Cloture Attempts on Nominations
Richard S. Beth
Specialist on Congress and the Legislative Process
Betsy Palmer
Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process
January 31, 2011
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL32878
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

Summary
Cloture is the only means by which the Senate can vote to limit debate on a matter, and thereby
overcome a possible filibuster. It would be erroneous, however, to assume that cases in which
cloture is sought are the same as those in which a filibuster occurs. Cloture may be sought when
no filibuster is taking place, and filibusters may occur without cloture being sought.
Until 1949, cloture could not be invoked on nominations, and before 1980 this action was
attempted only twice. From the 96th Congress (1979-1980) through the 102nd (1991-1992), cloture
was never sought on more than three nominations in a single Congress, but in four of the nine
Congresses since then a dozen or more nominations were subjected to cloture attempts.
From 1949 through 2010, cloture was sought on 89 nominations, and invoked on 41. The Senate
voted to reject cloture on 22 of the remaining 48 nominations, and on the final 26 nominations no
cloture motion received a vote. Eighteen of the 89 nominees failed of confirmation, and 11 of
these 18 were considered during the 108th Congress (2003-2004). In the 103rd Congress (1993-
1994), the 109th Congress (2005-2006), and the 111th Congress (2009-2010) most of the cloture
attempts were to executive branch nominations, but in all other Congresses nominations to the
federal bench predominated.
Cloture has been sought on four nominations to the Supreme Court. In 1968, a cloture vote on the
motion to proceed to consider the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice failed. In 1971,
when he was first appointed to the court, and again in 1986 when he was nominated to be Chief
Justice, opponents of William H. Rehnquist mounted a filibuster. Though the cloture vote in 1971
was unsuccessful, Rehnquist was confirmed to the court; in 1986, the cloture vote was successful.
In 2006, the Senate successfully invoked cloture on the nomination of Samuel A. Alito, Jr., to be
an associate justice on the Supreme Court.
This report is to be updated after each Congress in which additional nominations are subjected to
cloture attempts. Filibusters and cloture are discussed more generally in CRS Report RL30360,
Filibusters and Cloture in the Senate, by Richard S. Beth, Valerie Heitshusen, and Betsy Palmer.
The process by which the Senate considers nominations is discussed more generally in 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.

Congressional Research Service

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

Contents
Cloture, Filibusters, and How They Differ ................................................................................... 1
Frequency of Cloture Attempts on Nominations .......................................................................... 2
Historical Development of Cloture Attempts on Nominations...................................................... 3
Positions in Relation to Which Cloture Was Sought..................................................................... 5

Tables
Table 1. Cloture Attempts and Action on Nominations................................................................. 3
Table 2. Frequency and Success of Cloture Attempts on Nominations, by Time Period,
1949-2008................................................................................................................................ 4
Table 3. Cloture Action on Judicial and Executive Nominations, by Time Period, 1967-
2008 ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Table 4. Nominations Subjected to Cloture Attempts, 1968-2010................................................. 6

Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 10

Congressional Research Service

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

Cloture, Filibusters, and How They Differ
Senate Rules place no general limits on how long consideration of a nomination (or most other
matters) may last. Owing to this lack of general time limits, opponents of a nomination may be
able to use extended debate or other delaying actions to prevent a final vote from occurring.
Although a voting majority of Senators may be prepared to vote for a nominee, the nomination
cannot be confirmed as long as other Senators, presumably a voting minority, are able to prevent
the vote from occurring. The use of debate and procedural actions for the purpose of preventing
or delaying a vote is a filibuster.
The motion for cloture is the only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place time limits on
its consideration of a matter. It is, therefore, the Senate’s most usual means of attempting to
overcome a filibuster. When the Senate adopts a cloture motion on a matter, known as “invoking
cloture,” further consideration of the matter is limited to 30 hours.1 By invoking cloture, the
Senate may be able to ensure that a question will ultimately come to a vote, and can be decided
by a voting majority.
The cloture rule permits Senators to move for cloture repeatedly, if necessary. The Senate,
however, can impose the constraints of cloture only by a super-majority vote. For most matters,
including nominations, three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes, is required to invoke
cloture. As a result, even if a majority of Senators support a nomination, opponents may still be
able to prevent a vote on it by defeating any attempt to invoke cloture. Although the nomination
itself can always be approved by a simple majority of Senators present and voting, the support of
a super-majority may be required to limit consideration and enable the Senate to reach a vote.
While cloture affords the Senate a means of overcoming a filibuster, it is erroneous to assume that
cases in which cloture is sought are always the same as those in which a filibuster occurs. Cloture
may be sought when no filibuster is taking place, and filibusters may occur without cloture being
sought. The reason is that cloture is sought by supporters of a matter, while filibusters are
conducted by its opponents. Leaders of the majority party, or other supporters, may move for
cloture even when opponents do not assert that they are attempting a filibuster, or when no
extended debate or delaying actions have actually occurred. They may do so in response to a
threat or perceived threat of a filibuster, or simply in an effort to speed action.
It is also possible for opponents of a matter to engage in a filibuster without supporters deciding
to move for cloture. Supporters may refrain either because they think they lack the votes to obtain
cloture, because they believe they can overcome any delaying actions and reach a vote without
cloture, or because they hope to resolve the matter in dispute by some negotiated accommodation.
This situation may be less common today, but does seem to have occurred in relation to
nominations in earlier times.
If cloture is not an automatic indicator of a filibuster, neither is any other specific procedural
action. A filibuster is a matter of intent; any course of action by opponents of a matter may be a

1 Senate Rule XXII, paragraph 2. U.S. Senate, Committee on Rules and Administration, Senate Manual, Containing the
Standing Rules, Orders, Laws, and Resolutions Affecting the Business of the United States Senate, S.Doc. 110-1, 110th
Cong., 2nd sess., prepared by Matthew McGowan under the direction of Howard Gantman, Staff Director (Washington:
GPO, 2008), sec. 22.2. During the 30 hours, no single Senator, other than the party floor leaders and the managers of
the debate, may occupy more than one hour in debate.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

filibuster if it is undertaken with the purpose of blocking or delaying a vote. Yet any of the
procedural actions that might be used to delay or block a vote might also be used for other
purposes. As a result, filibusters cannot simply be identified by explicit or uniform criteria, and
there is no commonly accepted set of criteria for doing so. Instead, determining whether a
filibuster is occurring in any specific case typically requires a degree of subjective judgment.
For these reasons, it would be a misuse of the following data, identifying nominations on which
cloture was sought, to treat them as identifying nominations subjected to filibuster. It would
equally be a misinterpretation to assume that all nominations on which cloture was not sought
were not filibustered (especially for periods before 1949, when it was first made possible to move
cloture on nominations, as described in the next section). This report provides data only on
nominations on which cloture motions were offered. It is not to be taken as providing systematic
data on nominations that were or were not filibustered. It would not be feasible to develop a list
of measures filibustered unless a commonly accepted single standard for identifying what
constitutes filibustering could first be established.2 At most, the data presented here may be
regarded as identifying some potentially likely cases in which a filibuster (by some appropriate
definition) may have occurred.
Frequency of Cloture Attempts on Nominations
The Senate first adopted a cloture rule in 1917. Until 1949, cloture could be moved only on
legislative measures, and nominations could not be subjected to cloture attempts.3 From 1949
through 2010 (81st-111th Congresses), cloture was sought on 89 nominations.4 Table 4, following
the text of this report, identifies the 89 nominations, the number of separate cloture motions filed
on each, the ultimate outcome of the cloture attempt in each case, and the disposition of each
nomination. As shown by the summary in Table 1, the Senate invoked cloture on 41 of these 89
nominations. On another 26 nominations, cloture motions were offered, but never came to a vote,
because the motions fell, were withdrawn or vitiated. On the remaining 22 nominations, the
Senate voted against imposing cloture.5

