Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 6, 1973
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 6, 1973
[00.41.57] Mr. DASH. Now, you have referred in the testimony, Mr. Sloan, to a pre-April 7 period and a post-April 7 period. So that, we fully understand what you mean by that, this did refer to a new law, election law? -Mr. SLOAN. Yes, Sir, Mr. DASH. That was passed that took effect as of April 7? -Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir. Mr. DASH. Could you very briefly indicate that was the significance Of pre-April 7 funding find post-April funding? Mr. SLOAN. Well, the pre-April 7 period, as I understand it, from certainly the 1968 election and precedent, the interpretation had been Put on the Corrupt Practices Act, that prenomination fundraising activities of Presidential candidates were not required to be reported. This Made a tremendous difference in terms of' the administrative overhead how many people you had to keep track of, no requirement to have receipts. From an internal standpoint it is obviously a much easier thing to deal with. There was no disclosure. The post-April 7 campaign election law is very stringent, has massive accounting requirements, principally in the disclosure area. It also puts restrictions on media advertising and so forth. But what it essentially meant to us as a campaign was that in the middle of a campaign we had to essentially restructure, close down 450 committees and set up a whole new structure under a whole new set Of ground rules, Mr. DASH. Now, do you know, to your own knowledge, what Mr. Liddy was doing or what right he had to receive that $100,000 you disbursed to him? Mr. SLOAN. No, sir; I only knew he had the authority to receive it. Mr. DASH. And, as you indicated in your testimony, that Mr. Stans confirmed that arrangement and said that you do not want to know and he does not want to know? Did that raise any question in your mind when he said that to you? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir; but I think in all fairness, to put it in the context of the time, at that point in time I would have interpreted that kind of remark, because of the continuing problems between the political and finance committee, was that he was unhappy and had essentially thrown up his hands about the loss of control over the funding. Traditionally the role has been the finance people raise it and the political people spend it. However, there is a responsibility to finance a campaign to set realistic limits of what we imagine can be raised and to provide the mechanism to monitor the expenditures of a campaign so that the expenditures will be properly paced and you will have the wherewithal in the home stretch where you need it. I had the impression with regard to the cash funding situation that this was just a runaway situation that he lost the argument Mr. DASH. While Mr. Liddy was working as a counsel to the finance committee, did he have any responsibilities with the regular Committee To Re-Elect the President? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir' when Mr. Liddy came to the finance committee it was clearly understood, made known to me and to Secretary Stans, that he would be able to devote about 95-98 percent of his time to legal work for the finance committee. However, it was indicated to us that he would have continuing responsibility responsibilities ties with regard to the political committee which would take up a relatively small percentage of his time on special projects. It was not identified beyond that. Mr. DASH, Now, on the chart, which is exhibit No. 20, your next item there is Mr. Magruder. Is that Jeb Magruder, who was your superior? Mr. SLOAN. He was deputy campaign director on the political side of the campaign. I do not know how-the structures were sort of' parallel. Mr. DASH. The figure indicates $20,000 cash disbursement to him. Is that a correct figure? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir. Mr. DASH. And could you tell us briefly the circumstances of that payment to Mr. Magruder? Mr. SLOAN. That was to the best of my knowledge,, on his request to me. It would have been sometime probably early 1972 February or March, Somewhere in that period. He did indicate to me the purpose for which he made that request. Mr. DASH. NOW, the next name on the chart is Sandy in the amount of $50,000. Who is Sandy Lankler? Mr. SLOAN. I believe at the time we are talking about,, which would be during the early part of the campaign, I cannot pin down on this in terms of the actual disbursement, but he was at the time he came in to receive this money from Secretary Stans, he was to the best of MY recollection, was the political chairman for the Republican Party in Maryland. Mr. DASH. And did he receive $50,000 in cash? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir. [00.47.26]