All the president’s nominations: Taking stock at the 200-day mark

One notable difference between President Trump’s first and second terms was the considerable transition and personnel planning conducted in preparation for his return to office. Unlike the 2016-2017 presidential transition, Trump quickly hit the ground running, making a record number of nominations in the first 100 days of his second administration.

Trump’s emphasis on personnel signifies the essential role that appointees play as the leaders of executive agencies and drivers of the president’s agenda. However, the president’s urgency has been met by the realities of an increasingly gridlocked Senate confirmation process.

Now, at the 200-day mark of Trump’s second administration, a clearer picture of the confirmation process is beginning to emerge. Three key trends stand out:

• Trump made more nominations in the first 200 days than any modern president. However, his early advantage at the 100-day mark has dissipated, as he made the fewest nominations during the second 100 days.
• Trump’s faster nomination pace has not translated into more confirmations. At the 200-day mark, his nominees face the longest average confirmation delay on record, and Trump has only slightly outpaced his first term in total confirmations.
• A major factor behind the growing confirmation delays and Senate bottleneck is procedural hurdles. Nearly all of Trump’s confirmed nominees have required a cloture and final recorded vote, steps that demand limited floor time.

Pace of nominations

President Trump made more nominations (401) in the first 200 days than any modern president. While some of his contemporaries come close, the starkest difference is with his first term. In the second administration, Trump has made over 70% more nominations than he did in the first (232).

Going back to the Reagan presidency and comparing Trump to seven prior administrations, President Trump put forward a record number of nominees in the first 100 days. Since then, there has been a noticeable downturn. During days 101 to 200, he made the fewest number of nominations when compared to his recent predecessors.

Confirmation delay

My colleague Kathryn Dunn Tenpas shows that there was a modest increase (+8) in the number of Senate confirmations during Trump’s first 200 days of his second administration compared with his first. However, the numbers pale in comparison to the W. Bush and Obama confirmation rates.

When the process is bogged down, nominees bear the brunt of the delay. Despite the Trump team’s pace of nominations, his nominees have experienced the longest average confirmation delay (94 days) of any prior administration. This is nearly four times longer than delays experienced during the Reagan administration (25 days) and 74% longer than Trump’s nominees faced in the first term (54 days).

Confirmation delays will only continue to increase as the Senate goes on a month-long recess and lower-level nominees get confirmed upon their return. Lower-level positions, such as assistant secretaries, tend to get deprioritized by the Senate due to their lack of seniority. The nominees on the Senate executive calendar as of August 3 had already waited an average of 143 days since their nomination.

What explains the delay?

One primary cause of the bottleneck slowing Trump’s nominees is a significant increase in procedural barriers during the confirmation process.

After being referred out of committee and placed on the Senate executive calendar, nominees must be brought to the floor, await the conclusion of floor debate, and receive a final vote. Debate can end through unanimous consent or invoking cloture, while final votes may occur via unanimous consent, voice vote, or final recorded vote. Historically, most nominees were confirmed through unanimous consent and voice vote.

However, under recent administrations, a growing number of nominees require cloture and final recorded votes to reach confirmation. This forces the Senate to spend more floor time on each nominee and weigh the value of confirming that nominee against conducting other legislative business.¹

In the first 200 days, nearly all of Trump’s nominees have encountered procedural barriers. Only seven nominees² were confirmed without cloture being invoked, and every nominee has required a final recorded vote.

The extent to which these procedures have been required to reach confirmation is unprecedented. Senate Republicans have argued that they are facing “historic obstruction” and that the president deserves the ability to have his appointees in place. Senate Minority Leader Schumer has explained that the “historic levels of scrutiny” are due to nominees’ lack of experience, ethical conflicts of interest, and perceived extreme views.

The use of cloture to process nominees began to rise in 2013 after the Senate changed its rules, reducing the vote-threshold for cloture on most nominations from a three-fifths majority to a bare majority. This change allowed presidents to get their nominees confirmed with only their party’s support, when in the majority. However, individual senators in the minority can still hold up nominations by requiring cloture to be invoked. This has been viewed as a tool by senators from both parties to negotiate with the administration over White House and agency policy.

Holds on nominees, or the indication by a senator that they will object to a nominee advancing to final consideration through unanimous consent, have also been used by senators as a messaging tool to show opposition to the administration and claim individual credit for slowing down or preventing controversial nominees from entering their positions. Several Senators have announced blanket holds on all of Trump’s nominees for particular agencies or more broadly. Whether senators take credit for it or not, there have been de facto holds on all of Trump’s nominees that required cloture to be invoked.

Conclusion

The Senate confirmation process may be at an inflection point; President Trump, Senate Majority Leader Thune, and other Senate Republicans have become increasingly frustrated with confirmation delays and procedural barriers placed on nominees. Following demands from President Trump, Majority Leader Thune kept the Senate in session for an extra day past the scheduled recess to focus on confirmations.

Reform may be possible to expedite the confirmation process and make floor consideration more efficient. Senate Republicans have discussed several possibilities, including shortening the debate time between cloture and final votes, bundling lower-level nominations for joint consideration, and reducing the number of positions requiring Senate confirmation. Shortening debate time and allowing for bundling would be the simplest for the Senate to undertake, as they only require a majority vote to change Senate rules.

Time will tell whether these proposed reforms prove possible. No major reform of the confirmation process has occurred since 2012-2013, when they eliminated the confirmation requirement for 166 executive branch positions, and the vote threshold for cloture on most nominations was lowered.

Trump’s confirmation troubles will likely continue over the rest of the year. Historically, presidents see fewer confirmations on average between days 201 and 365 than from day 101 to 200, while confirmation delays continue to lengthen. Given the increased use of procedural barriers, President Trump should expect greater challenges than his predecessors.