FEC Commissioner David M. Mason

David M. Mason

	The task of self-government is central to the foundation and continuing existence of our country. In most instances, Americans govern themselves through elections. Thus, conducting and regulating elections is the most fundamental and necessary task for the government of a free people. ...(more)
Categories
Biographical information Speeches Contact the Commissioner's Office (commissionermason@fec.gov) Guide to Documents The documents posted on my page were chosen because they represent my legal philosophy or because they constitute important statements about the Commission’s policies or enforcement practices. Documents signed by four or more ommissioners represent Commission positions which have significant precedential weight. Statements joined by three Commissioners are often accorded deference by courts. Testimony and individual statements represent my own views which may or may not be shared by other Commissioners. The documents marked [PDF] on this site may be read using Adobe Reader from Adobe. Dissenting Opinion of Chairman David M. Mason in Advisory Opinion Request 2007-32 for SpeechNow.org. To see the request and the Office of General Counsel's draft opinion, go to the Advisory Opinions page, put "2007-32" into the "Go To AO number" field, then click the search button. Hearing on S. 271, 527 Reform Act of 2005, Testimony of Commissioner David M. Mason Before the Committee on Rules and Administration, United States Senate, March, 8, 2005 Statement of FEC Chairman David M. Mason on Accomplishments in 2002. Confirmation Statement of David M. Mason before the Senate Rules Committee, explains my priorities for the Commission and approach to major issues. “Anonymity and the Internet: Constitutional Questions...,” Testimony, House Judiciary Committee, addresses some constitutional difficulties with popular campaign finance reform proposals. “The Internet and Campaign Finance Regulation,” Testimony, Senate Rules Committee, how the Commission and Congress should regulate political speech on the Internet. Statement of Reasons in MUR 4960 (Hillary Rodham Clinton), illustrates the Commission’s standard for summary dismissal of a complaint (“no RTB”). Statement of Reasons in MUR 4689 (Robert Dornan) and Additional Statement of Reasons in MUR 4689, summarize precedents on the FECA’s media exemption and my disagreement with some of the Commission’s prior decisions regarding this exemption. Statement of Reasons on Withdrawal of the Complaint in FEC v. Forbes, another statement on the FECA “press exemption” its basis in First Amendment and problems with the Commission’s initial decision to file this suit. Statement of Reasons on the Audits of the Dole for President and the Clinton/Gore Committees, rejects the “electioneering message” test previously employed by the Commission in assessing political party advertisements. Explains the need to avoid vagueness and overbreadth in Commission rules and enforcement decisions and the necessity for the Commission to observe statutory and constitutional due process in promulgating regulatory standards. Concurrence in Advisory Opinion 1999-11, rejects the use of the phrase “campaign related” as a test or description of activity in connection with a federal election. Expresses significant limitations on the advisory opinion process and on the use of advisory opinions to enunciate general rules or policy statements.

The task of self-government is central to the foundation and continuing existence of our country. In most instances, Americans govern themselves through elections. Thus, conducting and regulating elections is the most fundamental and necessary task for the government of a free people. ...(more)

Guide to Documents

The documents posted on my page were chosen because they represent my legal philosophy or because they constitute important statements about the Commission’s policies or enforcement practices. Documents signed by four or more ommissioners represent Commission positions which have significant precedential weight. Statements joined by three Commissioners are often accorded deference by courts. Testimony and individual statements represent my own views which may or may not be shared by other Commissioners. The documents marked [PDF] on this site may be read using Adobe Reader from Adobe.

Dissenting Opinion of Chairman David M. Mason in Advisory Opinion Request 2007-32 for SpeechNow.org. To see the request and the Office of General Counsel's draft opinion, go to the Advisory Opinions page, put "2007-32" into the "Go To AO number" field, then click the search button.
Hearing on S. 271, 527 Reform Act of 2005, Testimony of Commissioner David M. Mason Before the Committee on Rules and Administration, United States Senate, March, 8, 2005
Statement of FEC Chairman David M. Mason on Accomplishments in 2002.
Confirmation Statement of David M. Mason before the Senate Rules Committee, explains my priorities for the Commission and approach to major issues.
“Anonymity and the Internet: Constitutional Questions...,” Testimony, House Judiciary Committee, addresses some constitutional difficulties with popular campaign finance reform proposals.
“The Internet and Campaign Finance Regulation,” Testimony, Senate Rules Committee, how the Commission and Congress should regulate political speech on the Internet.
Statement of Reasons in MUR 4960 (Hillary Rodham Clinton), illustrates the Commission’s standard for summary dismissal of a complaint (“no RTB”).
Statement of Reasons in MUR 4689 (Robert Dornan) and Additional Statement of Reasons in MUR 4689, summarize precedents on the FECA’s media exemption and my disagreement with some of the Commission’s prior decisions regarding this exemption.
Statement of Reasons on Withdrawal of the Complaint in FEC v. Forbes, another statement on the FECA “press exemption” its basis in First Amendment and problems with the Commission’s initial decision to file this suit.
Statement of Reasons on the Audits of the Dole for President and the Clinton/Gore Committees, rejects the “electioneering message” test previously employed by the Commission in assessing political party advertisements. Explains the need to avoid vagueness and overbreadth in Commission rules and enforcement decisions and the necessity for the Commission to observe statutory and constitutional due process in promulgating regulatory standards.
Concurrence in Advisory Opinion 1999-11, rejects the use of the phrase “campaign related” as a test or description of activity in connection with a federal election. Expresses significant limitations on the advisory opinion process and on the use of advisory opinions to enunciate general rules or policy statements.