ȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
ȱȱȱ ȱȱ
¢ȱǯȱ ȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱ ȱ
ȱȱ
ȱȱȱ
¢ȱȱ
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
ȱŗŞǰȱŘŖŖŞȱ
ȱȱȱ
ŝȬśŝŖŖȱ
ǯǯȱ
ŚŖŗŗşȱ
ȱȱȱ
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
¢ȱ
In its 2004 report, the 9/11 Commission identified what it perceived were shortcomings in the
appointment process during presidential transitions. The report asserted that delays in filling top
executive branch leadership positions, such as those experienced during the 2000-2001 transition,
could compromise national security policymaking in the early months of a new Administration.
Although the unique circumstances of the 2000 presidential race truncated the ensuing transition
period, the commission’s observations could be applied to other recent transitions; lengthy
appointment processes during presidential transitions, particularly between those of different
political parties, have been of concern to observers for more than 20 years. The process is likely
to develop a bottleneck during this time, even under the best of circumstances, due to the large
number of candidates who must be selected, vetted, and, in the case of positions filled through
appointment by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate (PAS positions),
considered by that body.
The advice and consent appointment process has three stages: selection and vetting, Senate
consideration, and presidential appointment. Congress has taken steps to accelerate appointments
during presidential transitions. In recent decades, Senate committees have provided for pre-
nomination consideration of Cabinet-level nominations; examples of such actions are provided in
this report. In addition, recently adopted statutory provisions appear designed to facilitate faster
processing of appointments during presidential transitions. Among the new statutory provisions
were those enacted by Congress in response to 9/11 Commission recommendations, mainly in the
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. Also part of this act was a sense of the
Senate resolution stating that nominations to national security positions should be submitted by
the President-elect to the Senate by Inauguration Day, and that Senate consideration of all such
nominations should be completed within 30 days of submission.
The President has certain powers—constitutional recess appointment authority and statutory
authority under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998—that he could, under certain
circumstances, use to unilaterally fill PAS positions on a temporary basis.
The final portion of the report provides comprehensive data and analyses related to the length of
time taken during recent party-turnover transitions to fill Cabinet-level positions and selected
higher-level subcabinet positions. In general, transition-period Cabinet-level nominees were
selected, vetted, considered, and confirmed expeditiously; they generally took office shortly after
the new President’s inauguration. On average, the interval between election day and final
disposition of nominations to selected subcabinet positions was more than twice as long as that of
nominations to Cabinet-level positions, though nominees to subcabinet positions in some
departments were faster than others. The pre-nomination portion of this period was notably longer
than the period of Senate consideration. The Senate confirmed more than half of the selected
subcabinet nominations 23 days or fewer after the nomination was submitted.

ȱȱȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
ȱ
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
The Appointment Process for PAS Positions................................................................................... 3
Selection and Vetting................................................................................................................. 3
Selection and Vetting During Presidential Transitions........................................................ 3
Senate Consideration................................................................................................................. 4
The Senate Confirmation Process and Presidential Transitions.......................................... 5
Appointment.............................................................................................................................. 7
Temporary Staffing of PAS Positions During Presidential Transitions ........................................... 7
The Length of the Appointment Process ......................................................................................... 9
Transition-period Cabinet Appointment Intervals................................................................... 10
Findings ............................................................................................................................ 14
Transition-period Subcabinet Appointment Intervals ............................................................. 14
Findings ............................................................................................................................ 15
Summary ................................................................................................................................. 18

ȱ
Table 1. Political Appointees by Department and Appointment Type as of September 1,
2008.............................................................................................................................................. 2
Table 2. Mean and Median Length of Appointment Process Intervals for Transition-
period Cabinet-level Nominees of President Ronald W. Reagan, President William J.
Clinton, and President George W. Bush ..................................................................................... 12
Table 3. Mean and Median Length of Appointment Process for Selected Transition-period
Subcabinet Nominees of President Ronald W. Reagan, President William J. Clinton,
and President George W. Bush ................................................................................................... 17
Table A-1.Transition Period Nominations to Cabinet Positions by President Ronald W.
Reagan, President William J. Clinton, and President George W. Bush..................................... 19
Table C-1.Transition Period Nominations to Selected Subcabinet Positions by President
Ronald W. Reagan, President William J. Clinton, and President George W. Bush .................... 28

¡ȱ
Appendix A. Transition Period Nominations to Cabinet Positions by President Ronald W.
Reagan, President William J. Clinton, and President George W. Bush..................................... 19
Appendix B. Subcabinet Position Selection Method..................................................................... 25
Appendix C. Transition Period Nominations to Selected Subcabinet Positions by
President Ronald W. Reagan, President William J. Clinton, and President George W.
Bush............................................................................................................................................ 28

ȱȱȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
ȱ
Author Contact Information .......................................................................................................... 38

ȱȱȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
ȱ
In its July 22, 2004, report, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
(known as the 9/11 Commission) identified what it perceived were shortcomings in the
appointment process during presidential transitions that could compromise national security
policymaking in the early months of a new Administration. The commission noted, in particular,
the abbreviated transition period resulting from the delayed resolution of the 2000 presidential
race. As the report stated, “Given that a presidential election in the United States brings wholesale
change in personnel, this loss of time hampered the new administration in identifying, recruiting,
clearing, and obtaining Senate confirmation of key appointees.”1 The commission reported,
among other findings, that “the new [George W. Bush] administration did not have its deputy
cabinet officers in place until the spring of 2001, and the critical subcabinet officials were not
confirmed until the summer—if then. In other words, the new administration—like others before
it—did not have its team on the job until at least six months after it took office.”2
Although the unique circumstances of the 2000 presidential race truncated the ensuing transition
period, the commission’s observations could be applied to other recent transitions. The length of
presidential transitions, particularly between those of different political parties, has been of
concern to observers for more than 20 years.3 The appointment process is likely to develop a
bottleneck during this time, even under the best of circumstances, due to the large number of
candidates who must be selected, vetted, and, in the case of positions filled through appointment
by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate (PAS positions), considered by that
body. By the end of the first 100 days of the Reagan presidency, nominees had been confirmed
for only 20% of vacant PAS positions. At the same juncture at the outset of the Clinton
Administration, nominees had been confirmed for only 10% of these openings. At the end of the
first 100 days of the presidency of George W. Bush, nominees had been confirmed for only 6% of
PAS vacancies.4 Delays in installing new leadership would not be welcome at any time, but they
may be particularly problematic during the transition period between Presidents. As noted by the
9/11 Commission, a new President is likely to need his or her top advisers in place to maintain
continuity in national security policymaking.5 Furthermore, the President has limited time
following his or her election to initiate an administrative and legislative agenda.
As the 9/11 Commission pointed out, presidential transitions involve large-scale changes in the
political leadership of the executive branch. Table 1 summarizes Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) data indicating that more than 2,500 political appointees occupied positions
in the 15 departments as of September 1, 2008. These officials included top-level policymaking
presidential appointees, political managers, and confidential support staff. Unlike career public
service executives and employees, top political officials in the federal departments and agencies
nearly always serve at the pleasure of the President or agency head. These officials typically

1 U.S. National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, The 9/11 Commission Report (Washington:
GPO, 2004), p. 198 (hereafter referred to as 9/11 Commission Report).
2 Ibid., p. 422.
3 See, for example, National Academy of Public Administration, Leadership in Jeopardy: The Fraying of the
Presidential Appointments System (Washington: National Academy of Public Administration, 1985), pp. 9-10.
4 CRS Report RL31054, Nominations and Confirmations to Policy Positions in the First 100 Days of the George W.
Bush, William J. Clinton, and Ronald W. Reagan Administrations, by Rogelio Garcia (archived CRS report available
from the authors of this report).
5 9/11 Commission Report, p. 422.
ȱȱȱ
ŗȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
resign when the Administration changes, especially if the incoming President is from a different
party.6
This report focuses on the processes, during a presidential transition, by which top-level
executive branch PAS positions are filled. Outside of top White House staff appointments, these
are a new President’s earliest and arguably most important appointments. In the next section, the
usual process is described in three stages: “Selection and Vetting”, “Senate Consideration”, and
“Appointment”. That section also provides examples of ways the Senate has adapted its
procedures during recent presidential transitions. The report then discusses processes—recess
appointments and designations under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998—that could be
used by the President to unilaterally fill positions on a temporary basis. The final portion of the
report provides additional information on the length of time required in the past to fill Cabinet
positions and certain national-security-related subcabinet positions. This section provides related
data for the last three party turnover transitions prior to 2008: Carter-Reagan (1980-1981), Bush-
Clinton (1992-1993), and Clinton-Bush (2000-2001).
Table 1. Political Appointees by Department and Appointment Type as of
September 1, 2008
Pres. Appt.
Pres. Appt. Not
Non-Career
Department
Requiring Senate
Requiring Senate
Senior Executive
Approval
Approval
Service Schedule
C
Total
Agriculture 16 0 43 168
227
Commerce 23 2 33 103
161
Defense 53 0 94
134
281
Education 17 1 14 112
144
Energy 22 0 30
66
118
Health and Human
20 1 48 66
135
Services
Homeland Security
20
1
61
102
184
Housing and Urban
15 0 18 49
82
Development
Interior 17 0 30
36
83
Justice 223 0 45
68
336
Labor 19
0
29
105
153
State 222
3
36
125
386
Transportation 23
0
31
41
95
Treasury 33 0 23 45
101
Veterans Affairs
15
0
8
9
32
Total 738 8
543
1229
2518

