CQ Roll Call June 20, 2013 | Register

Now is the Time to Fix the Nomination Process

Jonathan Bernstein argues that the most important procedural reform for President Obama is not doing away with the filibuster, which is almost meaningless with a Republican-controlled House, but rather addressing the broken confirmation process for executive branch nominees.

“The first step is dramatically reducing the vetting involved for selecting executive branch officials. Sure, you don’t want crooks. But presidents should stop worrying that something embarrassing will be revealed somewhere down the line; the truth is that, for the most part, that sort of thing becomes a one-day story that no one but the most intense partisans ever hear about… Senate committees have also been far too intrusive and demanding. Again, it’s counterproductive. Senate committees certainly should take their advice and consent responsibilities seriously, but overdoing the job only leads to pressure to give up Senate involvement at all.”

“And, yes, filibuster reform is needed, too. In my view, there’s simply no need at all for supermajority protection against partisan efforts to block an appointment. Preferably, the Senate would just return to the old norm in which presidents were allowed their choice of personnel, if not their choice of policy… The solution is easy: Lower the requirement for cloture on executive branch nominations to a simple majority of senators voting; continue to respect holds when they are attempts to bargain over substantive issues; but insist on cloture votes and moving forward if the minority party abuses the hold process to simply roadblock a nominee.”

Most importantly: “Democrats could achieve this reform with a majority vote.”

  • http://profiles.google.com/creed.pogue Creed Pogue

    The problem is, who determines the difference between reasonable and obstructionist? The filibuster should simply end and the motion to proceed should go in the trash bin. If each member wants to talk for an hour on a bill, then they should have the right to do that. If other members want to yield their time to a modern-day Henry Clay or Daniel Webster, that is fine. How many bills have ever had more than four whole days of actual debate? If a member wants a PUBLIC one-week hold on a bill or nomination, fine. For everything else, if there is a majority in favor of passing something, then it should be done.

    • jwallace79

      Agreed. The problem with the failed executive nomination process (and a great deal other problems) is a broken Senate procedural system.

Sign In

Forgot password?

Or

Subscribe

Receive daily coverage of the people, politics and personality of Capitol Hill.

Subscription | Free Trial

Logging you in. One moment, please...