[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 44 (Wednesday, March 30, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1985-S1990]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. SCHUMER (for himself, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Reid, Mr. 
        McConnell, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Collins, Mr. Brown of 
        Massachusetts, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Durbin, Mr. 
        Johanns, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Reed, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Carper, and 
        Mr. Kyl):
  S. 679. A bill to reduce the number of executive positions subject to 
Senate confirmation; to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, the Senator from New York and I are on 
the Senate floor today to introduce

[[Page S1986]]

legislation that will help make the Senate a more effective place to 
deal with the big issues facing our country, such as the debt, our 
national defense, and other issues.
  This is the result of discussions we have had over the last several 
months with many Members of the Senate on both sides of the aisle. It 
began with some reforms in Senate rules, which included eliminating the 
so-called secret hold and doing other steps. It is the culmination of 
work by a number of Senators on both sides of the aisle--including 
Senator Lieberman; Senator Collins; the leaders, Senator Reid and 
Senator McConnell, when they were whips; Senator Schumer and I; and 
others. We had bipartisan breakfasts on these reforms a couple years 
ago, and it came down to the questions: How many confirmations should 
the Senate have? How many confirmations are enough confirmations? Is it 
in the public interest to allow a new President, whether Democratic or 
Republican, to staff the government promptly? And is it in the public 
interest to get rid of this syndrome that is established in Washington, 
which I call ``innocent until nominated,'' where we invite a 
distinguished person to come in and run that person through a gauntlet 
that makes him or her out to be a criminal for making some mistake in 
the process of being confirmed?
  We have worked together, and we have come up with legislation that 
Senator Schumer is introducing on behalf of both of us--on behalf of 
the leaders, Senator Reid and Senator McConnell, and on behalf of 
Senator Lieberman and Senator Collins.
  This legislation would answer the question, how many confirmations 
are enough confirmations, by reducing or streamlining the nomination 
process for about 450 nominees--out of a total of about 1,400 
nominations. Over 1,000 Senate confirmed nominations will remain 
unchanged. Just to put that into perspective, that is still more 
confirmations than existed when President Clinton was President of the 
United States. It is almost four times as many confirmations as existed 
when President Kennedy was President of the United States. In other 
words, like many things in government, the number of confirmations has 
grown over time.
  We have ended up confirming people we have no business confirming--
people who are public relations officers, people who are financial 
information people--and we have made it difficult for the government to 
be staffed.
  Is it in our interest, and the citizens', to staff the government 
promptly? Yes, I think it is. We have created this phenomenon where 
Administrations are slow to get staffed up. For example, when President 
Obama came in, Secretary Geithner, the Treasury Secretary, was sitting 
over at Treasury almost home alone during the middle of the worst 
recession since the Great Depression. According to news accounts, he 
did not have much help. The key vacant positions in Treasury were 
Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Tax Policy, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Tax, Trade, and Tariff Policy, and a variety of 
others. That situation was not helping any of us. Whether we agreed 
with President Obama or Secretary Geithner or not, after an election a 
President should be able to promptly staff the government, and we in 
the Senate should have procedures to give us a chance to review those 
nominees and offer our advice and consent and confirm or reject those 
nominees in a reasonable period of time.
  If we are spending our time dealing with junior officials or PR 
officers, we are spending less time dealing with the Assistant 
Secretary for Tax Policy, on whom we should be focusing a lot of time, 
and to whom we should be asking a lot of questions.