2 These questions of method are discussed in more detail in Richard S. Beth, “What We Don’t Know About
Filibusters,” paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western Political Science Association, Portland, Ore., March
1995 (available from the author).
3 U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Rules and Administration, Senate Cloture Rule: Limitation of Debate in the
Congress of the United States and Legislative History of Paragraph 2 of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the United
States Senate (Cloture Rule), S.Print 99-95, prepared by the Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 99th
Cong., 1st sess. (Washington: GPO, 1985), pp. 17, 21, 38-39, 105-112.
4 For these purposes, five State Department nominations considered concurrently are counted as one, and each instance
in which a single individual was simultaneously nominated to two positions is counted as one.
5 The data include all cloture action in relation to a nomination, whether the motion is offered to close debate on the
nomination itself or on a debatable motion to proceed to its consideration (which does not occur in practice after 1980).
Congressional Research Service
2

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

Table 1. Cloture Attempts and Action on Nominations
Action on Nomination
Cloture Action
Confirmed Not
confirmed
Total
Invoked 41
0
41
Rejected 5
17
22
Withdrawn/Vitiated/Fel a 25
1 26
Total 71
18
89
Source: Table 4.
a. This category only includes situations in which there was no vote on any cloture motion.
Of the 89 nominations on which cloture was sought, 71 ultimately won confirmation. The 71
nominations confirmed include all 41 on which the Senate invoked cloture and 25 of those on
which the Senate did not vote on the cloture motions, as well as five on which the Senate rejected
cloture. The remaining 18 nominations were not confirmed, either because the Senate voted to
reject cloture or because they did not receive a final vote. On 17 of these nominations, 11 of
which occurred in the 108th Congress (2003-2004), the Senate rejected cloture. In the final case,
in the 109th Congress (2006-2007), the cloture motion was withdrawn and the nomination was not
confirmed.
Before the 108th Congress, only three of the 35 nominations on which cloture was sought were
ultimately rejected. These were
• Justice Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice of the United States in 1968;
• Sam Brown to be Ambassador during his tenure as Head of Delegation to the
Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) in 1994; and
• Dr. Henry Foster to be Surgeon General of the United States in 1995.
Historical Development of Cloture Attempts on
Nominations
Even after Senate rules began to permit cloture on nominations in 1949, cloture was sought on
none until 1968, when a motion to proceed to consider the nomination of Supreme Court
Associate Justice Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice was debated at length. After the Senate rejected
cloture on the motion to proceed, 45-43, President Lyndon B. Johnson withdrew the nomination
at Fortas’ request. In 1969 and 1970, the nominations of Clement F. Haynsworth and G. Harrold
Carswell to the Supreme Court were defeated after lengthy debate, but no cloture motion was
filed on either. When the Senate considered the nomination to the Supreme Court of William H.
Rehnquist late in the 1971 session, however, cloture was quickly sought. Though the Senate did
not invoke cloture (52-42), the nomination was subsequently confirmed.
In 1975, the majority required for invoking cloture on most matters, including nominations, was
changed from two-thirds of Senators present and voting to three-fifths of the full membership of
Congressional Research Service
3

