Political appointees describe nomination nightmare

Political appointees endure a long, drawn-out, tortuous and stressful process to enter public service, according to a survey of current and former appointees to be released Friday.

The Brookings Institution's Paul Light and the Heritage Foundation's Virginia Thomas co-authored the study as part of Brookings' recently launched Presidential Appointee Initiative, a project designed to help nominees of the next administration through the appointment process. The team surveyed 435 senior-level appointees of the Clinton, Bush and Reagan administrations.

"At least according to those who have experienced the frustrations firsthand as nominees, it is safe to conclude that the presidential appointments process now verges on complete collapse," the study concluded.

More than half of appointees confirmed between 1984 and 1999 had to wait five or more months before entering office. By comparison, only one-sixth of appointees confirmed between 1964 and 1984 had to wait that long.

"Had I known that I was going to be a ship adrift in the sea, I probably would have taken more personal initiative to ensure that the matter was being pushed along," one survey respondent from the Bush administration wrote.

Respondents said the delays came from both getting White House approval for the nomination and making it through the Senate confirmation process.

"Unless the two branches come together soon to work out their differences, the next administration could well be unpacking when its first term is ending," the study said.

The appointment process involves a maze of requirements, including financial background reports, FBI checks and congressional scrutiny that can turn downright nasty. Forty percent of respondents called the process confusing, and 23 percent said it was embarrassing. Senate confirmation drew the most ire among the steps of the process. Clinton appointees reported the most suffering, first from dealing with a party changeover, and then with a national scandal and impeachment trial.

Nonetheless, "it would be a mistake to assume that Clinton's departure from office will make all the delays or frustrations cited above disappear," the study said. "It will not make financial disclosure forms easier to master, the FBI field investigations shorter, or the Senate review more efficient."

Survey respondents suggested several ways to improve the process, including speeding FBI background checks, eliminating redundancies in forms that must be filled out, and offering better advice to new appointees.

Only 56 percent of Reagan, Bush and Clinton appointees felt they were given enough information from the White House, while 6 in 10 looked beyond the presidential personnel office for legal advice and 48 percent turned to consultants for help on the financial aspects of the review.

Interestingly, 54 percent of the surveyed appointees said they would strongly recommend the post in which they served to their good friends. Almost 20 percent said the job provided a good chance to meet and work with stimulating people, while others cited public goals and serving an admired President as reasons to go through the appointment process.