6 Not all political appointees change with a change in Administration, however. Some presidential appointees, such as
members of most regulatory commissions, serve in fixed-term positions, and these appointees may continue to serve
out their terms when the President changes.
ȱȱȱ
Řȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
Source: Table created by CRS using data drawn from the 2008 edition of the committee print commonly
known as the “Plum Book” (U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs,
United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions, committee print, 110th Cong., 2nd sess., S.Prt. 110-36
(Washington: GPO, 2008), pp. 197-199). The Office of Personnel Management provided the data for the Plum
Book.
ȱȱȱȱȱȱ
Under the Constitution, the power to appoint the top officers of the United States is shared by the
President and the Senate. The appointment process consists of three stages—selection and
vetting, Senate consideration, and appointment.
ȱȱȱ
The first stage of the process begins with the President’s selection of a candidate for the position.
Following this selection, the candidate needs to be cleared for nomination. The Office of the
Counsel to the President oversees this part of the process, which usually includes background
investigations conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Internal Revenue Service
(IRS), Office of Government Ethics (OGE), and an ethics official for the agency to which the
President wishes to appoint the candidate. Once the Office of the Counsel has cleared the
candidate, the nomination is ready to be submitted to the Senate. Candidates for higher-level
positions, such as Cabinet Secretaries, are often accorded priority in this process. A nominee has
no legal authority to assume the duties and responsibilities of the position; the authority comes
with Senate confirmation and formal presidential appointment.
ȱȱȱȱȱȱ
An incoming President can, of course, begin the process of selecting the members of his
Administration at any time. During recent decades, most major candidates have begun preparing
for a potential presidency before election day by assigning a small number of advisors to begin
developing transition plans.7 With regard to the selection of personnel, the 2008 candidates and
their transition advisors were aided by a recently enacted statute. The Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (known as the Intelligence Reform Act)8 included a provision
that directs the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to transmit an electronic record “on
Presidentially appointed positions,” with specified contents, to each major party presidential
candidate “not later than 15 days” after his or her nomination.9 The provision permits OPM to
make such a record available to any other presidential candidate after these initial transmittals.
The Intelligence Reform Act also included several provisions that responded to 9/11 Commission
recommendations regarding the vetting process. One provision of law permits each major party
presidential candidate to submit, before the general election, security clearance requests for
“prospective transition team members who will have a need for access to classified information”
in the course of their work. The law directs that resulting investigations and eligibility

7 John P. Burke, Presidential Transitions: From Politics to Practice (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2000).
8 P.L. 108-458, 118 Stat. 3638.
9 P.L. 108-458, § 8403(b); 118 Stat. 3870.
ȱȱȱ
řȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
determinations be completed, as much as possible, by the day after the general election.10 To the
degree that transition team members go on to be nominees to positions in the new Administration,
this proactive clearance process might also accelerate the transition period appointment process.
The Intelligence Reform Act also amended the Presidential Transition Act of 1963. The
amendments included a provision stating that the President-elect should submit, as soon as
possible after the presidential election, the “names of candidates for high level national security
positions through the level of undersecretary” of agencies and departments. A second provision
requires the responsible agency or agencies to carry out background investigations of these
candidates for high-level national security positions “as expeditiously as possible ... before the
date of the inauguration.”11
ȱȱ
In the consideration stage, the Senate determines whether or not to confirm a nomination.12 Once
received from the President, each nomination is referred to the committee with jurisdiction over
the agency in which the nominee would serve or the subject matter related to the nomination.
Action at the committee level is at the discretion of the committee chair. No Senate or committee
rule requires that a committee, or the full Senate, act on any nomination.13 Most nominations,
however, proceed through the process in a routine, timely fashion. During the last presidential
transition in the 107th Congress, the Senate took a median14 of 36 days to confirm a nomination to
a full-time departmental position.15
The Senate confirmation process begins at the committee level. The rules and procedures of the
committees frequently include timetables specifying minimum periods between steps in the
process. Committee activity on nominations generally includes investigation, hearing, and
reporting stages. During the investigation phase, many committees require nominees to fill out
questionnaires that the committee has prepared. If the committee acts on a nomination, the
process typically begins with a hearing, where the nominee and other interested parties may
testify and Senators may question the nominee.16 After the hearing—if there is one—the
committee usually votes to report the nomination to the Senate. The committee may choose to
report the nomination favorably, unfavorably, or without recommendation.
The full Senate may then take up the nomination and vote on it. Confirmation of a nomination by
the Senate requires a simple majority. If there is opposition to the nomination, however,

10 P.L. 108-458, § 7601(c); 118 Stat. 3857.
11 P.L. 108-458, § 7601(a); 118 Stat. 3856.
12 For further information, see CRS Report RL31980, Senate Consideration of Presidential Nominations: Committee
and Floor Procedure, by Elizabeth Rybicki; and CRS Report RL31948, Evolution of the Senate’s Role in the
Nomination and Confirmation Process: A Brief History, by Betsy Palmer.
13 A chair may decide not to schedule committee consideration of a nomination. Nominations on which the Senate does
not act are returned to the President at the end of a session or if the Senate is adjourned for more than 30 days.
14 The median is the middle value in a numerical distribution. In this case, half the confirmations took less time, and
half took more time.
15 See CRS Report RL31346, Presidential Appointments to Full-Time Positions in Executive Departments During the
107th Congress, 2001-2002, by Henry B. Hogue.
16 While most high-level nominations receive hearings, many other nominations, such as those for military promotions
or public health officials, do not receive individual attention, and are acted upon by both the committee and the full
Senate as a group.
ȱȱȱ
Śȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
opponents may try to prevent a vote on it, using what is known as a filibuster. If a nomination is
subject to a filibuster, it can take 60 votes to bring an end to Senate consideration of the
nomination (that is, invoke cloture) and get to a final vote. Senators may also place “holds” on
nominations to prevent them from being considered, or for other reasons. A “hold” is an informal
Senate practice in which a Senator requests that his or her party leader delay floor action on a
particular matter, in this case a nomination. It is up to the Senate Majority Leader whether to
honor the request of the Senator wishing the hold or to try to bring the nomination to a vote. A
“hold” will not necessarily have the effect of killing a nomination, but it could signal that the
Senate may not be able to consider the nomination without considerable delay and the need for a
super-majority vote to invoke cloture.17
Although the Senate confirms most nominations, some are not confirmed. Rarely, however, is a
nomination voted down on the Senate floor. Most rejections occur in committee, either by
committee vote or by committee inaction. Rejections in committee occur for a variety of reasons,
including opposition to the nomination, inadequate amount of time for consideration of the
nomination, or factors that may have nothing to do with the merits of the nomination. If a
nomination is not acted upon by the Senate by the end of a Congress, it is returned to the
President. Pending nominations also may be returned automatically to the President at the
beginning of a recess of 30 days or longer, but the Senate rule providing for this return is often
waived.18
The 9/11 Commission, which expressed concern about delays in the confirmation process for the
nation’s national security team, recommended that the Senate change its rules to require that all
action on these nominations, such as hearings, committee meetings, and floor votes, be conducted
within 30 days of the Senate’s receipt of the nomination.19 The Senate adopted a sense of the
Senate resolution stating that the 30-day target should be the goal.20 Such sense of the Senate
language is not binding on the chamber, but represents a position that at least a majority of the
Senators endorsed.
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
Under regular procedure, Senate action on nominations is triggered by the President’s submission
of the nomination to the Senate. During recent Presidential transitions, however, it appears that
the Senate has developed a flexible, informal process to allow quick action on nominations to
Cabinet and other high-level positions.
When the President is sworn-in on January 20, one of his first official acts is typically to send to
the Senate many, if not all, of his nominations to Cabinet positions and some other high-level
positions.21 It is not uncommon for the Senate to confirm many of those individuals on January 20

17 See CRS Report 98-712, “Holds” in the Senate, coordinated by Walter J. Oleszek.
18 The rule may be found in U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, Senate Manual, 106th
Cong., 1st sess., S. Doc. 106-1 (Washington: GPO, 1999), p. 55, Rule XXXI, paragraph 6 of the Standing Rules of the
Senate. For an example of a waiver of the rule, see Sen. John E. Sununu, “Nomination in Status Quo,” Congressional
Record, daily edition, vol. 149, July 31, 2003, p. S10844.
19 9/11 Commission Report, p. 422; P.L. 108-458, § 7601(b).
20 P.L. 108-458, § 7601(b); 118 Stat. 3857.
21 Prior to January 20, a President-elect does not have the authority to submit nominations to the Senate. That power is
held by the sitting President until the new President is sworn in.
ȱȱȱ
śȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
or very soon thereafter. If the Senate did not act quickly, it is possible that the President could be
in the position of trying to make new policy without his top people in place to carry out his plans.
But the tight timeline would typically allow the Senate very little time to review the nominations
to some of the most important positions in the federal government. The Senate appears to have
developed a method for handling this situation by allowing its committees to act on an
“anticipated” or “expected” nomination. As shown in Appendix A, which is discussed in detail
later in this report, Senate committees held hearings on most nominations to Cabinet positions at
the outset of the Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush Administrations before inauguration day.
Some committees also reported out the nominations before January 20.
During the transition from President Carter to President Reagan, for example, Senate committees
held confirmation hearings and voted to recommend confirmation of Reagan’s nominees to be
secretaries of Defense, State, and Treasury before the formal submission of the nominees on
January 20. That allowed the full Senate to vote almost immediately on those nominations. The
Senate followed the same pattern for the three positions during the transition from President
George H. W. Bush to President Clinton, and Senate committees reported nominations to two of
the positions during the transition from President Clinton to President George W. Bush. (Delays
in Senate organization at the start of the 107th Congress prevented the Senate Finance Committee
from acting on the nominee for Secretary of the Treasury, and the committee consented to be
discharged from its responsibilities on the nomination to allow the Senate to act on the
nomination on January 20.)22
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to report the nomination of Alexander M. Haig,
Jr., to be President Reagan’s Secretary of State on January 15, 1981, during the final session of its
confirmation hearing on the nomination. The chair of the committee moved “that in anticipation
of the nomination, that it be approved, subject to the formal receipt of it from the new President
of the United States.”23
When the Senate Finance Committee acted upon the nomination of Lloyd Bentsen to be President
Clinton’s Secretary of the Treasury on January 12, 1993, the chair made the following motion
before the hearing began: “I would ask that a vote be undertaken in the following form. The
resolution will read, ‘The Committee on Finance, having under consideration the perspective (sic)
nomination of Lloyd Bentsen to be Secretary of the Treasury, recommends that the nomination be
confirmed when received by the Senate.’”24
The Senate Armed Services Committee, on January 19, 2001, acted on the “expected” nomination
of Donald H. Rumsfeld to be Secretary of Defense. The committee reported the nomination to the
full Senate with the recommendation that Rumsfeld be confirmed. The language in the
committee’s legislative calendar for the 107th Congress notes that “On January 19, 2001, the
Committee voted by a roll call vote of 19-0 in favor of a motion that the Committee recommend