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

the Senate (60 votes, assuming no more than one vacancy).6 This change in the rules generally
meant that the threshold for invoking cloture was lowered; if all 100 Senators participated in the
vote, the previous rule required the votes of 67 to invoke cloture, the new rule normally required
60 votes, regardless of how many Senators participated.
Cloture was sought on no other nomination until 1980. That occurrence was the first in which
cloture was sought on a nomination to an executive branch position, that of William G. Lubbers to
be General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board. Cloture was invoked, and the
nomination was confirmed.
Table 2. Frequency and Success of Cloture Attempts on Nominations,
by Time Period, 1949-2008
Nominations on which cloture was:
Moved
Invoked
Congresses and (years)
Number
Average per Congress
Number
Percent of moved
81st-89th (1949-1966)
0
0
0
—
90th-102nd (1967-1992)
12
0.9
9
75%
103rd-111th (1993-2010)
77
8.6
32
42%
Source: Table 4.
As Table 2 illustrates, the frequency with which nominations have been subjected to cloture
attempts has increased in recent years (a development that reflects the trend in the overall
frequency of cloture motions). Before the 103rd Congress, cloture was sought on as many as three
nominations only in the 96th Congress (1979-1980) and the 99th Congress (1985-1986). Since
then, however, this level has been exceeded five times. Cloture was sought on 12 nominations in
the 103rd Congress (1993-1994), five in the 107th (2001-2002), 14 in the 108th (2003-2004), 18 in
the 109th Congress (2005-2006) and 21 in the 111th Congress (2009-2010). These five Congresses
were also the only ones since 1981 in which the presidency, Senate, and House were all
controlled by the same political party.7 In addition, the 103rd, 107th and 111th Congresses were
each the first of a new presidential administration, so that the number of nominations to be
considered was presumably large.
Table 2 also indicates that, although the frequency of nominations with cloture attempts has
increased, the frequency with which cloture has succeeded has decreased. This pattern appears to
suggest that in recent Congresses, cloture has been sought even when it is unlikely to be invoked.
This shift was evident especially in the 103rd Congress, when cloture was successfully invoked on
only four of the 12 nominations where attempted, and in the 108th Congress, when it was invoked
on none of the 14 nominations on which it was attempted. In other Congresses, the proportion of
nominations with cloture attempts on which cloture succeeded has generally been much higher.
In the 108th Congress (2003-2004), the pattern of Senate action on nominations on which cloture
was sought displayed several distinctive features. First, the maximum number of cloture motions
offered on any nomination was higher than in any other Congress. In other Congresses, as many

6 Committee on Rules and Administration, Senate Cloture Rule, pp. 30-32, 53-54, 119-121.
7 The Republican Party lost control of the Senate during the 1st session of the 107th Congress.
Congressional Research Service
4

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

as three cloture motions had been offered on a single nomination only on three occasions (two in
1980 and one in 1994). In the entire 111th Congress, cloture was not attempted more than once on
any nomination on which it was sought. In the 108th Congress, by contrast, one nomination was
subjected to seven cloture motions and another to four.
Second, when the Senate sought cloture on a nomination but was unable to confirm it, the Senate
in the 108th Congress retained the nomination on its calendar until final adjournment. In earlier
Congresses, nominations that were not confirmed after cloture attempts were typically either
withdrawn or returned to the President. Both these shifts may represent indications of an
increased intensity with which supporters of these nominations were attempting to secure Senate
votes on them.
Table 3. Cloture Action on Judicial and Executive Nominations, by Time Period,
1967-2008
Judicial
Executive
Cloture Fell,
Cloture Fell,
Congresses
Cloture
Cloture
Vitiated or
Cloture
Cloture
Vitiated or
and (years)
Invoked
Rejected
Withdrawna
Invoked
Rejected
Withdrawna
90th-102nd (1967-1992)
5
2
1
4
0
0
103rd (1993-1994)
1
0
1
3
3
4
104th-107th (1995-2002)
5
1
1
3
1
0
108th (2003-2004)
0
10
2
0
1
1
109th
(2005-2006) 6 0
0
3 2
7
110th
(2007-2008) 1 0
0
0 0
0
111th
(2009-2010) 2 0
3
8 2
6
Total 20
13
8
21
9
18
Source: Table 4.
Notes: All nominations on which cloture was invoked were confirmed. Five of the nominations for which
cloture was rejected were confirmed. All but one of the nominations on which the cloture motion fell, was
vitiated, or was withdrawn were ultimately confirmed. See Table 1.
a. This category includes only situations in which there was no vote on any cloture motion.
Positions in Relation to Which Cloture Was Sought
Few of the nominations on which cloture has been attempted have been to the Supreme Court or
Cabinet-level positions. Only four have been to the Supreme Court, and five to offices at the level
of the President’s Cabinet. Until the 111th Congress, a majority of the nominations on which
cloture was sought had been to positions on the federal bench. This circumstance perhaps
reflected the Senate’s traditional inclination to permit the President generally wide latitude in
selecting officials to serve under him in executive branch positions.
Only in the 103rd, 109th and 111th Congresses was cloture sought in more cases of nominations to
positions in the executive branch than the judicial branch. Of the 12 nominations on which cloture
action occurred during the 103rd Congress, 10 were for executive branch positions. Of the 19
nominations on which cloture was sought in the 109th Congress, 12 were for executive branch
Congressional Research Service
5

