It's easy to see why some good government advocates are upset that President Obama has tapped labor lawyer John J. Sullivan to serve on the Federal Election Commission.

Labor unions fought to block the landmark McCain-Feingold legislation that banned soft money, joining in an unsuccessful Supreme Court challenge in 2003. More recently the Service Employees International Union, where Sullivan is associate general counsel, has urged the FEC to relax its enforcement both of disclosure rules and of limits on coordination between candidates and outside groups.

Today's FEC appears to have imposed a virtual lock-down on public communications.

Sullivan's selection bodes poorly for Obama's pledges to fix the dysfunctional FEC, complained J. Gerald Hebert, executive director of the Campaign Legal Center.

"The gusto with which Mr. Sullivan has bashed important elements of McCain-Feingold and repeatedly taken radical deregulatory positions does not inspire confidence that he will have different views if confirmed to the Commission," Hebert warned in a statement.

But Sullivan's critics would do well to remember another labor lawyer whose nomination prompted similar dire warnings back in 2005. President Bush's nomination of Robert Lenhard also caused a stir among reform advocates, who objected at that time that Lenhard, too, had challenged the constitutionality of McCain-Feingold as associate general counsel of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).

As it turns out, Lenhard went on to help preside over what in hindsight looks like one of the FEC's more productive recent phases. Not that Lenhard's every decision was lauded by good government watchdogs. But compared with today's FEC -- which in recent months has bogged down repeatedly in partisan deadlocks and public disputes -- Lenhard's tenure looks like a virtual model of efficiency.

During that time the FEC adopted expedited enforcement procedures that helped reduce its chronic backlog of complaints. The commission also processed an unusually high volume of cases and collected numerous fines. Most importantly, Lenhard, who served as FEC chairman in 2007, worked collegially with his GOP colleagues, notably then-vice chairman David Mason. Both Mason and Lenhard made themselves accessible to reporters, inviting them in for informal briefings and answering questions during breaks at public meetings.

What a contrast to today's FEC, which appears to have imposed a virtual lock-down on public communications. Numerous actions have been taken behind closed doors; even press releases come out not at all or belatedly. According to a recent Roll Call tally, the FEC has put out fewer statements and press releases this year than it did in the first six months of 2008, when a Senate stalemate over nominees had virtually shut the agency down.

The FEC is examining its communications policies as part of a top-to-bottom operational review. But even if transparency improves, that won't fix the partisan splits and deadlocks that have come to define the agency lately. In case after case, the six-member FEC, which is evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats, has split 3-3 along party lines. Since the FEC may take no action without a majority, a long list of complaints have been effectively thrown out.

"We have a non-functioning commission," said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, who argued that the FEC is worse off now than it was during its shutdown last year. Wertheimer laid the blame squarely at the feet of the FEC's three GOP commissioners: Caroline Hunter, Donald McGahn and Matthew Petersen.

In a recent memo detailing problems at the FEC, Wertheimer listed more than a dozen recent campaign finance complaints that GOP commissioners have opted to set aside, rejecting the FEC counsel's recommendations for an investigation, a settlement or a penalty.

Several of these involve allegations that so-called 527 groups broke the campaign finance laws by using unregulated money to pay for election expenses. Such groups enjoy tax-free status under section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code but may not use unregulated money for explicit election messages. A string of FEC fines after the 2004 election appeared to have slowed 527 political activity. But recent FEC actions may reverse that trend, reform advocates warn.

"The basic message being sent out for the 2010 election is: Do what you want, and don't worry about us. We're not going to be causing any problems here," said Wertheimer.

Certainly the agency is due for a shakeup, and as of May 1, expiring terms allow Obama to tap up to three new commissioners. The problem isn't Sullivan, who's won endorsements from both Public Campaign and Common Cause, and who would replace a departing Democrat in any event. The problem is the FEC appointments process and structure -- something Obama pledged to examine during his transition, but which he's so far done little to address.

On this score, the Legal Center's complaints are justified. As Hebert's recent statement concludes: "The president has yet to show that the change he advocated, including reform of the FEC, will become a reality in this administration."