  Then, there is this business of what I call ``innocent until 
nominated''--all of us know this exists. It really exists by sloppiness 
on our part, both in the legislative branch and the executive branch. 
If you are asked to serve in the Federal Government--and I know this 
because I was asked by the first President Bush--you fill out forms. 
Well, there are many forms. There are many forms in the executive 
branch. They have different definitions; for example, the definition of 
``income.'' If you were to carelessly fill out the same definition of 
``income'' on one form as another form, you might have been incorrect 
on one of the forms, and then someone might say you were telling a lie 
and were not fit to serve. That has been called by others, including 
me, as being ``innocent until nominated.''
  I remember when Ron Kirk, the former mayor of Dallas, was nominated 
by President Obama to be the Trade Representative. There was some issue 
about whether he had properly reported a speech fee he gave to charity. 
What difference did it make in terms of his overall fitness to serve? 
It held him up. It embarrassed him. It was not relevant to the inquiry.
  So the legislation we have will do the following: It proposes 
eliminating the need for Senate confirmation or streamlining over 450 
positions. About 200 of these nominations will be eliminated as Senate 
confirmations. These are the ones the Senate does not need to spend 
time on. The other half will come directly to the desk. Then, unless an 
individual Senator says: Send it on to committee to go through the 
regular order, it will be expedited. That still leaves us with 1,000 
Senate confirmations that we can have--1,000 hostages we can take. That 
is more hostages than we could take under Bill Clinton. That is almost 
four times as many hostages than the Senate could take under President 
Kennedy. That ought to be plenty of hostages for any Senator to make 
his or her point if that is what we seek to do.
  Second, the legislation would set up a process whereby an executive 
branch working group would review the various forms that nominees are 
expected to fill out, and try to have a single smart form in the 
executive branch. The working group will consult with committees of 
Congress. It might make sense to see if we can do the same thing with 
our forms, and make it possible that we can get all the information we 
want without unnecessarily subjecting nominees to harassment or 
trickery just because they are not wise enough to fill out different 
forms with different definitions.
  I think this is a substantial step forward. It may not sound like 
much to those watching the Senate, but let me just say that both of our 
leaders, Reid and McConnell, have said they tried this and could not 
get it done. Senator Lieberman and Senator Collins have tried, and they 
could not get it done. I worked with Senator Lieberman 2 years ago and 
we could not get it done.
  What has happened this time is a result of the discussion we had 
earlier in the year about making the Senate a more effective place to 
work--with the full support of the leaders, Reid and McConnell; with 
the full support of Senator Lieberman and Senator Collins; and with the 
good work of Senator Schumer. We have come up with a consensus piece of 
legislation which has broad bipartisan support from both sides of the 
aisle, including chairmen and ranking members of the committees you 
would think might be the first ones to object. This legislation would 
still leave the Senate with the prerogatives it ought to have in terms 
of reviewing Presidential nominees and separates out those who take our 
time away from the more important things we ought to be doing.
  I thank the Senator from New York for the way he has worked on this 
issue. He has been constructive and direct and helpful. I thank the 
leaders for their support. I hope the committees will rapidly consider 
the legislation Senator Schumer is introducing on our behalf, and I 
hope it will show we can take another small step in making the Senate a 
more effective place to work.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
a document entitled ``List of Presidential Appointments No Longer 
Requiring Senate Confirmation''--there are about 200 of those--and a 
document entitled ``Privileged Nominations.'' Those are the ones that 
will be expedited, unless a single Senator decides he or she wants to 
have this nominee sent to committee, and that is about another 240.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