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

positions. Of the 21 nominations on which cloture was sought in the 111th Congress, 16 were for
executive branch positions. Table 3 summarizes the outcomes of cloture action on executive and
judicial nominations, broken down into seven periods that display distinct patterns.
Table 4. Nominations Subjected to Cloture Attempts, 1968-2010
Final
Outcome
Number
of
Disposition
Congress
of Cloture
Cloture
of
and Year
Nominee Position Attemptsa Attemptb Nomination
90th, 1968
Abe Fortas
Chief Justice
1
rejected,
withdrawn
45-43
92nd, 1971
William H. Rehnquist
Associate Justice
2
rejected,
confirmed
52-42
96th, 1980
William A. Lubbers
General Counsel, National
3 invoked,
confirmed
Labor Relations Board
62-34
96th, 1980
Don Zimmerman
Member, National Labor
3 invoked,
confirmed
Relations Board
63-31
96th, 1980
Stephen G. Breyer
Circuit Judge
2
invoked,
confirmed
68-28
98th, 1984
J. Harvie Wilkinson
Circuit Judge
2
invoked,
confirmed
65-32
99th, 1986
Sidney A. Fitzwater
District Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
64-33
99th, 1986
Daniel A. Manion
Circuit Judge
1
withdrawn
confirmed
99th, 1986
William H. Rehnquist
Chief Justice
1
invoked,
confirmed
68-31
100th, 1987
Melissa Wel s
Ambassador
1
invoked,
confirmed
64-24
100th, 1987
C. William Verity
Secretary of Commerce
1
invoked,
confirmed
85-8
102nd, 1992
Edward Earl Carnes, Jr.
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
66-30
103rd, 1993
Walter Dellinger
Assistant Attorney General
2
rejected, confirmed
59-39
103rd, 1993
five nominationsc State
Department
2 rejected,
confirmed
58-42
103rd, 1993
Janet Napolitano
U.S. Attorney
1
invoked,
confirmed
72-26
103rd, 1994
M. Larry Lawrence
Ambassador
1
fel d confirmed
103rd, 1994
Rosemary Barkett
Circuit Judge
1
withdrawn
confirmed
103rd, 1994
Sam Brown
Ambassador
3
rejected, returned to
56-42
president
103rd, 1994
Derek Shearer
Ambassador
2
invoked,
confirmed
62-36
103rd, 1994
Ricki Tigert
Board Member and Chair,
2
invoked,
confirmed
Congressional Research Service
6

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

Final
Outcome
Number
of
Disposition
Congress
of Cloture
Cloture
of
and Year
Nominee Position Attemptsa Attemptb Nomination
Federal Deposit Insurance
63-32
Corporationc
103rd, 1994
H. Lee Sarokin
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
85-12
103rd, 1994
Buster Glosson
Air Force Lieutenant
1 withdrawn
confirmed

General (retired)

103rd, 1994
Claude Bolton, Jr.
Air Force Brigadier General
1
vitiatedf confirmed
103rd, 1994
Edward P. Barry, Jr.
Air Force Lieutenant
1 vitiatedf confirmed
General (retired)
104th, 1995
Henry Foster
Surgeon General
2
rejected,
no final vote
57-43
105th, 1997
Joel I. Klein
Assistant Attorney General
1
invoked,
confirmed
78-11
105th, 1998
David Satcher
Surgeon General
1
invoked,
confirmed
75-23
106th, 1999
Brian Theadore Stewart
District Judge
1
rejected,
confirmed
55-44
106th, 2000
Marsha L. Berzon
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
86-13
106th, 2000
Richard A. Paez
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
85-14
107th, 2002
Lavenski R. Smith
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
94-3
107th, 2002
Richard R. Clifton
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
97-1
107th, 2002
Richard H. Carmona
Surgeon General
1
invoked,
confirmed
98-0
107th, 2002
Julia Smith Gibbons
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
89-0
107th, 2002
Dennis W. Shedd
Circuit Judge
1
vitiatedf confirmed
108th, 2003
Victor J. Wolski
Judge, Court of Claims
1
vitiatedf confirmed
108th, 2003
Miguel A. Estrada
Circuit Judge
7
rejected,
withdrawn
55-43
108th, 2003
Michael O. Leavitt
Administrator,
1 withdrawn
confirmed
Environmental Protection
Agency
108th, 2003
Charles W. Pickering, Sr. Circuit Judge
1
rejected,
no final vote
54-43
108th, 2003
William H. Pryor, Jr.
Circuit Judge
2
rejected,
no final vote
51-43
108th, 2003
Priscilla Richman Owen
Circuit Judge
4
rejected,
no final vote
53-42
Congressional Research Service
7

