Here are some thoughts I received via FReepmail:
“I ran a PAC years ago. Like 25 years ago, and haven’t kept up with the relevant laws as they would have changed over those years.
I can tell you it is a full time job, whether staff or volunteer, regardless of the PAC’s nature or size. (...) But whoever runs the FR PAC has to be knowledgeable about the relevant laws. Obviously, a lawyer specializing in election law would be aware of those regulations, but who wants to call their lawyer every day before doing anything? I.e., what is considered ‘coordinating’ with a campaign? What constitutes an in-kind contribution? How/if bundling can be done?
FR PAC might be able to work with a conservative group’s PAC that is already established in DC to share a staffer’s time and costs. Someone has to be designated to do the ‘nuts and bolts.’ Nuts and bolts of a FR PAC would be fundraising, tracking contributions and expenditures for FEC filings, coordinating with members in the various states, updating members of what the PAC is doing, and what its preferred candidates are doing. Maybe setting up meetings, rallies, etc.
I don’t yet have a picture of what y’all have in mind, but am trying to think of what was involved when I worked in this field. We had a Board that met quarterly, but with continuous intervening telephone conversations. We had people in most of the 57 states who would help with providing information, suggestions and/or introductions to candidates in their state or various congressional districts. When feasible I met with (non-incumbent) candidates, but someone connected to our PAC always did, and then would make recommendations on donations to his/her campaign. Donations over $X had to be approved by the board. As the primary staff person, I was also Treasurer, but IIRC, my public address was that of the trade association, not my home. I don’t know if a PO Box suffices.”
More from FReepmail:
“I’d say the first thing that has to be done is to establish very, VERY clear criteria for contributions to candidates. FReepers have a way of not agreeing among themselves on much of anything. IMO, the term “RINO” gets tossed out a little too frequently. (...) Some FReepers in TX or AL don’t understand how an otherwise conservative member from PA or MA would vote differently than, say, Jeff Sessions.
If it becomes an individual’s or group of individuals’ PAC, it will disintegrate very quickly. PACs are, by their nature, ‘special interest groups,’ emphasis on group. Give to one ‘wrong’ candidate and you lose your donor base. Obviously, some will donate to a FR PAC regardless, and it would be interesting to see how that holds up. Would it be worth the cost/time/effort put into a PAC if only the hard core stay with it? In that case, it’d be easier to just suggest to them who they may want to donate to directly.
The other side of that coin is: how many candidates would be willing to take the hard core positions FR PAC would require? Depending, again, on the congressional district or state, it might be unwise for a candidate to put him/herself into that box. Probably it would be best to have a pre-set list of positions with which any potential recipient would have to agree. I.e., the obvious, pro-life, pro-gun, but with as much specificity as possible.
Among FReepers, there are mostly ‘pro life’ folks, but then you get to the details .. some are no abortion, no way, no how. Others afford some flexibility for life of the mother, etc. A few are just pro-choice. Some believe everyone under the sun should own as many weapons of any variety as s/he wants, others believe in pro-choice. But, in asking people to donate to this PAC, they’d have to know to what extent the candidate is on board with them. Some will require 100%, others 80%. Given the congressional district, some would take 50%, others would never go for that.”