain a review of an adverse determination under such procedures. Requires the Commission's general counsel, within 90 days after the time for responding to a filed complaint has elapsed for all respondents, to provide a recommendation to the Commission regarding whether there is sufficient reason to investigate the violation alleged in the complaint.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Thomas, William M. [R-CA-21] · R–CA

Committees

  • Committee on House Administration
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 342.

    2. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Oversight. H. Rept. 105-606.

    3. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Oversight. H. Rept. 105-606.

    4. Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 6 - 3.

    5. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

    6. Referred to the House Committee on House Oversight.

    7. Introduced in House

    8. Introduced in House

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

    Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze H.R.3748 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine H.R.3748 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine H.R.3748 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine H.R.3748 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.

    View full prompt & sources