FEC Drops Suit Against Forbes

Writing a column is not the same as writing a check, the Federal Election Commission has decided.

In papers filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in New York City, the FEC agreed to dismiss its suit against publisher Steve Forbes. The commission sued Forbes last September, charging that the columns he wrote for his magazine were illegal contributions to his 1996 presidential campaign. Forbes may run again in 2000.

Forbes is president and editor in chief of Forbes magazine, but took a leave of absence during his campaign.

The FEC voted in closed session to dismiss the suit. The six-member commission is equally divided among party lines, and four votes are needed for any action. The vote was not disclosed. Three new members joined the FEC since the suit was filed.

"The reasoning that led to the Forbes suit holds that once you declare as a candidate for office, you leave your First Amendment rights behind," said one commissioner who voted to drop the case, David Mason. "A substantially new set of commissioners has rejected that reasoning."

Forbes noted that his columns did not specifically urge a vote for or against any candidate, including himself, and therefore could not be regulated by the FEC. Among the topics discussed were abortion, taxes, term limits and interleague baseball.

"This case represented an egregious and unconstitutional effort to restrict and control basic political expression and freedom of speech and press," Forbes said Thursday.

The FEC had tried to reach a settlement with Forbes over the issue, then went to court charging Forbes Inc. with making illegal corporate contributions, and Forbes' presidential campaign with failing to report the contributions.

Forbes spent $38 million of his own money on the campaign. The FEC valued the columns at $94,900.

The company issued a statement praising the FEC's decision.

"We vehemently objected to the FEC's assertions that we violated the federal election laws and feel vindicated that the commissioners have terminated this matter in our favor," the company said.

Some media critics questioned during the campaign whether Forbes should be writing the column while running for president, calling it a conflict of interest.

And a few of Forbes' earlier columns were attacked by one of his GOP primary opponents, Texas Sen. Phil Gramm. Gramm criticized him for endorsing Sen. Edward Kennedy's national health care plan in 1973 and claimed other Forbes' columns supported allowing gays in the military, liberalizing the nation's immigration laws and raising the gasoline tax to $1.50 a gallon.

Written By Jonathan D. Salant