22 Sen. Charles Grassley, remarks in Senate, Congressional Record, daily edition, Jan. 20, 2001, p. S65. By unanimous
consent, the Treasury Secretary nomination, along with eight other nominations, was, upon receipt by the Senate,
placed directly on the Executive Calendar. (Sen. Pat Roberts, “Executive Calendar,” remarks in the Senate,
Congressional Record, daily edition, Jan. 20, 2001, pp. S57-S58.)
23 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, The Nomination of Alexander M. Haig, Jr., to be Secretary
of State, 97th Cong., 1st sess., Jan. 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 1981, pt. 2, p. 115.
24 Federal News Service transcript, hearing of the Senate Finance Committee, Confirmation Hearing for Secretary of
the Treasury-Designate Senator Lloyd Bentsen, Jan. 19, 1993. Accessed on Nexis.com on Nov. 21, 2008.
ȱȱȱ
Ŝȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
the Senate give its advise and consent to the nomination when it was received by the Senate from
the President and without referral to the Committee.”25
Other nominations to Cabinet or top-level positions also have been approved by committees in
advance of their actual submission. On January 18, 2001, for example, the Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Committee reported the nomination of Spencer Abraham to be Secretary of
Energy. During the committee meeting, the chair said that the committee’s actions were “in
keeping with the past practices of the committee in reporting cabinet nominations made by
incoming presidents prior to their official receipt by the Senate….” In that case, the motion
agreed to by the committee was to “move that the committee report favorably on the proposed
nomination and recommend that when the nomination is received the Senate give its advice and
consent.”26
ȱ
In the final stage, the confirmed nominee is given a commission signed by the President, with the
seal of the United States affixed thereto, and is sworn into office. The President may sign the
commission at any time after confirmation, and the appointment process is not complete until he
or she does so. Once the appointee is given the commission and sworn in, he or she has full
authority to carry out the responsibilities of the office. The length of the time between
confirmation and appointment varies in accordance with the preferences of the Administration
and appointee. It is usually shorter than either of the other two stages, and has not been identified
as problematic by presidential appointment scholars.
¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱ
ȱȱ
Several provisions of law allow for temporarily filling PAS positions without Senate approval
during presidential transitions, as well as at other times. Congress has provided limited statutory
authority for temporary presidential appointments under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of
1998.27 Appointees under the Vacancies Act are authorized to “perform the functions and duties of
the office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations” provided in the act.28 A
temporary appointment under the Vacancies Act ordinarily may last up to 210 days
(approximately seven months). During a presidential transition, however, the 210-day restriction
period does not begin to run until either 90 days after the President assumes office (i.e., mid-
April), or 90 days after the vacancy occurs, if it is within the 90-day inauguration period.

25 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Armed Services, Legislative Calendar, committee print, 107th Cong., 2nd sess.
(Washington: GPO, 2002), p. 83.
26 Federal News Service, transcript of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Nomination of Gale
Norton As Secretary of the Interior, Jan. 18, 2001. Accessed on Nexis.com on Nov. 20, 2008.
27 P.L. 105-277, Div. C, Title I, § 151; 5 U.S.C. §§ 3345-3349d. The act does not apply to positions on multi-member
regulatory boards and commissions, to certain other specific positions that may be filled temporarily under other
statutory provisions, or to new positions that have never been filled. This law superceded previous, similar statutory
provisions. For more on the Vacancies Act, see CRS Report 98-892, The New Vacancies Act: Congress Acts to Protect
the Senate’s Confirmation Prerogative, by Morton Rosenberg.
28 5 U.S.C. § 3345(a)(1).
ȱȱȱ
ŝȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
Furthermore, the time restriction is suspended if a first or second nomination for the position has
been submitted to the Senate for confirmation and is pending.
When an executive agency position requiring confirmation becomes vacant, it may be filled
temporarily under the Vacancies Act in one of three ways. First, the first assistant to such a
position may automatically assume the functions and duties of the office. This provision may be
of limited utility to a new President, because he probably would not yet have installed a first
assistant of his own choosing. Nonetheless, if the first assistant who becomes the acting leader is
a career executive, he or she might lend continuity to agency operations and reduce organizational
confusion and paralysis during the transition.
The Vacancies Act also provides that the President may direct an officer in any agency who is
occupying a position requiring Senate confirmation to perform the tasks associated with the
vacant position. Although this option would allow a new President to authorize one of his
confirmed appointees to perform key tasks, it might be of limited utility in the early months of the
new Administration when PAS positions in general are thinly staffed. Individuals the President
might designate to serve under this provision include appointees of the President’s party who are
incumbents in fixed-term membership positions on boards and commissions and holdover
appointees from the previous Administration who support the President’s policy preferences.
Finally, the Vacancies Act provides that the President may temporarily fill the vacant position
with any officer or employee of the subject agency who has been occupying a position for which
the rate of pay is equal to or greater than the minimum rate of pay at the GS-15 level, and who
has been with the agency for at least 90 of the preceding 365 days. Under this provision, the
President could draw, for example, from among an agency’s career Senior Executive Service
members, and this might allow him to select, as a temporary office holder, an individual who
supports his policy preferences.
A second form of limited-term appointment without Senate confirmation is a presidential recess
appointment. The President’s authority to make recess appointments is conferred by the
Constitution, which states that “[t]he President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may
happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End
of their next Session.”29 Such appointments during within-session Senate breaks are termed
intrasession recess appointments, and those which occur during between-session recesses are
known as intersession recess appointments. Intrasession recess appointments have, however,
sometimes provoked controversy in the Senate, and there is also an academic literature that has
drawn their legitimacy into question.30 Notwithstanding the ongoing discourse in this area, recent
Presidents have made recess appointments during both kinds of recesses. Recess appointments
expire at the end of the next session of Congress. As a result, a recess appointment may last for
less than a year, or nearly two years, depending on when the appointment is made.31

29 Article 2, § 2, cl. 3 of the Constitution.
30 Regarding Senate controversy, see Sen. George Mitchell, “The Senate’s Constitutional Authority to Advise and
Consent to the Appointment of Federal Officers,” Congressional Record, vol. 139, July 1, 1993, p. 15266; and Senate
Legal Counsel, “Memorandum of United States Senate as Amicus Curiae in Support of Plantiffs’ Motion, and in
Opposition to Defendants’ Motions, for Summary Judgment on Count Two,” U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia, Mackie v. Clinton, C.A. No. 93-0032-LFO, Congressional Record, vol. 139, July 1, 1993, pp. 15267-15274.
For academic literature, see, for example, Michael A. Carrier, “When Is the Senate in Recess for Purposes of the
Recess Appointments Clause?” Michigan Law Review, vol. 92, June 1994.
31 For information on recess appointments generally, see CRS Report RS21308, Recess Appointments: Frequently
(continued...)
ȱȱȱ
Şȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
Although a new President might elect to use his recess appointment authority during a Senate
recess soon after he takes office, three recent Presidents used it sparingly during their first
calendar years in office. President George H.W. Bush made five such appointments in November
and December of 1989. President Clinton did not use this authority until 1994. President George
W. Bush made one recess appointment during the Senate’s August recess in 2001. A fourth recent
President, President Reagan, did not use this authority during his first six months in office, but he
made 34 recess appointments between August and December of 1981.
At times, a nominee is hired as a consultant while awaiting confirmation, but he or she may serve
only in an advisory capacity and may not take on the functions and duties of the office to which
he or she has been nominated. A nominee to a Senate-confirmed position has no legal authority to
assume the responsibilities of this position; the authority comes with one of the limited-term
appointments discussed above, or with Senate confirmation and subsequent presidential
appointment.
ȱȱȱȱȱȱ
As noted at the outset of this report, the length of the appointment process during presidential
transitions, particularly between incoming and outgoing Presidents of different political parties,
has been of concern to observers for more than 20 years.32 The 9/11 Commission drew fresh
attention to this issue in 2004, recommending changes that might accelerate the selection,
clearance, and Senate consideration processes, particularly for “national security positions.”33
Congress responded by enacting new statutory provisions related to the selection and vetting
process, as well as a provision expressing a “sense of the Senate” regarding a timetable for
submission and consideration of high-level national security nominations during transitions. (See
“Selection and Vetting During Presidential Transitions” and “The Senate Confirmation Process
and Presidential Transitions,” above.) It could be argued that, with federal government efforts to
address the nation’s economic and financial downturn underway during the 2008-2009
presidential transition, the pace at which top leadership positions at the Department of the
Treasury are filled would also be of concern.
Given these concerns and reform measures, Congress might elect to evaluate the length of the
2008-2009 transition-period appointment process. Baseline data about past transition-period
appointments could be helpful in such an effort. The 2008-2009 transition is a transition during
which the incoming President is of a political party different from the outgoing President.
Arguably, other recent “party-turnover” transitions would be more comparable to this one than
would be transitions between Presidents of the same political party.34 Appendix A provides

(...continued)
Asked Questions, by Henry B. Hogue; and CRS Report RL33310, Recess Appointments Made by President George W.
Bush, January 20, 2001- October 31, 2008, by Henry B. Hogue and Maureen Bearden. For information on related legal
issues, see CRS Report RL32971, Judicial Recess Appointments: A Legal Overview, by T. J. Halstead; and CRS Report
RL33009, Recess Appointments: A Legal Overview, by T. J. Halstead.
32 See, for example, National Academy of Public Administration, Leadership in Jeopardy: The Fraying of the
Presidential Appointments System (Washington: National Academy of Public Administration, 1985), pp. 9-10.
33 9/11 Commission Report, p. 422.
34 During such a transition, most politically appointed positions were vacated by the time of the inauguration of the new
President. This would not necessarily be the case during transitions between two Presidents of the same political party.
When President George H.W. Bush took office, for example, Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady, Attorney General
(continued...)
ȱȱȱ
şȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
nominee-level data on the length of the process for making appointments to Cabinet-level
positions during the three most recent party turnover transitions prior to 2008: Carter-Reagan
(1980-1981), Bush-Clinton (1992-1993), and Clinton-Bush (2000-2001). Appendix C provides
nominee-level data on the length of the process for making appointments to selected higher-level
subcabinet positions during the transitions. Appendix B provides information on the method for
selecting those positions that were included in Appendix C.
Appendix A and Appendix C each provide information about the intervals, in elapsed days,
between different points in the appointment process.35 These points include election day, which is
the point after which the successful candidate and his supporters turn their attention from
campaigning to selecting a governing team, announcement of a proposed nominee, submission of
a nomination, Senate committee hearing on the nomination, Senate committee report or
discharge, and final disposition by the Senate.36
The remainder of this section provides brief analyses of these data.
Ȭȱȱȱȱ
The analysis presented here summarizes the data presented in Appendix A. Cabinet-level PAS
positions considered in this analysis include all heads of departments,37 the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), the U.S. Trade Representative, and the Director of the Office of National Drug Control
Policy (ONDCP).38
Table 2 shows, for each position, across the three transitions, the mean length of the intervals
between specified points in the process: election day and the announcement; the announcement
and the first hearing date; the announcement and the final disposition of the nomination (usually
confirmation); and election day and final disposition of the nomination. The table also provides

