The top regulatory agency for federal election laws is throwing open its doors to what campaign finance lawyers call an unprecedented self-examination of its operating procedures, a process many involved say is expected to reduce the burden on an already overworked agency.

The two-day public hearings follow an extensive public comment period during which virtually every major election lawyer in the country submitted thoughts on Federal Election Commission operations. Many were asked to testify before the commission in advance of what some say could be significant overhauls.

Several lawyers said they expected the results of the multi-day confab to include more rights for those accused, justly or unjustly, of violating campaign finance laws. 

Following a similar, though more limited, hearing in 2003, those accused of violations were allowed to contest filings in hearings, and this time respondents are expected to gain new rights.

Many of the 25 public comments filed recommend that the commission should do more to weed out frivolous complaints early in the process. Some campaigns will file complaints against opponents even without merit, if only to drum up negative press close to an election.

“There is an emerging consensus that the FEC needs to be more discriminating in selecting which complaints to pursue, and that the agency should be dismissing more complaints that are clearly frivolous and filed for purely partisan reasons,” said Rob Kelner, a Republican attorney with Covington & Burling LLP whose clients include the National Republican Congressional Committee.

“The common theme was to reduce the frequency and burdensomeness of investigations by providing mechanisms to ensure that only when there’s sufficient facts should an investigation be begun, and that an investigation should be terminated based on a motion by the respondent,” said James Bopp Jr., a prominent conservative lawyer who runs the James Madison Center for Free Speech.

In short, Bopp and others agreed, the commission should have additional power, with help from a respondent, to determine early that a complaint is without merit.

Though those in the regulatory community are often asked to submit comments on specific aspects of the FEC’s operations, attorneys said this meeting is different. 

“What is very unusual about this is just the breadth of the topic,” said Marc Elias, a Democratic lawyer with Perkins Coie who is handling Senate hopeful Al Franken’s legal strategy in Minnesota. “What they’re asking us to do is to comment on how the agency itself functions, and that's pretty unusual.”

“The commission should be congratulated for doing this,” he added. “The commissioners have asked the regulating community to tell them the good, the bad and the ugly.”

Kelner said that the scope of the meeting is “unprecedented.”

Thanks to the wide mandate set forth by the open agenda, both McGahn and those who will testify before him are hopeful that big changes will result.

Commissioners will also face suggestions on how to improve transparency and how to better receive input from those with stakes in election cases, said Jan Witold Baran, an election lawyer at Wiley Rein LLP in Washington.

Baran also said he expects improvements in the process by which all-important advisory opinions are approved.

“Currently, there is no opportunity for people who submitted an advisory opinion request to be heard from when the commission debates” that request, Baran said. 

Advisory opinions from the commission guide candidates through uncharted campaign finance territory, and, as online and other new fundraising techniques become more important, new ground is broken on an increasingly frequent basis.

Most attorneys who keep a close eye on the FEC say those testifying on behalf of the regulatory community have sounded the same themes in seeking more rights for those accused of wrongdoing, and for greater input into the rule-making process.

“It’s remarkable the consistency throughout the comment [period] regardless if it’s a Republican lawyer or a Democratic lawyer or a campaign lawyer or a 501(c)(3) lawyer,” McGahn said. “I hope [the meeting] is going to lead to some significant procedural changes.”