Democrats are concerned that Republicans are rushing through the confirmation process in an unseemly fashion. A couple of points on that: First, it isn't unprecedented (unpresidented?), but in-depth, slow-moving confirmations have been the custom since 1977. Before that, appointments received a more cursory review. The change was precipitated by Jimmy Carter's appointment of a friend of his, Bert Lance, to head the OMB (Office of Management and Budget). After being appointed, previous instances of corruption and mismanagement came to light, and Lance resigned in disgrace.
Second, Republicans argue that Obama's appointments were rushed through, too, and they were: The difference is that the Obama nominees had met the requirements placed on them to file necessary paperwork, such as financial disclosures (where necessary; not all positions require them) and the questionnaires from the U.S. Office of Government Ethics (presently headed by Walter Shaub). Trump's cabinet nominees -- many of whom are billionaires, and have very complex financial affairs -- have not.
Shaub has written "The announced hearing schedule for several nominees who have not completed the ethics review process is of great concern to me." He says “We can’t risk creating the perception that government officials will use their positions for personal profit.” He has said he cannot recall a time when the Senate held a confirmation hearing without the process being completed.
Cabinet nominees are not officially appointed until after inauguration on January 20; the period before inauguration is when the nominations are studied and hearings take place. This year, the hearings started yesterday, January 10, with the hearing for Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III to become Trump's Attorney General.
After the hearings, as Ms. Lord says:
One of two things will happen: The nomination will be sent to the floor for a full Senate vote with a favorable recommendation, an unfavorable recommendation or no recommendation at all; or the nomination will not be sent to the Senate floor.She describes the vetting process as follows:
But a rule that grew out of a Democratic-led measure in 2013 led to what is now called the “nuclear option,” which means that with 51 votes, instead of 60 votes, filibusters against nominees are basically prohibited, except for Supreme Court nominees. So while a vote can be delayed, it cannot be killed and will eventually come to the floor.
After cloture is called, the Senate must wait until the second calendar day after to hold a vote to end debate. The debate can be ended on a simple majority vote with 51 votes. Before 2013, it took 60 votes, but a Democratic-led Senate voted that year to change the rules of the Senate and require only 51 votes to end debate and vote.
Once a nomination moves to the Senate floor for a vote, it takes a simple majority there as well to confirm the nomination. There are currently 52 Republican senators and 48 Democratic senators.
The practice of vetting – or confirming the information provided by the nominee – generally happens before the person’s name is made public as the president’s choice for a position. Usually, the Federal Bureau of Investigation conducts a background investigation, in addition to having his or her financial information certified by ethics officers.
Nominees fill out questionnaires, such as the White House’s “Personal Data Statement Questionnaire,” and the Office of Government Ethics' Standard Form 278. They answer about 230 questions about their mental health, their in-laws, any drug convictions, whether they hired maids or gardeners and their personal alcohol use. The questions are designed to head off any embarrassing information coming out at Senate hearings.
0 comments:
Post a Comment