From an editorial Tuesday in The Washington Post:
It’s been three months since Majority Leader Harry M. Reid, Nev., and his fellow Democrats used the “nuclear option” in the Senate to unilaterally change the rules to limit filibusters on most presidential nominations. So far, though, there’s been no flood of confirmations. Part of the explanation is continuing GOP obstruction, as unfounded as ever. But it also turns out that the nuclear option wasn’t the panacea some made it out to be. It remains unacceptably hard to staff the government.
Perhaps the best – or worst – example is the number of ambassadorial nominations languishing in Senate confirmation limbo. Forget the campaign donors President Obama chose to reward with cushy ambassadorships, some of whom are embarrassments. According to the American Foreign Service Association, 20 career diplomats are awaiting consideration, including the president’s picks to lead embassies in important U.S. allies such as Chile and Colombia. Fourteen of them have already gone through their hearings. Last month, meanwhile, Secretary of State John F. Kerry sent Reid an understandable letter of complaint that more than a third of his senior staff still weren’t in place a year into his tenure.
Uncontroversial nominees – and even those who rub some legislators the wrong way but are well qualified – should fly through the Senate. Instead, many are stuck waiting for floor time. Republicans might have reason to be angry, but exacting revenge on well-qualified would-be public servants, particularly those who aren’t heading into lifetime judgeships, is toxic for the country and the sort of behavior that led to the deployment of the nuclear option to begin with.
The problem here is bigger than the partisan wars that get all the attention. Too many jobs are filled by presidential appointments, and too many of those require confirmation in the Senate, which only has so much floor time.
One fix is to slim down the number of presidential appointments, or at least the ones lawmakers must consider. The Senate did a bit of this last year in a bipartisan vote. Part of the price of going nuclear, though, is that the two parties are unlikely to be able to agree on that sort of reform again anytime soon.
The Charlotte Observer welcomes your comments on news of the day. The more voices engaged in conversation, the better for us all, but do keep it civil. Please refrain from profanity, obscenity, spam, name-calling or attacking others for their views.
Have a news tip? You can send it to a local news editor; email firstname.lastname@example.org to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Charlotte Observer.Read moreRead less