(...continued)
Richard Thornburgh, and Secretary of Education Lauro F. Cavazos, each of whom had been appointed by President
Ronald W. Reagan, remained in office.
35 The appendices differ slightly with regard to the intervals they provide, because the transition-period appointment
process for Cabinet-level positions differs from the usual appointment process. Appendix A does not provide the
interval between submission and final disposition, for example. As discussed in the sections identified, Senate
committees often begin consideration of prospective Cabinet-level nominations before the new President takes office
and has the authority to submit formal nominations. Consequently, the submission-to-final disposition interval would
not be a meaningful measure of the Senate consideration period. (See “The Senate Confirmation Process and
Presidential Transitions“ above.)
36 As noted earlier in the report, confirmation by the Senate must be followed by formal presidential appointment and
swearing in, but these steps may be carried out quickly, at the discretion of the Administration, and are generally
inconsequential in pace of the overall process.
37 As noted in the table, no nomination has been made to the position of Secretary of Homeland Security during a
presidential transition. The Department of Homeland Security, which was established in 2003, was not in existence
during any prior transition.
38 Department heads are generally considered to be members of the Cabinet by tradition. Other officials may be
accorded Cabinet rank at the President’s discretion. For the purposes of this table, the category of Cabinet-rank
nominees includes nominees to the four additional PAS positions given Cabinet rank by President George W. Bush. All
of these positions, as well as others, were given Cabinet rank by President Clinton. President Reagan accorded Cabinet
rank to two of these positions—OMB Director and U.S. Trade Representative—as well as others.
ȱȱȱ
ŗŖȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
the means, and medians, for each of these intervals in each of three categories of Cabinet
nominees: department head nominees, Cabinet-rank nominees, and all Cabinet nominees.39

39 Two measures of central tendency are presented here: the mean and the median. The mean is the more familiar
measure, and it was calculated, in each instance, by adding together the elapsed times for all of the cases and dividing
the resulting sum by the total number of cases. The median is the middle number in a set of observations (or, in this
case, because of an even number of observations, the average of the two middle numbers). In data sets, such as those
under discussion here, where the data are skewed because of a limited number of extreme values, the median is often
considered to be the more accurate of the two measures of central tendency.
ȱȱȱ
ŗŗȱ

ȱ
Table 2. Mean and Median Length of Appointment Process Intervals for Transition-period Cabinet-level Nominees of President
Ronald W. Reagan, President William J. Clinton, and President George W. Bush

Mean (or median*) elapsed days
Election day to Announcement to first Announcement to final
Position (number of nominees)
announcement
hearing date
disposition
Total: election day
to final disposition
Department heads

Secretary of State (3)
43
26
33
77
Secretary of the Treasury (3)
39
29
38
77
Secretary of Defense (3)
46
19
31
76
Attorney General (4)
58
28
36
94
Secretary of the Interior (3)
50
21
30
81
Secretary of Agriculture (3)
48
21
30
77
Secretary of Commerce (3)
40
22
38
77
Secretary of Labor (3)
48
22
36
84
Secretary of Health and
42 27
36 78
Human Services (3)
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (3)
45
25
33
78
Secretary of Transportation (3)
48
21
31
79
Secretary of Energy (3)
51
22
27
77
Secretary of Education (3)
55
14
23
77
Secretary of Veterans Affairs (2)
48
21
30
78
Secretary of Homeland Security (0)a
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
Department head nominees (42)—mean
47
23
32
80
Department head nominees (42)—median
48*
25*
31*
79*
Cabinet-rank positions

Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (3)
64
42
51
115
Director of the Office of Management and Budget (3)
40
29
40
80
U.S. Trade Representative (3)
60
19
23
83
ȬŗŘȱ

ȱ

Mean (or median*) elapsed days
Election day to Announcement to first Announcement to final
Position (number of nominees)
announcement
hearing date
disposition
Total: election day
to final disposition
Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (2)
181
53
129
309
Cabinet-rank nominees (11)—mean
77
34
55
133
Cabinet-rank nominees (11)—median
51*
28*
42*
84*
All Cabinet nominees (53)—mean
54
25
37
91
All Cabinet nominees (53)—median
48*
26*
32*
79*
Source: Table created by CRS based on data from Appendix A of this report.
Note: n.a. = not applicable.
a. The Department of Homeland Security was established in 2003. As of the beginning of the 2008-2009 transition, no incoming President had made appointments to the
position of Secretary of Homeland Security.

Ȭŗřȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
ȱ
On average, Cabinet appointments were confirmed within 91 days (approximately three months)
of the election. This means that the average Cabinet appointment was confirmed within about two
weeks after inauguration day. This finding suggests that, on the whole, the transition-period
appointment process has been effective at installing the top leaders of a new Administration soon
after the new President takes office.
Cabinet-level nominees do not all move through the process this quickly, however. As Table 2
shows, there are notable differences between the mean interval from election day to final
disposition for department head nominees (80 days) and for Cabinet-rank nominees (133 days).
Department head nominees were announced sooner, brought before the committee of jurisdiction
more quickly, and confirmed at an earlier date than Cabinet-rank nominees.
There was more variation in the intervals between election day and final disposition among the
Cabinet-rank nominees than the department head nominees. The overall duration of the
appointment process for OMB Director and U.S. Trade Representative nominees was similar to
that of department head nominees. On average, the EPA Administrator nominations were
confirmed more than a month later than nominees to these two positions. Most notably,
nominations to the position of Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy took far
longer to go through every stage of the process than any other Cabinet nomination.
With regard to the EPA Administrator nominations, the data in Table 2 suggest that the
nominations were announced later than, and brought before the committee of jurisdiction for a
hearing less quickly than, the average department head nomination. As the data in Appendix A
show, however, one of the three EPA nominations, President Reagan’s nomination of Ann M.
Gorsuch, took twice as long as either of the other two to get to final disposition. This single
nomination appears to account for most of the variation from the department head average.
Both transition period nominations to the position of ONDCP Director,40 on the other hand, were
anomolous among all Cabinet-level nominations. As the data in Appendix A show, both of these
nominations took much longer than other Cabinet nominations. But the elapsed time between
election day and final disposition for President Bush’s nomination of John P. Walters was 393
days, 168 days longer than the same period for President Clinton’s nomination of Lee P. Brown.
Because of these extreme values, for Cabinet-rank nominees, the mean length of the process is
much greater than the median.
Ȭȱȱȱȱ
The analysis presented here summarizes the data presented in Appendix C. This appendix
includes data on 75 nominations to 29 positions across the three party-turnover transitions
identified above. Positions considered in this analysis include selected higher-level subcabinet
posts in the federal government organizations that are most involved with policymaking related to
national security and to the federal response to the economic and financial downturn. A complete

40 As noted in Appendix A, the position of ONDPC Director was established near the end of the Reagan
Administration, so there were only two transition-period appointments prior to the 2008-2009 transition.
ȱȱȱ
ŗŚȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
list of these selected positions and a detailed explanation of the method by which they were
chosen are provided in Appendix B.
Table 3 provides, at the department level, the mean and median length of the intervals between
specified points in the process: election day and nomination submission; submission and hearing;
hearing and report or discharge; report or discharge and final disposition of the nomination
(usually confirmation); submission and final disposition; and election day and final disposition of
the nomination. The table does not provide this information for the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) or the Intelligence Community. In each of these cases, only one position was
included in the selected group of subcabinet positions. These cases would not necessarily be
representative of all DHS or the Intelligence Community subcabinet positions. The nominees to
positions in these agencies are, however, included in the mean and median values in the rows
entitled “All specified subcabinet nominees” at the bottom of the table.
ȱ
For many of the intervals in Table 3, the mean is notably greater than the median. This suggests
that these data include a limited number of extreme values.41 In such cases, the median is often
considered to be the more accurate of the two measures of central tendency. Consequently, the
analysis in this subsection will focus on the median.
The median length of the total process, from election day to final disposition, for all specified
subcabinet nominees was 182 days. This means that half of the nominees to positions in this
group were confirmed within approximately six months of election day, or, in other words, within
approximately 3½ months of inauguration day. The remaining half were confirmed after that
point.
State Department nominees, on average, completed the process most swiftly. Half the
nominations reached the point of final disposition within 139 days, or about 4½ months, after
election day. The median interval between election day and nomination submission, at 121 days,
or roughly four months, is shorter for State Department nominees than it is for any of the other
groups of nominees, and this appears to account for the faster progress of these nominees.
Nominees to Department of Energy positions took the longest to be confirmed, on average. The
median interval between election and confirmation for the seven nominees was 234 days, or
nearly eight months. In large part, this appears to be due to a relatively long interval between
election day and the submission of nominations to the Senate. Half of these nominations were
submitted 196 days (about 6½ months) or more after election day. Once the Energy Department
nominations were submitted, the median number of days before confirmation was 25 (less than
one month).

41 A review of the data in Appendix C verified that this is correct. A nomination with one or more time intervals that
are far longer than average is not necessarily one that faced a problematic process or led to extended vacancy in the
position in question. For example, President Bush submitted his first nomination to the position of Under Secretary of
Energy for Nuclear Security/Administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration on February 4, 2003, 819 days
after the presidential election and more than two years into his presidency. In this case, however, the incumbent under
the Clinton Administration, John Gordon, remained in office until July 2002. Following Gordon’s departure, Linton F.
Brooks, who was then Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, became Acting Administrator. He
was President Bush’s nominee to the position, and was confirmed on May 1, 2003, approximately three months after
the nomination was submitted.
ȱȱȱ
ŗśȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
As Table 3 shows, for all selected subcabinet nominations, the median interval between election
and submission is nearly six times longer than the median interval between submission and final
disposition. In other words, during the past three party-turnover transitions, the incoming
Administration has typically taken much longer to submit one of these nominations than the
Senate has taken to dispose of it, once it is submitted.