     List of Presidential Appointments No Longer Requiring Senate 
                              Confirmation

       Agriculture (11): Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
     Relations, Department of Agriculture; Chief Financial 
     Officer, Department of Agriculture; Assistant Secretary for

[[Page S1987]]

     Administration, Department of Agriculture; Rural Utilities 
     Service Administrator; Directors (7), Commodity Credit 
     Corporation.
       Armed Services (12): Assistant Secretary of Defense 
     (Networks and Information Integration); Assistant Secretary 
     of Defense (Public Affairs); Assistant Secretary of Defense 
     (Legislative Affairs); Assistant Secretary of the Air Force 
     (Comptroller); Assistant Secretary of the Army (Comptroller); 
     Assistant Secretary of Navy (Comptroller); Members (6), 
     National Security Education Board.
       Banking (8): Assistant Secretary for Administration, Human 
     Capital Officer, HUD; Chief Financial Officer, HUD; Assistant 
     Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, 
     HUD; Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, HUD; Director of 
     the Mint, Department of the Treasury; Members (2), Council of 
     Economic Advisers; Administrator, Community Development 
     Financial Institution Fund.
       Budget (0).
       Commerce (14 regular positions and 319 NOAA Officer Corps 
     positions): Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs, 
     Department of Commerce; Assistant Secretary for 
     Administration and Chief Financial Officer, Department of 
     Commerce; Assistant Secretary for Communication and 
     Information, Department of Commerce; Chief Scientist, NOAA; 
     Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs--CFO, Department 
     of Transportation; Assistant Secretary for Government 
     Affairs, Department of Transportation; Deputy Administrator, 
     Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); Chief Financial 
     Officer, NASA; Associate Director, Office of Science and 
     Technology Policy; Associate Director, Office of Science and 
     Technology Policy; Associate Director, Science, Office of 
     Science and Technology Policy; Associate Director, 
     Technology, Office of Science and Technology Policy; 
     Administrator, St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation; 
     Federal Coordinator, Alaska Natural Gas Transportation 
     Project; Officer Corps of NOAA (319 additional positions).
       Energy (2): Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy; 
     Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental 
     Affairs, Department of Energy.
       Environment and Public Works (9): Alternate Federal Co-
     Chairman, Appalachian Regional Commission; Chief Financial 
     Officer, EPA; Commissioners (7), Mississippi River 
     Corporation.
       Finance (4): Deputy Under Secretary/Assistant Secretary for 
     Legislative Affairs, Department of Treasury; Assistant 
     Secretary for Public Affairs and Director of Policy Planning, 
     Department of Treasury; Assistant Secretary for Management 
     and Chief Financial Officer, Department of Treasury; 
     Treasurer of the United States.
       Foreign Relations (14): Assistant Secretary for Legislative 
     and Intergovernmental Affairs, Department of State; Assistant 
     Secretary for Public Affairs, Department of State; Assistant 
     Secretary for Administration, Department of State; Chief 
     Financial Officer, Department of State; Assistant 
     Administrator for Legislative and Public Affairs, USAID; 
     Assistant Administrator for Management, USAID; Governor, 
     African Development Bank; Alternate Governor, African 
     Development Bank; Governor, Asian Development Bank; Alternate 
     Governor, Asian Development Bank; Governor, International 
