What are some of the costs and benefits of the current nomination and confirmation process for top-level executive appointments? Do you believe this system should be changed, and if so, how?
What will be an ideal response?
Costs might include loss of privacy deterring high-quality candidates, long delays during which no appointee is approved, expanding bureaucracy creates concerns about public accountability, and rough treatment in confirmation hearings in a polarized Congress. Benefits might include allowing a voice for two branches of government in selecting officials and providing a check on the president. Students should then make a clear argument about whether and how this system should be changed. Students should also mention the 2013 Senate rule change regarding the filibuster of executive appointments. They should also mention other ways of blocking appointees.
You might also like to view...
The ___________ passed by the legislature in 2007 allowed Texans to carry concealed handguns almost anywhere
Fill in the blank with the appropriate word.
The New Jersey Plan would have
a. apportioned representation according to taxes paid. b. accentuated the inequalities among states. c. amended rather than replaced the government under the Articles. d. vested enormous power in the executive. e. established a national court system.