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

Final
Outcome
Number
of
Disposition
Congress
of Cloture
Cloture
of
and Year
Nominee Position Attemptsa Attemptb Nomination
108th, 2003
Carolyn B. Kuhl
Circuit Judge
2
rejected,
no final vote
53-43
108th, 2003
Janice R. Brown
Circuit Judge
1
rejected,
no final vote
53-43
108th, 2003
Thomas C. Dorr
Undersecretary of
2
rejected,
no final vote
Agriculture for Rural
57-39
Development and Board

Member, Commodity
Credit Corporatione
108th, 2004
Marcia G. Cooke
District Judge
1
withdrawn
confirmed
108th, 2004
William Gerry Myers III
Circuit Judge
1
rejected,
no final vote
53-44
108th, 2004
David W. McKeague
Circuit Judge
1
rejected,
no final vote
53-44
108th, 2004
Henry W. Saad
Circuit Judge
1
rejected,
no final vote
52-46
108th, 2004
Richard A. Griffin
Circuit Judge
1
rejected,
no final vote
54-44
109th, 2005
Thomas C. Dorr
Undersecretary of
1 withdrawn
confirmed
Agriculture for Rural
Development
109th, 2005
Peter Cyril Wyche
Assistant Secretary of
1
rejected,
no final vote
Flory
Defense
52-41
109th, 2005
Priscilla Richman Owen
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
81-18
109th, 2005
William H. Pryor, Jr.
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
67-32
109th, 2005
Janice R. Brown
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
65-32
109th, 2005
John R. Bolton
U.S. Representative to the
2
rejected,
no final vote
United Nations
54-38
109th, 2005
Stephen L. Johnson
Administrator,
1 invoked,
confirmed
Environmental Protection
61-37
Agency
109th, 2005
Robert J. Portman
U.S. Trade Representative
1
vitiated
confirmed
109th, 2006
Gordon England
Deputy Secretary of
1 withdrawn
confirmed
Defense
109th, 2006
Eric S. Edelman
Under Secretary of Defense
1 withdrawn
confirmed
for Policy
109th, 2006
Benjamin A. Powel
General Counsel, Office of
1 withdrawn
confirmed
the Director of National
Intelligence
109th, 2006
Richard Stickler
Assistant Secretary of Labor
1
withdrawn no final vote
Congressional Research Service
8

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

Final
Outcome
Number
of
Disposition
Congress
of Cloture
Cloture
of
and Year
Nominee Position Attemptsa Attemptb Nomination
for Mine Safety and Health
109th, 2006
Dorrance Smith
Assistant Secretary of
1 withdrawn
confirmed
Defense
109th, 2006
Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
Associate Justice, Supreme
1 invoked,