     Monetary Fund and International Bank for Reconstruction and 
     Development; Alternate Governor, International Monetary Fund 
     and International Bank for Reconstruction and Development; 
     Governor, African Development Fund; Alternate Governor, 
     African Development Fund.
       HELP (101 regular positions and 2,536 Public Health Service 
     Officer Corps positions): Chief Financial Officer, Department 
     of Education; Assistant Secretary for Management, Department 
     of Education; Assistant Secretary for Legislation and 
     Congressional Affairs, Department of Education; 
     Commissioner--Rehabilitation Services Administration; 
     Commissioner--Education Statistics; Assistant Secretary for 
     Resources and Technology/CFO, Department of HHS; Assistant 
     Secretary for Public Affairs, Department of HHS; Assistant 
     Secretary for Legislation, Department of HHS; Commissioner, 
     Administration for Children, Youth, Families; Commissioner, 
     Administration for Native Americans; Assistant Secretary for 
     Administration and Management, Department of Labor; Chief 
     Financial Officer, Department of Labor; Assistant Secretary 
     for Congressional Affairs, Department of Labor; Assistant 
     Secretary for Public Affairs, Department of Labor; Director 
     of the Women's Bureau, Department of Labor; Chairperson, 
     National Council on Disability; Vice Chairperson (2), 
     National Council on Disability; Members (12), National 
     Council on Disability; Members (24), National Science 
     Foundation; Managing Directors (2), Corporation on National 
     and Community Service; Members (15), National Board of 
     Education Sciences; Members (20), National Museum and Library 
     Services Board; Members (10), National Institute for Literary 
     Advisory Board; Public Health Services Corps (2,536 
     additional positions).
       HSGAC (6): Chief Financial Officer, Department of Homeland 
     Security; Controller, Office of Federal Financial Management, 
     OMB; Director, Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement, DHS; 
     Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs Chief Medical Officer, 
     DHS; Administrator, U.S. Fire Administration, Department of 
     Homeland Security; Assistant Administrator, Grants, FEMA.
       Indian Affairs (14): Commissioner, Navajo and Hopi 
     Relocation; Members (13), Board of Trustees, Institute of 
     American Indian and Alaska Native Culture.
       Intelligence (0).
       Judiciary (10): Assistant Attorney General--Legislative 
     Affairs, Department of Justice; Director, Bureau of Justice 
     Statistics; Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance; Director, 
     National Institute of Justice; Administrator, Office of 
     Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention; Director, Office 
     for Victims of Crime; Deputy Director, National Drug Control 
     Policy; Deputy Director, Demand Reduction, National Drug 
     Control Policy; Deputy Director, State and Local Affairs, 
     National Drug Control Policy; Deputy Director, Supply 
     Reduction, National Drug Control Policy.
       Rules (0).
       Small Business (0).
       Veterans Affairs (5): Assistant Secretary for Management, 
     Department of Veterans Affairs; Assistant Secretary for Human 
     Resources and Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs; 
     Assistant Secretary for Public and Intergovernmental Affairs, 
     Department of Veterans Affairs; Assistant Secretary for 
     Congressional and Legislative Affairs, Department of Veterans 
     Affairs; Assistant Secretary for Information and Technology, 
     Department of Veterans Affairs.
       * Does not include NOAA Officer Corps and Public Health 
     Services Officer Corps.
                                  ____


