Bob Bauer offers this insightful analysis. A snippet:

And yet: von Spakovsy is an agent, not a principal, whose actions in the Voting Section, one can be sure, were faithful to the expectations and directives of his superiors. Now these same superiors wish to move him to the FEC where, replacing a Republican Commissioner, he may well prove to be a reliable Republican vote on issues important to his party. No surprise there: the President would not conceivably appoint to a Republican seat an individual without ties to the party or demonstrated sympathy for its outlook. This is the likely significance of his laments about Democratic campaign finance, written in l997: this was the Republican party line at the time, and he will most probably follow it now, as would any other individual named by the President to that Smith seat.
Democrats can assume, then, that von Spakovsy will lend a friendly ear to the Republican complaints about “527s.” This is a true shift in the alignment of Republicans on this issue: his predecessor, Brad Smith, defied Republican orthodoxy on this issue, remaining true to his constitutional objections to regulatory overreach and to his distaste for partisan manipulation of the rules. Smith’s was a refreshing presence in this way. But all such good things must end because terms, such as Smith’s, must end; and the change would have come with anyone named to Smith’s seat. In this respect, a nominee such as von Spakovsky is no surprise: not at all out of the ordinary. Democrats can have no real complaint. And there is some cause for holiday cheer that von Spakovsky will trade his apparent influence at the Voting Section for one of six votes at the FEC.

Mike Krempasky of Redstate is upbeat on the four nominations.