confirmed
Court
72-25
109th, 2006
Brett M. Kavanaugh
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
67-30
109th, 2006
Andrew von
Commissioner, Food and
1 invoked,
confirmed
Eschenbach
Drug Administration
89-6
109th, 2006
Dirk Kempthorne
Secretary of the Interior
1
invoked,
confirmed
85-8
109th, 2006
Kent A. Jordan
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
93-0
110th, 2007
Leslie Southwick
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
62-35
111th, 2009
Hilda Solis
Secretary of Labor
1
withdrawn
confirmed
111th, 2009
Austan Dean
Member, Council of
1
withdrawn confirmed
Goolsbee
Economic Advisers
111th, 2009
Cecilia Elena Rouse
Member, Council of
1
withdrawn confirmed
Economic Advisers
111th, 2009
David W. Ogden
Deputy Attorney General
1
withdrawn confirmed
111th, 2009
David J. Hayes
Deputy Secretary of the
1
rejected, confirmed
Interior
57-39
111th, 2009
Christopher R. Hill
U.S. Ambassador to Iraq
1
invoked,
confirmed
73-17
111th, 2009
David F. Hamilton
Circuit judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
70-29
111th, 2010
Lael Brainard
Under Secretary, Treasury
1 invoked,
confirmed
Department
84-10
111th, 2010
Harold Hongju Koh
Legal Advisor, Department
1 invoked,
confirmed
of State
65-31
111th, 2010
Marisa J. Demeo
Associate Judge, Superior
1 withdrawn
confirmed
Court, District of Columbia
111th, 2010
William K. Sessions III
Chair, United States
1 withdrawn
confirmed
Sentencing Commission
111th, 2010
M. Patricia Smith
Solicitor, Department of
1 invoked,
confirmed
Labor
60-32
111th, 2010
Cass R. Sunstein
Administrator, Office of
1 invoked,
confirmed
Information and Regulatory
63-35
Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget
111th, 2010
Robert M. Groves
Director of the Census,
1
invoked,
confirmed
Congressional Research Service
9

---

Cloture Attempts on Nominations

Final
Outcome
Number
of
Disposition
Congress
of Cloture
Cloture
of
and Year
Nominee Position Attemptsa Attemptb Nomination
Department of Commerce
76-15
111th, 2010
Martha N. Johnson
Administrator, General
1 invoked,
confirmed
Services Administration
82-16
111th, 2010
Thomas J. Vanaskie
Circuit Judge
1
withdrawn
confirmed
111th, 2010
Barbara Milano Keenan
Circuit Judge
1
invoked,
confirmed
99-0
111th, 2010
Ben S. Bernanke
Chairman, Board of
1 invoked,
confirmed
Governors of the Federal
77-23
Reserve System
111th, 2010
Denny Chin
Circuit Judge
1
withdrawn
confirmed
111th, 2010
Craig Becker
Member, National Labor
1
rejected, no final vote
Relations Board
52-33
111th, 2010
Christopher H.
Assistant Attorney General
1
withdrawn confirmed
Schroeder
Sources: Compilations by CRS and Senate Library; Legislative Information System of the U.S. Congress; U.S.
Congress, Senate, Committee on Rules and Administration, Senate Cloture Rule, committee print 99-95, 99th
Congress, 1st session (Washington: GPO, 1985), pp. 44-70, 78-85; Congressional Record (Daily Digest); and
Congressional Quarterly Almanac for 1986, 1987, 1992, 1995, 1999.
Notes: Executive branch nominations in roman; Judicial nominations in italic. Final outcome of cloture attempt is
in bold when cloture was rejected. Disposition of nomination is in bold when the nominee was not confirmed.
a. Category includes both cloture motions filed and votes of the Senate to reconsider a cloture vote.
b. On several of the nominations, the Senate held more than one cloture vote. This vote represents the final
cloture vote of that Congress on the nomination.
c. These five nominations to various positions in the State Department received consideration and cloture
action concurrently, and are counted as one case in the tables.
d. Cloture motion became moot and received no action.
e. The individual was nominated simultaneously for the two positions specified, and cloture action took place
on each nomination in turn. The table counts all actions on one nominee as one case.
f.
By unanimous consent, the Senate treated the cloture motion as having no effect.

Author Contact Information

Richard S. Beth
Betsy Palmer
Specialist on Congress and the Legislative Process
Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process
rbeth@crs.loc.gov, 7-8667
bpalmer@crs.loc.gov, 7-0381


Congressional Research Service
10

---