ȱȱȱ
ŗŜȱ

ȱ
Table 3. Mean and Median Length of Appointment Process for Selected Transition-period Subcabinet Nominees of President
Ronald W. Reagan, President William J. Clinton, and President George W. Bush

Elapsed days
Department
Election day to
Submission to
Hearing to report Report or discharge Submission to final Total: election day
(number of
submission
hearing
or discharge
to final disposition
disposition
to final disposition
nominees)

Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median
State
(22)
121 121 24 15 6 5 5 1 33 23 154 139
Treasury
(9) 131 133 16 16 9 6 37 19 55 50 186 189
Defense
(20) 162 155 13 9 14 8 2 1 28 15 190 189
Justice
(12)
223 170 59 28 21 8 8 4 88 50 311 206
Energy
(7)
317 196 24 17 5 7 13 9 41 25 358 234
All selected
subcabinet
166 133 25 13 11 6 10 2 43 23 209 182
nominees
(75)
Source: Table created by CRS based on data from Appendix C of this report.

Ȭŗŝȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
¢ȱ
In general, transition-period Cabinet-level nominees are selected, vetted, considered, and
confirmed expeditiously; they generally take office shortly after the new President’s inauguration.
Nominations to be Director of ONDCP, a position that was accorded Cabinet rank by President
Clinton and President Bush, were different; they took far longer than other Cabinet-level
nominations to be confirmed.
On average, the interval between election day and final disposition of nominations to selected
subcabinet positions was more than twice as long as that of nominations to Cabinet-level
positions. There were notable differences in the average election to final disposition interval
among the subcabinet positions in different departments; on average, State Department
subcabinet nominations were processed and confirmed more quickly than those of any other
department. The pre-nomination portion of this period was notably longer than the period of
Senate consideration. The Senate confirmed more than half of the selected subcabinet
nominations 23 days or less after the nomination was submitted.

ȱȱȱ
ŗŞȱ

ȱ
¡ȱǯ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ
ȱǯȱǰȱȱȱǯȱǰȱȱȱȱ
ȱǯȱȱ
Table A-1.Transition Period Nominations to Cabinet Positions by President Ronald W. Reagan,
President William J. Clinton, and President George W. Bush

Date of action
Elapsed daysa
Nominee
Confirmation or Election day to Announcement Announcement Total: election
(nominating President)
Announcement Committee
hearings
Submission
other final
to first hearing
to final
day to final
disposition
announcement
date
disposition
disposition
TRADITIONAL CABINET MEMBERS (HEADS OF THE 15 DEPARTMENTS)
Secretary of State (Committee on Foreign Relations)
1/9/81, 1/10/81,
Alexander M. Haig Jr. (Reagan)
12/16/80
1/12/81, 1/13/81,
1/20/81 1/21/81
42
24
36
78
1/14/81b
Warren Christopher (Clinton)
12/22/92
1/13/93, 1/14/93
1/20/93
1/20/93
49
22
29
78
Colin L. Powell (Bush)
12/16/00
1/17/01
1/20/01
1/20/01
39
32
35
74
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Secretary of State
43
26
33
77
Secretary of the Treasury (Committee on Finance)
Donald T. Regan (Reagan)
12/11/80
1/6/81
1/20/81
1/21/81
37
26
41
78
Lloyd Bentsen (Clinton)
12/10/92
1/12/93
1/20/93
1/20/93
37
33
41
78
Paul H. O’Neill (Bush)
12/20/00
1/17/01
1/20/01
1/20/01
43
28
31
74
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Secretary of the Treasury
39
29
38
77
Secretary of Defense (Committee on Armed Services)
Caspar W. Weinberger (Reagan)
12/11/80
1/6/81
1/20/81
1/20/81
37
26
40
77
Les Aspin (Clinton)
12/22/92
1/7/93
1/20/93
1/20/93
49
16
29
78
Ȭŗşȱ

ȱ

Date of action
Elapsed daysa
Nominee
Confirmation or Election day to Announcement Announcement Total: election
(nominating President)
Announcement Committee
hearings
Submission
other final
to first hearing
to final
day to final
disposition
announcement
date
disposition
disposition
Secretary of Energy (Committee on Energy and Natural Resources)
James B. Edwards (Reagan)
12/22/80
1/12/81
1/20/81
1/22/81
48
21
31
79
Hazel R. O’Leary (Clinton)
12/21/92
1/19/93
1/20/93
1/21/93
48
29
31
79
Spencer Abraham (Bush)
1/2/01
1/18/01
1/20/01
1/20/01
56
16
18
74
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Secretary of Energy
51
22
27
77
Secretary of Education (Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions)
Terrel H. Bell (Reagan)
1/7/81
1/15/81
1/20/81
1/22/81
64
8
15
79
Richard W. Riley (Clinton)
12/21/92
1/12/93
1/20/93
1/21/93
48
22
31
79
Roderick R. Paige (Bush)
12/29/00
1/10/01
1/20/01
1/20/01
52
12
22
74
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Secretary of Education
55
14
23
77
Secretary of Veterans Affairs (Committee on Veterans’ Affairs)
Jesse Brown (Clinton)
12/17/92
1/7/93
1/20/93
1/21/93
44
21
35
79
Anthony J. Principi (Bush)
12/29/00
1/18/01
1/20/01
1/23/01
52
20
25
77
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Secretary of Veterans Affairs
48
21
30
78
Secretary of Homeland Security (Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs) (No nominations during presidential transitions)e
Mean elapsed days for all appointments to department head positions
47
23
32
80
Median elapsed days for all appointments to department head positions
48
25
31
79
ADDITIONAL ADVICE AND CONSENT POSITIONS THAT HELD CABINET RANK DURING THE GEORGE W. BUSH ADMINISTRATION
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (Committee on Environment and Public Works)
Ann M. Gorsuch (Reagan)
2/21/81
5/1/81
3/3/81
5/5/81
109
69
73
182
Carol M. Browner (Clinton)
12/10/92
1/11/93
1/20/93
1/21/93
37
32
42
79
Christine T. Whitman (Bush)
12/22/00
1/17/01
1/20/01
1/30/01
45
26
39
84
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
64
42
51
115
ȬŘŘȱ

ȱ

Date of action
Elapsed daysa
Nominee
Confirmation or Election day to Announcement Announcement Total: election
(nominating President)
Announcement Committee
hearings
Submission
other final
to first hearing
to final
day to final
disposition
announcement
date
disposition
disposition
Director of the Office of Management and Budget (Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs)f
David A. Stockman (Reagan)
12/11/80
1/8/81
1/20/81
1/27/81
37
28
47
84
Leon E. Panetta (Clinton)
12/10/92
1/11/93
1/20/93
1/21/93
37
32
42
79
Mitchell E. Daniels Jr. (Bush)
12/22/00
1/19/01
1/20/01
1/23/01
45
28
32
77
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Director of the Office of Management and Budget
40
29
40
80
U.S. Trade Representative (Committee on Finance)
William E. Brock III (Reagan)
1/7/81
1/19/81
1/20/81
1/21/81
64
12
14
78
Michael Kantor (Clinton)
12/24/92
1/19/93
1/20/93
1/21/93
51
26
28
79
Robert B. Zoellick (Bush)
1/11/01
1/30/01
1/29/01
2/6/01
65
19
26
91
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be U.S. Trade Representative
60
19
23
83
Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (Committee on the Judiciary) new position - P.L. 100-690 signed into law 11/18/1988, Title I, Subtitle A, Section 1002(b)
Lee P. Brown (Clinton)
4/28/93
5/25/93
5/20/93
6/16/93
176
27
49
225
John P. Walters (Bush)g 5/11/01
7/28/01
6/5/01
12/5/01 185 78 208 393
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy
181
53
129
309
Mean elapsed days for all appointments to cabinet rank positions
77
34
55
133
Median elapsed days for all appointments to Cabinet-rank positions
51
28
42
84
MEAN ELAPSED DAYS FOR ALL APPOINTMENTS
54
25
37
91
MEDIAN ELAPSED DAYS FOR ALL APPOINTMENTS
48
26
32
79
Source: Table created by CRS using data gathered from the nominations database of the Legislative Information System (LIS), which is available to the congressional
community at http://www.congress.gov/nomis/, various Senate committee calendars, various hearing records, various volumes of the Journal of the Executive Proceedings of the
Senate of the United States of America, and the U.S. Code. Announcement dates were drawn from contemporary news accounts (articles available from the authors), and from
Charles O. Jones, Passages to the Presidency: From Campaigning to Governing (Washington: Brookings, 1998), p. 97.
Notes: This table includes, in sequential sections, the traditional Cabinet positions that are filled through the advice and consent process (i.e., heads of departments), and
the four additional PAS positions given Cabinet rank by President George W. Bush. All four positions, as well as others, were given Cabinet rank by President Clinton.
President Reagan accorded Cabinet rank to two of these positions—OMB Director and U.S. Trade Representative—as well as others. In each of these sections, the
ȬŘřȱ

ȱ
positions are listed in the order they were established as advice and consent positions. The table does not include an individual whose selection was announced if he or she
was not subsequently nominated.
a. This table does not provide the interval between submission and final disposition. As discussed in the body of this report, Senate committees often begin consideration
of prospective Cabinet-level nominations before the new President takes office and has the authority to submit formal nominations. Consequently, the submission-to-
final disposition interval would not be a meaningful measure of the Senate consideration period. (See “The Senate Confirmation Process and Presidential Transitions”
above.)
b. The record of hearings concerning the nomination of Alexander M. Haig Jr. before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations includes a transcript of the January 15,
1981, meeting of the committee to review and vote on the nomination. (U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Nomination of Alexander M. Haig, Jr.,
hearings on the nomination of Alexander M. Haig, Jr., to be Secretary of State, 97th Cong., 1st sess., January 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 1981 (Washington: GPO, 1981).) The
committee does not appear to have heard any testimony on the 15th, however. In addition, the committee calendar does not include January 15, 1981, as a hearing
date. (U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Legislative Calendar, Final Edition, committee print, 97th Cong., 2nd sess. (Washington: GPO, 1983).)
Consequently, this date is not included here.
c. The Committee on Labor and Human Resources also held a hearing on this nomination on January 15, 1993.
d. The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions also held a hearing on this nomination on January 19, 2001.
e. The Department of Homeland Security was established in 2003. As of the beginning of the 2008-2009 transition, no incoming President had made appointments to the
position of Secretary of Homeland Security.
f. According to the Legislative Information System, President Reagan’s nomination of Stockman to this position was also referred to the Committee on Finance. The
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs was formerly known as the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
g. This row summarizes President Bush’s two sequential nominations of Walters to the position. The first nomination, on June 5, 2001, was returned to the President on
August 3, 2001, at the beginning of the Senate’s August recess, under the provisions of Senate Rule XXXI, paragraph 6 of the Standing Rules of the Senate. The
President renominated Walters to the position on September 4, 2001, and the nomination was confirmed on December 5, 2001. The two nominations are combined
here to provide a more accurate understanding of the length of the entire process.

ȬŘŚȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
¡ȱǯ ȱȱȱȱ
This report includes analysis of a group of higher-level subcabinet positions in the departments
most involved with policymaking related to national security and to the federal response to the
economic and financial downturn. A two stage process was used to select this group. First,
relevant criteria were used to identify an appropriate pool of positions. Second, those positions to
which a nomination had been made during at least one previous presidential transition were
selected from this pool.
The inclusion of the national security related positions was based on a 9/11 Commission
recommendation that the “president-elect ... submit the nominations of the entire new national
security team, through the level of under secretary of cabinet departments, not later than January
20,” and that the “Senate ... adopt special rules requiring hearings and votes to confirm or reject
national security nominees within 30 days of their submission.”42 The commission did not further
specify which departments or under secretaries should be treated in this manner. In an effort to
select positions for analysis that might match those intended by the commission, criteria similar
to those in the passages above were adopted. Positions were to be part of the Department of State,
the Department of Defense, the Department of Justice, the Department of Energy, the Department
of Homeland Security, or the Intelligence Community and either (1) at Level II of the Executive
Schedule; (2) titled as under secretaries; or (3) for those organizations without under secretaries,
the equivalent title at Level III of the Executive Schedule.
It could be argued that, with federal government efforts to address the nation’s economic and
financial downturn underway during the 2008-2009 presidential transition, the pace at which top
leadership positions at the Department of the Treasury are filled would also be of concern. For
this reason, Treasury positions similar to those in the other organizations were included. In
addition, two new positions specifically associated with the federal government’s efforts, the
Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability and the Special Inspector General for the Troubled
Asset Relief Program, were included.
The list below shows the positions that met the criteria specified above. The positions are listed
by organization, and the organizations are listed in the order established. The subcabinet positions
that were actually subject to analysis in this report were drawn from this pool. Given the nature
and purpose of the study, the group selected for analysis includes only those positions to which a
nomination has been made during at least one presidential transition; positions that have come
into existence since the 2000-2001 transition were not included in the final pool. Selected
positions are marked with an asterisk in the list below.
Department of State
Deputy Secretary*
Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development*
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations*
Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security*
Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs*

42 9/11 Commission Report, p. 422.
ȱȱȱ
Řśȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
Under Secretary for Economic Business and Agricultural Affairs*
Under Secretary for Management*
Under Secretary for Political Affairs*
Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs*
Department of the Treasury
Deputy
Secretary*
Under Secretary for Domestic Finance*
Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence*
Under Secretary for International Affairs*
Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability
Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program
Department of Defense
Deputy
Secretary*
Secretary of the Army*
Secretary of the Navy*
Secretary of the Air Force*
Under Secretary for Acquisitions, Techonology, and Logistics
Under Secretary - Comptroller*
Under Secretary for Intelligence
Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness*
Under Secretary for Policy*
Department of Justice
Deputy Attorney General*
Administrator of Drug Enforcement*
Associate Attorney General*
Solicitor
General*
Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
Department of Energy
Deputy
Secretary*
Under
Secretary*
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security/Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration*
Under Secretary for Science
Department of Homeland Security
Deputy Secretary
Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency*
Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis
Under Secretary for Management
Under Secretary for Preparedness (also known as the Under Secretary for National Protection and Programs
Directorate)
ȱȱȱ
ŘŜȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ
Under Secretary for Science and Technology
Intelligence Community
Director of National Intelligence
Director of Central Intelligence*
Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence
Director of the National Counterterrorism Center
Note: Positions marked with an asterisk are those that were selected from this pool and subject to analysis in
this report. See text above for more information.

ȱȱȱ
Řŝȱ

ȱ
¡ȱǯ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
¢ȱȱȱǯȱǰȱȱȱǯȱǰȱȱȱ
ȱǯȱȱȱ
Table C-1.Transition Period Nominations to Selected Subcabinet Positions by President Ronald W. Reagan, President William J.
Clinton, and President George W. Bush

Date of action
Elapsed days
Report or
Total:
Reported Confirmation
Hearing to discharge to Submission election to
Nominee
Committee
or
or other final Election to Submission report or
final
to final
final
(nominating President)
Submission hearing(s) discharged disposition submission to hearing discharge disposition disposition disposition
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Deputy Secretary (Committee on Foreign Relations)
William P. Clark (Reagan)
1/26/81
2/2/81
2/13/81
2/24/81
83
7
11
11
29
112
Clifton R. Wharton Jr. (Clinton)
1/20/93
1/22/93
1/26/93
1/26/93
78
2
4
0
6
84
Richard L. Armitage (Bush)
3/8/01
3/15/01
3/23/01
3/23/01
121
7
8
0
15
136
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Deputy Secretary of State
94
5
8
4
17
111
Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) (Committee on Foreign Relations)
M. Peter McPherson (Reagan)
2/3/81
2/20/81
2/24/81
2/26/81
91
17
4
2
23
114
J. Brian Atwood (Clinton)
4/5/93
4/29/93
5/6/93
5/7/93
153
24
7
1
32
185
Andrew S. Natsios (Bush)
3/22/01
4/25/01
4/26/01
4/26/01
135
34
1
0
35
170
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Administrator of the USAID
126
25
4
1
30
156
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations (U.N.) (Committee on Foreign Relations)
Jeane J. Kirkpatrick (Reagan)
1/20/81
1/15/81
n.a.a
1/29/81 77 n.a.a
n.a.a
n.a.a
9
86
Madeleine K. Albright (Clinton)
1/20/93
1/21/93
1/26/93
1/26/93
78
1
5
0
6
84
ȬŘŞȱ

ȱ

Date of action
Elapsed days
Report or
Total:
Reported Confirmation
Hearing to discharge to Submission election to
Nominee
Committee
or
or other final Election to Submission report or
final
to final
final
(nominating President)
Submission hearing(s) discharged disposition submission to hearing discharge disposition disposition disposition
John D. Negroponte (Bush) b
5/14/01 9/13/01 9/13/01 9/14/01 188
122
0
1
123
311
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be U.S. Permanent Representative to the U.N.
114
62
3
1
46
160
Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security (Committee on Foreign Relations) (New position as of 1999, 106th Congress)c
John R. Bolton (Bush)
3/8/01
3/29/01
4/26/01
5/8/01
121
21
28
12
61
182
Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs (Committee on Foreign Relations)d
Robert C. McFarlane (Reagan)
2/3/81
2/20/81
2/24/81
2/26/81
91
17
4
2
23
114
Timothy E. Wirth (Clinton)
3/8/93
3/25/93
4/1/93
4/21/93
125
17
7
20
44
169
Paula Dobriansky (Bush)
4/4/01
4/25/01
4/26/01
4/26/01
148
21
1
0
22
170
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs
121
18
4
7
30
151
Under Secretary for Economic, Business, and Agricultural Affairs (Committee on Foreign Relations)e
Myer Rashish (Reagan)
3/17/81
4/28/81
5/4/81
6/11/81
133
42
6
38
86
219
Joan E. Spero (Clinton)
3/16/93
3/24/93
3/25/93
3/31/93
133
8
1
6
15
148
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Under Secretary for Economic, Business, and Agricultural
133 25 4 22 51 184
Affairs
Under Secretary for Management (Committee on Foreign Relations)
Richard T. Kennedy (Reagan)
2/3/81
2/18/81
2/24/81
2/26/81
91
15
6
2
23
114
J. Brian Atwood (Clinton)
3/8/93
3/17/93
3/23/93
3/31/93
125
9
6
8
23
148
Grant S. Green Jr. (Bush)
3/8/01
3/21/01
3/27/01
3/28/01
121
13
6
1
20
141
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Under Secretary for Management
112
12
6
4
22
134
Under Secretary for Political Affairs (Committee on Foreign Relations)
Walter J. Stoessel Jr. (Reagan)
2/3/81
2/18/81
2/24/81
2/26/81
91
15
6
2
23
114
Peter Tarnoff (Clinton)
2/26/93
3/4/93
3/9/93
3/10/93
115
6
5
1
12
127
ȬŘşȱ

ȱ

Date of action
Elapsed days
Report or
Total:
Reported Confirmation
Hearing to discharge to Submission election to
Nominee
Committee
or
or other final Election to Submission report or
final
to final
final
(nominating President)
Submission hearing(s) discharged disposition submission to hearing discharge disposition disposition disposition
Marc I. Grossman (Bush)
3/8/01
3/20/01
3/23/01
3/23/01
121
12
3
0
15
136
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Under Secretary for Political Affairs
109
11
5
1
17
126
Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy (Committee on Foreign Relations) (New position as of 1998 - 106th Congress)f
Charlotte L. Beersg (Bush)
6/29/01
9/24/01
9/25/01
9/26/01
234
87
1
1
89
323
Mean elapsed days for appointments to selected Department of State positions
121
24
6
5
33
154
Median elapsed days for appointments to selected Department of State positions
121
15
5
1
23
139
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Deputy Secretary (Committee on Finance)
R. T. McNamar (Reagan)
2/2/81
2/6/81
2/6/81
2/16/81
90
4
0
10
14
104
Roger Altman (Clinton)
1/20/93
1/13/93
n.a.h 1/21/93 78 n.a.h n.a.h n.a.h 1 79
Kenneth W. Dam (Bush)
3/8/01
3/29/01
5/1/01
8/3/01
121
21
33
94
148
269
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Deputy Secretary of the Treasury
96
8
11
35
54
151
Under Secretary (Domestic Finance) (Committee on Finance)i
Norman B. Ture (Reagan)
3/17/81
3/20/81
3/25/81
3/27/81
133
3
5
2
10
143
Frank N. Newman (Clinton)
3/22/93
4/26/93
4/28/93
5/11/93
139
35
2
13
50
189
Peter R. Fisher (Bush)
4/30/01
5/10/01
5/24/01
8/3/01
174
10
14
71
95
269
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Under Secretary (Domestic Finance)
149
16
7
29
52
200
Under Secretary (International Affairs) (Committee on Finance) (New position as of 1985 - 99th Congress)j
Lawrence H. Summers (Clinton)
3/2/93
3/18/93
3/24/93
3/31/93
119
16
6
7
29
148
John B. Taylor (Bush)
4/4/01
4/26/01
5/1/01
5/26/01
148
22
5
25
52
200
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Under Secretary (International Affairs)
134
19
6
16
41
174
Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Crimes (Committee on Finance)k
James Gurule (Bush)
4/30/01
5/16/01
5/24/01
8/3/01
174
16
8
71
95
269
ȬřŖȱ

