Americans elect a president, not a king. But sometimes it’s hard to tell that in the Bush White House. George Bush wants to get his own way. So, when he doesn’t, he thinks governing by fiat, rather than the democratic process, is the way to go.
Take the recess appointment of John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, skirting the Senate confirmation process. In this case, both Democratic and Republican senators expressed concerns about Bolton’s fitness for this highly sensitive job and requested additional information about his views and treatment of subordinates.
Most likely, the president could have won the confirmation fight over Bolton if he had just complied with these requests. But instead he chose to stonewall the requests, call the objecting Democrats “obstructionists” (code for “you don’t agree with me”) and make a recess appointment.
In the case of Bolton, there are good reasons to examine his nomination with care. This is a man who has expressed disdain for the United Nations. This is also a man who reportedly has treated his subordinates abusively and flown into rages when crossed. Now, why would you expect such a man to be an effective voice for America in a body that requires diplomacy and consensus to achieve our goals? There is good reason for the constitutional requirement of Senate advice and consent. Sometimes more heads produce a wiser outcome than just one stubborn man in the White House.
President Bush has also made recess appointments of controversial judges who could not make it through the Senate confirmation process. Since such appointees can only serve until the end of this session of Congress, one has to wonder at the need to flaunt presidential power. Is it really to get the best people into positions of authority or is it one more effort to get your way no matter what?
The constitutional requirement for Senate advice and consent on key appointments is an important cornerstone of a democracy. It makes it difficult for a president to stack the judiciary with cronies and to fill executive positions with unqualified pals. Even the Democratically controlled Senate rejected Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt’s attempt to stack the U.S. Supreme Court with men who would vote his way on the New Deal.
The point of the constitutional provision allowing recess appointments is to allow a president to fill key positions when Congress is not in session. In the early days of our country, when Congress met for relatively short periods of time, that made sense. Today, however, Congress meets virtually all year and recess appointments have become a way to circumvent the important requirement of Senate advice and consent.
Over the last 60 years, all presidents have made recess appointments. Fifteen Supreme Court justices were appointed during a congressional recess. All were later confirmed by the Senate, thereby validating their temporary appointments. It’s doubtful that President Bush’s recess appointments of judges and the U.N. ambassador would garner that confirmation support, however, because of the controversy surrounding the individuals themselves and the process the president used to put them where he wanted them. These haven’t been cases of needing to fill a job quickly. These are examples of using presidential power to get around the constitutional system.
Generally, the Senate has confirmed presidential appointees to executive positions, believing that a president has the right to work with a team of his own choosing. Only when that choice has been an individual whose qualifications or character are clearly inadequate has the Senate balked, and rarely at that. They’ve been slightly more cautious about judicial appointees, given their lifetime tenure. But even then, the vast majority of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents has been confirmed.
This simply underscores the point that Senate confirmation is not a constitutional requirement to be dodged lightly. A democracy depends on a government of all elected officials, not just one at the pinnacle of power. President Bush needs to be less imperial and more collaborative.
Gail Schoettler is a former U.S. ambassador, Colorado lieutenant governor and treasurer, Democratic nominee for governor and Douglas County school board member.