                         Privileged Nominations

       Agriculture (5): Members (5), Board of Directors, Federal 
     Agricultural Mortgage.
       Armed Services (0).
       Banking (23): Members (15), Board of Directors, National 
     Institute of Building Sciences; Members (3), Board of 
     Directors, National Consumer Cooperative Bank; Directors (5), 
     Securities Investors Protection Corporations.
       Budget (0).
       Commerce (8): Members (3), Board of Directors, Metropolitan 
     Washington Airport Authority; Members (5), St. Lawrence 
     Seaway Development Corporation.
       Energy (0).
       Environment and Public Works (9): Members (9), Board of 
     Trustees, Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in 
     National; Environmental Policy Foundation.
       Finance (16): Member (7), IRS Oversight; Members (2), Board 
     of Trustees, Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund; Member 
     (2), Board of Trustees, Federal Old Age and Survivors Fund; 
     Members (2), Board of Trustees, Federal Supplemental 
     Insurance Trust Fund; Members (3), Social Secretary Advisory 
     Board.
       Foreign Relations (59): Chairman, Advisory Board for Cuba 
     Broadcasting; Members (8), Advisory Board for Cuba 
     Broadcasting; Members (4), Millennium Challenge Corporation 
     Board of Directors; Board Members (8), Overseas Private 
     Investment Corporation; Members (15), National Peace Corps 
     Advisory Council; Commissioners (7), Commission on Public 
     Diplomacy; Members (9), Board of Directors, Inter-American 
     Foundation; Members (7), Board of Directors, African 
     Development Foundation.
       HELP (104): Members (15), Corporation on National and 
     Community Service; Members (26), National Council on the 
     Humanities; Chairman, Board of Directors, US Institute of 
     Peace; Vice Chairman, Board of Directors, US Institute of 
     Peace; Members (10), Board of Directors, US Institute of 
     Peace; Members (8), Board of Trustees, Goldwater Scholarship; 
     Members (8), Board of Trustees, Truman Scholarship; Members 
     (6), Board of Trustees, Madison Fellowship; Members (11), 
     Board of Directors, Legal Services Corporation; Members (18), 
     National Council on the Arts.
       HSGAC (5): Members (5), Federal Retirement Thrift 
     Investment Board.
       Intelligence (0).
       Judiciary (13): Members (2), Foreign Claims Settlement 
     Commission; Members (11), Board of Directors, State Justice 
     Institute.
       Rules (0).
       Small Business (0).
       Veterans Affairs (0).

  Mr. ALEXANDER. I thank the Presiding Officer, and I notice that the 
Senator from New York is also on the Senate floor. I thank him for his 
work on this issue.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, first, I thank my colleague from 
Tennessee. He has been a great partner in this effort. In fact, I would 
say it was his impetus that brought us here. He had thought about this 
long and hard and worked on it previously. As usual, it has been a 
pleasure to work with Senator Alexander on the Rules Committee or 
anywhere else, and I thank him for spearheading this effort.
  I also want to thank the two leaders, Senator Reid, of course, my 
friend--and I am so proud to work under his leadership--and Senator 
McConnell. I have to say this: Senator McConnell and I have our 
differences, but on all of these issues of moving the Senate forward he 
has been operating in good faith, and his support of this legislation 
has allowed us to get here.
  Also, the committee chair, Senator Lieberman, as well as Ranking 
Member

[[Page S1988]]