ȱ

Date of action
Elapsed days
Report or
Total:
Reported Confirmation
Hearing to discharge to Submission election to
Nominee
Committee
or
or other final Election to Submission report or
final
to final
final
(nominating President)
Submission hearing(s) discharged disposition submission to hearing discharge disposition disposition disposition
Mean elapsed days for appointments to selected Department of the Treasury positions
131
16
9
37
55
186
Median elapsed days for appointments to selected Department of the Treasury positions
133
16
6
19
50
189
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Deputy Secretary (Committee on Armed Services)
Frank C. Carlucci (Reagan)
1/22/81
1/13/81
1/29/81
2/3/81
79
n.a.l
16 5 12 91
William J. Perry (Clinton)
2/24/93
2/25/93
3/5/93
3/5/93
113
1
8
0
9
122
Paul Wolfowitz (Bush)
2/15/01
2/27/01
2/28/01
2/28/01
100
12
1
0
13
113
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Deputy Secretary of Defense
97
4
8
2
11
109
Secretary of the Army (Committee on Armed Services)
John O. Marsh Jr. (Reagan)
1/23/81
1/26/81
1/29/81
1/29/81
80
3
3
0
6
86
Togo D. West Jr. (Clinton)
11/5/93
11/18/93
11/18/93
11/20/93
367
13
0
2
15
382
Thomas E. White (Bush)
5/1/01
5/10/01
5/21/01
5/24/01
175
9
11
3
23
198
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Secretary of the Army
207
8
5
2
15
222
Secretary of the Navy (Committee on Armed Services)
John F. Lehman Jr. (Reagan)
1/23/81
1/28/81
1/29/81
1/29/81
80
5
1
0
6
86
John H. Dalton (Clinton)
7/1/93
7/13/93
7/20/93
7/21/93
240
12
7
1
20
260
Gordon England (Bush)
4/30/01
5/10/01
5/21/01
5/22/01
174
10
11
1
22
196
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Secretary of the Navy
165
9
6
1
16
181
Secretary of the Air Force (Committee on Armed Services)
Verne Orr (Reagan)
1/23/81
1/28/81
2/5/81
2/6/81
80
5
8
1
14
94
Sheila E. Widnall (Clinton)
7/22/93
7/29/93
7/30/93
8/5/93
261
7
1
6
14
275
James G. Roche (Bush)
5/7/01
5/10/01
5/21/01
5/24/01
181
3
11
3
17
198
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Secretary of the Air Force
174
5
7
3
15
189
Ȭřŗȱ

ȱ

Date of action
Elapsed days
Report or
Total:
Reported Confirmation
Hearing to discharge to Submission election to
Nominee
Committee
or
or other final Election to Submission report or
final
to final
final
(nominating President)
Submission hearing(s) discharged disposition submission to hearing discharge disposition disposition disposition
Under Secretary for Acquisitions, Technology, and Logistics (Committee on Armed Services) (New position 1986, 99th Congress)m
John M. Deutch (Clinton)
3/25/93
3/30/93
3/31/93
4/1/93
142
5
1
1
7
149
Edward C. Aldridge (Bush)
4/23/01
4/26/01
5/1/01
5/8/01
167
3
5
7
15
182
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Under Secretary for Acquisitions, Technology, and Logistics
155
4
3
4
11
166
Under Secretary - Comptroller (Committee on Armed Services) (New position as of 1986, 99th Congress)n
John J. Hamre (Clinton)
8/4/93
9/23/93
10/21/93
10/25/93
274
50
28
4
82
356
Dov S. Zakheim (Bush)
3/13/01
4/24/01
5/1/01
5/1/01
126
42
7
0
49
175
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Under Secretary - Comptroller
200
46
18
2
66
266
Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness (Committee on Armed Services) (New position as of 1993, 103rd Congress)o
David S. C. Chu (Bush)
4/30/01
5/10/01
5/21/01
5/26/01
174
10
11
5
26
200
Under Secretary for Policy (Committee on Armed Services)
Fred C. Ikle (Reagan)
3/17/81
3/26/81
3/26/81
3/27/81
133
9
0
1
10
143
Frank G. Wisner (Clinton)
2/24/93
3/4/93
6/30/93
7/1/93
113
8
118
1
127
240
Douglas J. Feith (Bush)
4/30/01
6/5/01
7/11/01
7/12/01
174
36
36
1
73
247
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Under Secretary for Policy
140
18
51
1
70
210
Mean elapsed days for appointments to selected Department of Defense positions
162
13
14
2
28
190
Median elapsed days for appointments to selected Department of Defense positions
155
9
8
1
15
189
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Deputy Attorney General (Committee on the Judiciary)
Edward C. Schmults (Reagan)
1/30/81
2/5/81
2/5/81
2/6/81
87
6
0
1
7
94
Philip B. Heymann (Clinton)
5/7/93
5/18/93
5/24/93
5/28/93
185
11
6
4
21
206
Larry D. Thompson (Bush)
3/22/01
4/5/01
5/10/01
5/10/01
135
14
35
0
49
184
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Deputy Attorney General
136
10
14
2
26
161
ȬřŘȱ

ȱ

Date of action
Elapsed days
Report or
Total:
Reported Confirmation
Hearing to discharge to Submission election to
Nominee
Committee
or
or other final Election to Submission report or
final
to final
final
(nominating President)
Submission hearing(s) discharged disposition submission to hearing discharge disposition disposition disposition
Administrator of Drug Enforcement (Committee on the Judiciary)p
Francis M. Mullen Jr. (Reagan)q
3/29/82 6/15/83 9/30/83 10/7/83 510
443
107
7
557
1067
Thomas A. Constantine (Clinton)
1/26/94
3/2/94
3/9/94
3/10/94
449
35
7
1
43
492
Asa Hutchinson (Bush)
6/12/01
7/17/01
7/26/01
8/1/01
217
35
9
6
50
267
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Administrator of Drug Enforcement
392
171
41
5
217
609
Associate Attorney General (Committee on the Judiciary)
Rudolph W. Giuliani (Reagan)
3/17/81
3/27/81
4/8/81
4/27/81
133
10
12
19
41
174
Webster L. Hubbell (Clinton)
4/7/93
5/19/93
5/24/93
5/28/93
155
42
5
4
51
206
Jay B. Stephens (Bush)
9/10/01
9/20/01
10/4/01
11/8/01
307
10
14
35
59
366
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Associate Attorney General
198
21
10
19
50
249
Solicitor General (Committee on the Judiciary)
Rex E. Lee (Reagan)
6/11/81
7/14/81
7/14/81
7/31/81
219
33
0
17
50
269
Drew S. Days III (Clinton)
4/7/93
5/20/93
5/24/93
5/28/93
155
43
4
4
51
206
Theodore B. Olson (Bush)
3/13/01
4/5/01
5/24/01
5/24/01
126
23
49
0
72
198
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Solicitor General
167
33
18
7
58
224
Mean elapsed days for appointments to selected Department of Justice positions
223
59
21
8
88
311
Median elapsed days for appointments to selected Department of Justice positions
170
28
8
4
50
206
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Deputy Secretary (Committee on Energy and Natural Resources)
W. Kenneth Davis
(Reagan)
4/27/81 5/13/81 5/13/81 5/14/81 174
16
0
1
17
191
William H. White (Clinton)
5/18/93
6/8/93
6/16/93
6/25/93
196
21
8
9
38
234
Francis S. Blake (Bush)
4/30/01
5/9/01
5/16/01
5/25/01
174
9
7
9
25
199
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Deputy Secretary of Energy
181
15
5
6
27
208
Ȭřřȱ

ȱ

Date of action
Elapsed days
Report or
Total:
Reported Confirmation
Hearing to discharge to Submission election to
Nominee
Committee
or
or other final Election to Submission report or
final
to final
final
(nominating President)
Submission hearing(s) discharged disposition submission to hearing discharge disposition disposition disposition
Under Secretary (Committee on Energy and Natural Resources)
Guy W. Fiske (Reagan)
8/28/81
9/14/81
9/16/81
9/18/81
297
17
2
2
21
318
Charles B. Curtis (Clinton)
11/20/93
2/1/94
2/2/94
2/7/94
382
73
1
5
79
461
Robert G. Card (Bush)
5/2/01
5/9/01
5/16/01
5/25/01
176
7
7
9
23
199
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Under Secretary of Energy
285
32
3
5
41
326
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security/Administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration (Committee on Armed Services) New Position as of 1999 - 106th Congressr
Linton F. Brooks (Bush)
2/4/03
2/27/03
3/6/03
5/1/03
819
23
7
56
86
905
Mean elapsed days for appointments to selected Department of Energy positions
317
24
5
13
41
358
Median elapsed days for appointments to selected Department of Energy positions
196
17
7
9
25
234
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITYs
Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (Committee on Governmental Affairs)t

