3 of 9

Write now Article Tools

According to the Constitution, Article II, Section 2, the powers of the President include appointing Ambassadors "with the Advice and Consent of the Senate." There is no Constitutional right for the Senate to hold nominations in committee ad infinitum, truly it is not even called out in the Constitution that the Senate even has the right to vote on such matters. Having said that, I have no problem with the process of an up or down vote in the Senate. However, the Senate should act responsibly in this process as well, and that has not happened in the nomination process of the UN ambassador.

I think a reasonable rule should be established, and the precedent of the President's responsibility with regards to law passed by the Senate is a good one. In Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, it is clearly called out that once law is passed by the Senate it is given to the President to sign or veto. If it is not returned "within ten Days (Sundays excepted)", it becomes law. Obviously it is a more simple task for the President to read a bill than it is to have a committee of Senators get their desired camera time asking at best tedious and largely ridiculous, at worst inappropriate, questions of an appointee. So extend the ten days to thirty, but set a time limit by which the Senate must provide its advice and counsel to the President. If no up or down vote takes place, it has the effect of the Senate confirming the appointee.

Learn more about this author, Jay Kitts.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Questioning the integrity of Senate confirmation hearings?
We want to hear your view. Write now!