Collins, have been equal partners in this legislation, and it will go 
through their committee.
  Finally, I thank all the committee chairs. They have been very 
understanding of the need to do this. Obviously, committee chairs might 
say: I want to have before my committee every single person, but 
ultimately they have realized it slows down the Senate.
  While we are introducing the legislation today, a number of committee 
chairs on our side--probably with the consent of their ranking 
members--have come to me and said there might be other positions they 
want to add to the list. That would be a good idea. We have tried to be 
careful. We do not want to step on any toes or prerogatives. In the 
past, when this legislation was attempted, people said: Well, just, I 
don't want this one; I don't want that one. So we were fairly minimal. 
It will have a real effect on the Senate. It is close to one-third of 
the appointments. But there may be different committees that say: I 
don't need to approve this. In my committee, the committee on which I 
am the chair, the committee on which I am the ranking member, we do not 
need to approve these five or six more. Add them to your list.
  We would hope our committee chairs would do that before the bill is 
considered because it will be considered by Senator Lieberman's 
committee, and there they could make such additions.
  So let me say this about the process: One of the most important 
duties of the Senate is the constitutional advice-and-consent power. We 
were careful to balance this interest with the importance of making the 
confirmation process more efficient--not only for the benefit of the 
Senate but as well for the benefit of the administration, its agencies, 
and, as Senator Alexander so aptly pointed out, for those individuals 
who are nominated as well.
  The Senate was designed to be a thoughtful and deliberative body, but 
the confirmation process has often become dangerously close to being 
gridlocked. The American public is harmed when we are not able to get 
qualified people confirmed to positions in a timely manner. All of the 
positions covered in this proposal tend to be noncontroversial and more 
closely resemble appointments that are currently made without Senate 
approval.
  This legislation consists of a stand-alone bill, the Presidential 
Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act, and a resolution. Senator 
Alexander touched on the stand-alone bill, which will eliminate from 
Senate confirmation over 200 executive nomination positions and nearly 
3,000 additional officer corps positions. The resolution will create a 
standing order that will streamline approval of almost 250 part-time 
board members.
  We intend to move both of these pieces together in an effort to 
reform this process. Together, these two pieces will remove or 
streamline, as I mentioned, nearly one-third of currently confirmable 
Senate appointments.
  The act will remove the need for confirmation for several categories 
of positions, including legislative and public affairs positions, chief 
financial officers, information technology administrators, internal 
management and administrative positions, and deputies or non-policy-
related assistant secretaries who report to individuals who are Senate-
confirmed. Removing these positions from Senate confirmation will allow 
a new administration to be set up with more efficiency and speed, thus 
making government work better for the people.
  In addition, we have removed thousands of positions from the Public 
Health Service officers corps and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration officer corps in the process. They are noncontroversial, 
and their removal will help prevent the possibility of further 
gridlock.
  This act will also create a working group--because this is a work in 
progress, and Senator Alexander has been working on it longer than I 
have or most of us in this body--that will provide recommendations on 
the process to further streamline the appointment and confirmation 
process. The group will make recommendations to the President and the 
Senate about streamlining the paperwork process for nominees by 
creating a single, searchable, electronic ``smart form'' and will also 
conduct a review of the current background investigation requirements.
  Senators Lieberman and Collins held a hearing on the confirmations 
process last month in the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 
Committee, which will have jurisdiction over this piece of the package. 
The hearing was extremely helpful to our working group efforts and 
further highlighted the fact that our system of dealing with executive 
nominations needs reform.
  The resolution piece of the package will create a streamlined process 
for part-time positions on boards or commissions. A majority of these 
boards require political balance--a certain number of Democrats and a 
certain number of Republicans. We are doing this rather than 
eliminating Senate consideration in its entirety in order to ensure 
that these politically balanced boards remain bipartisan. This was 
actually a recommendation, I believe, by Senator McConnell, and I think 
it is an apt one.
  The resolution creates a standing order that will provide for an 
expedited process for this class of ``privileged nominations'' by 
creating new pages on the Executive Calendar. When the Senate receives 
a nomination from the President, it will be placed on a new section on 
the Executive Calendar called ``Privileged Nomination--Information 
Requested'' while the nominee submits paperwork to the committee of 
jurisdiction. When the chair of that committee certifies that all 
committee questionnaires have been received from the nominee, the 
nomination will be placed on the ``Privileged Nomination--Information 
Received'' section of the Executive Calendar.
  As Senator Alexander mentioned, after 10 session days, the nomination 
is placed on the full Executive Calendar and will await action by the 
full Senate, with the presumption that these positions will be passed 
by unanimous consent. So any single Senator can object, although we 
doubt in almost every case that any will.
  From the beginning of the process until the expiration of 10 session 
days, any Member can request on his or her own behalf or on behalf of 
any identified Member that the nomination be referred to committee. We 
think that incorporating this safeguard is in line with our elimination 
of secret holds earlier this year.
  The presumption for these part-time positions is, as I said, that 
they will be approved by unanimous consent and not be held up as part 
of other battles or leverage or whatever else.
  This resolution would come before the Rules Committee, which Senator 
Alexander and I lead, and we hope to take action on it very soon. We 
are confident this package will eliminate many of the delays in the 
current confirmation process. These delays are very detrimental to the 
efficient operation of government and to the efforts to recruit the 
most qualified people to these Federal jobs.
  The package we propose today is the first step in protecting the 
American people's interests in having a newly elected President move 
quickly and efficiently to set up a government.
  Before I yield the floor, I note that the Senator from New Mexico, 
Mr. Udall, in his impetus to reform the Senate, can claim some credit 
for this move as well.
  We are introducing this bipartisan legislation--Senator Alexander and 
myself, along with Senators Reid, McConnell, Collins, Lieberman, and I 
think about eight or nine other cosponsors as well--this afternoon.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise today in support of legislation 
offered by Senators Schumer and Alexander to streamline the nomination 
process so incoming Presidents can get their teams in place more 
quickly and put them to work doing the people's business.
  On August 5, 1789, the Senate took up and confirmed 102 executive 
nominations that had been sent up by President Washington just 2 days 
earlier--rejecting only one nominee.
  Our first President, in a letter to the Senate, complained about the 
one he didn't get. If the Senate ever doubted the fitness of one of his 
nominees it should--and I quote ``communicate that circumstance to me, 
and thereby avail yourselves of the information which led me to make 
them and which I would with pleasure lay before you.''