Louis O. Giuffrida (Reagan)
4/3/81
5/6/81
5/12/81
5/19/81
150
33
6
7
46
196
James L. Witt (Clinton)
3/16/93
3/31/93
4/1/93
4/5/93
133
15
1
4
20
153
Joe M. Allbaugh (Bush)
2/6/01
2/13/01
2/15/01
2/15/01
91
7
2
0
9
100
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
125
18
3
4
25
150
INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITYu
Director of Central Intelligence (Select Committee on Intelligence)v
William J. Casey (Reagan)
1/20/81
1/13/81
n.a.w 1/27/81 77 n.a. w n.a. w n.a. w 7 84
R. James Woolsey (Clinton)
1/20/93
2/2/93
2/3/93
2/3/93
78
13
1
0
14
92
Mean elapsed days for initial appointments to be Director of the Central Intelligence
78
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
11
88
MEAN ELAPSED DAYS FOR ALL APPOINTMENTS
166
25
11
9
43
209
ȬřŚȱ

ȱ
Source: Table created by CRS using information gathered from the nominations database of the Legislative Information System (LIS), which is available to the congressional
community at http://www.congress.gov/nomis/, various Senate committee calendars, various volumes of the Journal of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate of the United
States of America, and the U.S. Code.
Note: Includes PAS positions in the listed organizational units that are either (1) at Level II of the Executive Schedule; (2) titled as under secretaries; or (3) for those
organizations without under secretaries, the equivalent title at Level III of the Executive Schedule. The table includes only those positions to which a nomination has been
made during at least one presidential transition. Positions that have come into existence since the 2000-2001 transition are not included.
n.a.= not applicable.
a. The Kirkpatrick nomination was one of a group of nominations that was submitted by President Reagan on January 20, 1981, and, by unanimous consent, held at the
desk (not referred to committee). Consequently, there is no entry in this row for date of committee report or discharge, and no entries for elapsed days between this
date and other dates. The Committee on Foreign Relations held hearings on the anticipated Kirkpatrick nomination before the President-elect took office and had the
authority to formally submit the nomination to the Senate. As a result, the elapsed time from submission to hearing is not applicable. The elapsed time from the
committee hearing to confirmation was 14 days.
b. This row summarizes President Bush’s two sequential nominations of Negroponte to the position. The first nomination, on May 14, 2001, was returned to the
President on August 3, 2001, at the beginning of the Senate’s August recess, under the provisions of Senate Rule XXXI, paragraph 6 of the Standing Rules of the
Senate. The President re-nominated Negroponte to the position on September 4, 2001, and the nomination was confirmed on September 14, 2001. The two
nominations are combined here to provide a more accurate understanding of the length of the entire process.
c. The position of Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security was established by P.L. 105-277, § 1213 (112 Stat. 2681-767). Bolton’s
nomination to the position was the first during a presidential transition.
d. This Under Secretary position has been entitled differently, under prior administrations, as, for example, Under Secretary for Global Affairs. Furthermore, its
predecessor position was “Counselor” prior to the enactment of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (P.L. 103-236; 108-382). The
Counselor was compensated at Level IV of the Executive Schedule until 1983, when it became a Level III position (5 U.S.C. § 5314).
e. This Under Secretary position has been entitled differently, under prior administrations, as, for example, Under Secretary for Economic Affairs and Under Secretary
for Economic and Agricultural Affairs. No new appointment was made to the position at the outset of the Bush presidency. Alan P. Larson was nominated to the
position by President Clinton, was confirmed on November 19, 1999, and continued to serve under President Bush. Larson was replaced by Josette S. Shiner, who was
confirmed on July 29, 2005.
f. The position of Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy was established by P.L. 105-277, § 1313 (112 Stat. 2681-776). Beers’s nomination to the position was
the first during a presidential transition. During the George W. Bush Administration, the position has been known as Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy
and Public Affairs.
g. This row summarizes President Bush’s two sequential nominations of Beers to the position. The first nomination, on June 29, 2001, was returned to the President on
August 3, 2001, at the beginning of a 31-day Senate recess, under the provisions of Senate Rule XXXI, paragraph 6 of the Standing Rules of the Senate. The President
re-nominated Beers to the position on September 4, 2001, and the nomination was confirmed on September 26, 2001. The two nominations are combined here to
provide a more accurate understanding of the length of the entire process.
h. The Altman nomination was one of a group of nominations that was submitted by President Clinton on January 20, 1993, and, by unanimous consent, placed directly
on the Executive Calendar (and not referred to committee). Consequently, there is no entry in this row for date of committee report or discharge, and no entries for
elapsed days between this date and other dates. The Committee on Foreign Relations held hearings on the anticipated Altman nomination before the President-elect
took office and had the authority to formally submit the nomination to the Senate. As a result, the elapsed time from submission to hearing is not applicable. The
elapsed time from the committee hearing to confirmation was eight days.
Ȭřśȱ

ȱ
i. This position, is entitled simply “Under Secretary” in statute, and has been named in various ways by different Administrations. Under the George W. Bush
Administration, it was known as the Under Secretary for Domestic Finance.
j. This under secretary position was established by P.L. 99-190, § 141 (99 Stat. 1324). It replaced the position of Under Secretary for Monetary Affairs. Summers’
nomination to the position was the first during a party turnover presidential transition. (A nomination had been submitted during the Reagan-Bush transition in 1989.)
The position, which is entitled simply “Under Secretary” in statute, has generally been known as Under Secretary for International Finance under various
Administrations.
k. The position of Under Secretary for Enforcement was established by P.L. 103-211, § 2003 (108 Stat. 24). Gurule’s nomination to the position was the first during a
presidential transition. He was succeeded in that position by Stuart Levey. The position of Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Crimes was established as a
successor position to the Under Secretary for Enforcement by P.L. 108-447, Division H, Title II, § 222 (118 Stat. 3242). After the transition, Levey, the incumbent,
continued to serve. During the George W. Bush Administration, the position has been known under a slightly different name, Under Secretary for Terrorism and
Financial Intelligence.
l. Hearings on the Carlucci nomination were held before President-elect Reagan took office and had the authority to formally submit the nomination to the Senate.
Consequently, the elapsed time from submission to hearing is not applicable.
m. The position of Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition was established in 1986 by P.L. 99-348, § 501(a) (100 Stat. 707). The position has since been retitled in
statute as “Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics” (10 U.S.C. § 133). Deutch’s nomination to the position was the first during a party
turnover presidential transition.
n. The position of Comptroller of the Department of Defense was established by the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-
433, § 107; 100 Stat. 998), and this position was compensated at Level IV of the Executive Schedule. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (P.L.
103-160; 107 Stat. 1547) enhanced the status of the position by changing its compensation to Level III of the Executive Schedule (§ 901). This act also established the
Comptroller as the “agency Chief Financial Officer of the Department of Defense for the purposes of chapter 9 of title 31” (the Chief Financial Officers Act) (§ 902). In
1994, the title of the position was changed to “Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)” (P.L. 103-337, Div. A, § 903(a); 108 Stat. 2823). Hamre’s nomination to the
Comptroller position was the first during a party turnover presidential transition. He was confirmed shortly before enactment of the provisions enhancing the
position’s compensation. Zakheim’s nomination was the first to the position, as it is currently titled and compensated, during a presidential transition.
o. The position of Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness was established in 1993 by P.L. 103-160, § 903 (107 Stat. 1727). Chu’s nomination to the
position was the first during a presidential transition.
p. During each of the three transitions covered by this table, incumbents from the preceding Administration remained in office for a number of months after the new
President’s inauguration: Mullen’s predecessor, Peter B. Bensinger, stayed on until July 10, 1981; Constantine’s predecessor, Robert C. Bonner, stayed on until
October 31, 1993; and Hutchinson’s predecessor, Donnie R. Marshall, stayed on until June 30, 2001.
q. This row summarizes President Reagan’s three sequential nominations of Mullen to the position. The first nomination, on March 29, 1982, was returned to the
President on December 27, 1982, after the Senate adjourned sine die near the end of the 97th Congress, under the provisions of Senate Rule XXXI, paragraph 6 of the
Standing Rules of the Senate. The President renominated Mullen to the position on January 25, 1983, and this nomination was returned, under the same provisions, at
the beginning of a 39-day Senate recess. After the end of the recess, on September 9, 1983, the President renominated Mullen again, and Mullen was confirmed on
October 7, 1983. The three nominations are combined here to provide a more accurate understanding of the length of the entire process.
r. The position of Under Secretary of Energy for Nuclear Security was established in 1999 by P.L. 106-65, § 3202 (113 Stat. 954). Brooks’s nomination to the position
was the first during a presidential transition. Brooks’ predecessor, John Gordon, remained in office until July 2002. Brooks, who was then Deputy Administrator for
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, became Acting Administrator at that point, and he appears to have served in that capacity until he was later confirmed and
appointed to the Administrator position.
ȬřŜȱ

ȱ
s. The Department of Homeland Security was established during the Administration of President George W. Bush, so most positions in this department that would
otherwise be covered in this table have never been filled during a presidential transition. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) predates DHS, however,
and prior nominations to its top position are shown here. The FEMA leader is now entitled “Administrator.”
t. At the time of each of these nominations, this committee was entitled the Committee on Governmental Affairs. It is now named the Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs.
u. The leadership structure of the Intelligence Community changed during the Administration of President George W. Bush. Most of these positions would be covered in
this table, but they have never been filled during a presidential transition.
v. The CIA Director at the end of the Clinton Administration, George Tenet, continued to serve during the first years of the Bush Administration; there was no
nomination to this position during the 2000-2001 transition. Due to the nature of the data for nominations to this position, calculated averages would not be
meaningful, and are therefore not included.
w. The Casey nomination was one of a group of nominations that was submitted by President Reagan on January 20, 1981, and, by unanimous consent, held at the desk
(not referred to committee). Consequently, there is no entry in this row for date of committee report or discharge, and no entries for elapsed days between this date
and other dates. The Select Committee on Intelligence held hearings on the anticipated Casey nomination before the President-elect took office and had the authority
to formally submit the nomination to the Senate. As a result, the elapsed time from submission to hearing is not applicable. The elapsed time from the committee
hearing to confirmation was 14 days.

Ȭřŝȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ
ȱ

ȱȱȱ

Henry B. Hogue
Betsy Palmer
Analyst in American National Government
Analyst on the Congress and Legislative Process
hhogue@crs.loc.gov, 7-0642
bpalmer@crs.loc.gov, 7-0381
Maureen Bearden

Information Research Specialist
mbearden@crs.loc.gov, 7-8955

ȱȱȱ
řŞȱ