[[Page S1989]]

  Modern Presidents of both parties would sigh over this bit of history 
because nowadays the process by which a person is selected, vetted, 
nominated, and then considered and confirmed by the Senate has become--
in the words of one scholar--``nasty and brutish, without being 
short.''
  One hundred days into President Obama's administration, only 14 
percent of the Senate-confirmed positions in his administration had 
been filled. After 18 months, 25 percent of these positions were still 
vacant. This is not an aberration or anomaly. The timetables for 
putting in place a leadership team across the government has been 
pretty much the same each of the last three times there has been a 
change of occupant in the White House.
  We have known about this problem a long time, but failed to act.
  In 2001, the then Governmental Affairs Committee under former 
Chairman Fred Thompson, held hearings titled the State of the 
Presidential Appointment Process and recommended legislation, which did 
not pass.
  In 2003, a bipartisan commission headed by Paul Volker recommended 
ways to speed up the nominations process. That got nowhere.
  In 2004, the 9-11 Commission said the delays in getting a new 
government up and running actually pose a threat to our national 
security and in its report it also recommended ways to speed up the 
process.
  Well after years of talk, it may be that we now finally have 
bipartisan support for change, although as the saying goes: ``It ain't 
over til it's over.''
  In January, Majority Leader Reid and Minority Leader McConnell 
established a working group on executive nominations and appointed 
Senators Schumer and Alexander--chairman and ranking member, 
respectively, of the Rules Committee--to lead it.
  Senator Collins and I--as chairman and ranking member of the Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs Committee--have been part of this 
working group and the bill being introduced today has my full support.
  In fact, we held a hearing earlier this month on the need for 
nomination reform and the numbers showed just how compelling the case 
for reform is.
  A study by the Congressional Research Service says that delay occurs 
not so much at the Cabinet level positions. Presidents Reagan, George 
W. Bush, Clinton, and Obama all were able to get the vast majority of 
their nominees for Cabinet Secretaries in place on or shortly after 
Inauguration Day.
  Where the delay is most pronounced, according to CRS, is in the sub-
cabinet level positions. Under President Reagan, nominees averaged 114 
days from the President's election to final confirmation. Under 
Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama those numbers jumped to 185, 198, 
and 195 respectively.
  Part of the problem is that the number of positions requiring 
confirmation has grown over time.
  When President Reagan took office, he had 295 key policy positions 
requiring confirmation. By the time President Obama was inaugurated, 
that number had grown to 422 key positions, plus another nearly 800 
lesser positions that also required Senate confirmation.
  These numbers do not include foreign service officers, or public 
health officials who also require Senate confirmation.
  The legislation Senators Schumer and Alexander are introducing 
recommends eliminating Senate confirmation for approximately 200 
presidential appointments to positions in the Executive Branch, 
including for legislative and public affairs positions, chief 
information officers, and internal management positions at or below the 
Assistant Secretary level.
  This will free the Senate to concentrate on the more important 
policy-making nominees.
  The bill also calls for a working group to simplify, standardize and 
centralize the forms and documentation required by both the White House 
and Senate so a nominee isn't burdened with duplicative paperwork and 
information requests.
  Senators Schumer and Alexander are also introducing a standing order 
this morning that would streamline the confirmation process for 
approximately 200 other Presidential appointments that receive Senate 
confirmation. Under the standing order, some nominees to part-time 
boards and commissions could have their nominations expedited by being 
held at the desk for a certain number of days and then placed directly 
onto the Executive Calendar rather than being referred to a Senate 
committee. I would also like to express my support for the standing 
order.
  In the past, nominations reform legislation has stalled because of 
the perceived fears of some of our colleagues, particularly committee 
chairs and ranking members, that they would be giving up some of their 
jurisdiction and authority. But the simple truth is that some of these 
nominations shouldn't require Senate confirmation and, frankly, take up 
valuable time that should be used for more important work.
  Nothing in the legislation we offer today will weaken in any way the 
Senate's important Constitutional role of ``advice and consent'' or our 
delicate system of checks and balances.
  But if we don't fix what is broken in this system, I fear we risk 
discouraging some of our nation's most talented individuals from 
accepting nominations, thus leaving important positions unfilled.
  If I may end with a little history, as Governeur Morris, one of the 
architects of the Constitution, said when speaking in favor of the 
``advice and consent'' clause: ``As the President was to nominate, 
there would be responsibility. As the Senate was to concur, there would 
be security.''
  Those founding principals will be unaffected by the kinds of modest 
changes this bill calls for, and I believe and hope we can get it done 
this year.
  I call on my fellow chairmen, ranking members, and colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle to work with us on addressing this challenge so the 
next new administration, regardless of party, can recruit the best 
candidates and then put them to work quickly addressing the many 
challenges our Nation faces.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to support the Presidential 
Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011, as well as the 
Senate resolution to create an expedited confirmation process for some 
part-time boards and commissions.
  I want to commend Senators Schumer and Alexander for their work on 
this issue and to express my appreciation for all the members of the 
nomination reform working group--Senators Reid, McConnell, and 
Lieberman. I was pleased to be a part of what has truly been a 
bipartisan effort.
  The Constitution, in the Appointments Clause, makes the appointment 
of senior Federal executive officers a joint responsibility of the 
President and the Senate. The President determines who, in his view, is 
the best qualified to serve in the most senior and critical positions 
across the executive branch of our Government. It also requires that 
we, the Senate, exercise our independent judgment and experience to 
determine if nominees have the necessary qualifications and character 
to serve our Nation in these important positions of public trust.
  The confirmation process must be thorough enough for the Senate to 
fulfill its Constitutional duty, but it should not be so onerous as to 
deter qualified people from public service.
  National security reasons also compel attention to this problem. The 
National Journal has noted that ``[p]eriods of political transition 
are, by their very nature, chaotic'' and that ``terrorists strike when 
they believe governments will be caught off guard.''
  Both the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and the attacks on 
September 11th, 2001, occurred within eight months of a change in 
presidential administrations. And in March 2004, just three days before 
Spain's national elections, al Qaeda-linked terrorists bombed Madrid 
commuter trains.
  The 9/11 Commission found that ``[a]t the sub-cabinet level, there 
were significant delays in the confirmation of key officials, 
particularly at the Department of Defense,'' in 2001. It was not until 
six months after President Bush took office that he had his national 
security team in place.
  Countless studies have been written and many experts have opined on 
how to improve the nomination and confirmation process--from the 
Brownlow Commission in 1937 to the 9/11 Commission in 2004.

[[Page S1990]]

  This is also an issue that the Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs has been working to address for a long time. For 
example, in 2001, when Senator Fred Thompson chaired the Committee, we 
held two hearings focusing on the state of the Presidential appointment 
process. As a result of these hearings, the Committee reported out 
legislation to address concerns that were raised. A few of the 
provisions of this bill would later be included in the Intelligence 
Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.
  But more work remains to be done. On March 2nd of this year, the 
Committee held another hearing to review the nomination process. The 
witnesses echoed the concerns that have been raised over the years by 
the many commissions and that still remain unaddressed.
  Based upon our review, there are a few areas in particular where 
improvements should be made. The first is to reduce the sheer number of 
positions subject to Senate confirmation.
  In this regard, the National Commission on the Public Service, 
commonly known as the Volcker Commission, gathered some very 
illuminating statistics. When President Kennedy came to office, he had 
286 positions to fill with the titles of Secretary, Deputy Secretary, 
Under Secretary, Assistant Secretary, and Administrator. By the end of 
the Clinton Administration, there were 914 positions with these titles.
  Today, according to the Congressional Research Service, CRS, there 
are more than 1,200 positions appointed by the President that require 
the advice and consent of the Senate.
  The large number of positions requiring confirmation leads to long 
delays in selecting, vetting, and nominating these appointees. 
Consequently, administrations can go for months without key officials 
in many agencies. And when political appointees are finally in place, 
their median tenure is only about two and a half years.
  A second area ripe for reform is to develop a consistent, common form 
for the nominees to complete in order to streamline the process, save 
time, and increase accuracy. This also would reduce the cost and burden 
on nominees.
  The White House, Office of Government Ethics, and the Senate need to 
work together to reconcile the various questions that are asked of 
nominees. Currently, nominees will often find themselves repeating 
variations of, or even the exact same, response over and over.
  In this regard, I believe Clay Johnson, the former head of 
Presidential Personnel from 2001 to 2003, made an excellent point. He 
noted that there is a thick file in the White House ``with every 
possible piece of relevant information on that person and yet none of 
that is made available to the Senate.''
  A consistent, common form, which a nominee can respond to online, 
would help to facilitate the flow of information so the Senate can 
begin its review of the nomination earlier.
  Finally, the executive branch also needs to review its own role and 
responsibilities in the process.
  Specifically, the White House should review its background 
investigation requirements. The extent of the investigation should be 
tailored to the position. A person nominated to a non-national 
security-related position should not have to undergo the same detailed 
FBI background investigation as a nominee to a national security-
related position, such as the Secretary of Homeland Security. In 
addition, the process should make some allowance for people who already 
have undergone the FBI full-field investigation for a different Senate-
confirmed position. Reform of this process would help speed up the 
review of nominees and aid in the task of recruiting talented people 
for public service.
  It also is the White House's responsibility to ensure that the Office 
of Presidential Personnel has the appropriate staffing level to meet 
the demands of a new administration.
  As Mr. Johnson noted at our March 2nd hearing, ``[a] new 
administration has never had the capacity in the first six months to 
nominate persons for more than 250 cabinet and subcabinet positions, 
let alone 400 positions, which government reform individuals and groups 
suggest a new administration should be able to do.''
  If these areas can be reformed, substantial time will be saved, and 
key leadership posts at our federal agencies will not be vacant for 
nearly as long.
  Now, during this mid-term period, two years away from a Presidential 
election, we have the opportunity to streamline the executive branch 
nominations process. This can help ensure that the next presidential 
transition will be as smooth as possible, thwarting the terrorists' 
belief that they will be able to ``catch us off guard.''
  The Schumer-Alexander bill and Senate Resolution go a long way to 
addressing the concerns that I have highlighted.
  The bill will make more than 200 positions direct Presidential 
Appointments that would no longer require Senate confirmation. Many of 
these positions have little or no policy role, such as the Assistant 
Secretary for Legislative Affairs at the Department of Commerce, or are 
internal management or administrative positions, such as chief 
financial officers or assistant secretaries for public affairs.
  By not requiring Senate confirmation, it will allow these positions 
be filled at a much faster pace and free up Senate resources to focus 
on more significant nominees.
  The Senate resolution proposes that more than 240 positions on part-
time boards or commissions go through a new ``expedited'' confirmation 
process. These positions will still require the nominee to respond to 
all committee questionnaires and still provide for the opportunity for 
closer scrutiny of the nominee, if warranted.
  This retains the authority of the Senate over these positions, but 
streamlines the process, lessening the burden on the Senate for 
routine, non-controversial nominations and providing for a faster road 
to confirmation as well.
  While we must deliver on our duty to provide advice and consent, 
reforms are needed to improve the effective operation of government. We 
all want the most qualified people to serve the President and the 
Nation. We should, therefore, ensure that the process is not 
unnecessarily burdensome and that key leadership posts do not go 
unfilled for long stretches of time. Most of all, we need to reform the 
process so that good people, whose talents and energy we need, do not 
become so discouraged that they give up their goal of serving the 
public.
  I am pleased to join Senators Schumer and Alexander as a cosponsor of 
this legislation and the Senate resolution, both of which will help us 
attract well-qualified people to public service.
                                 ______