Title: A test of fitness for presidential appointment?

POPLINE Document Number: 016935

Author(s):

Mackenzie GC

Source citation:

In: Steiner GY. The abortion dispute and the American system. Washington, D.C., Brookings Institution, 1983. :47-63.

Abstract:

The shape of policy reflects the concerns and biases of persons appointed to high office as well as those elected. The Conssitution acknowledges the importance of appointed officers. It requires the advice and consent of the Senate in the appointment of nearly all policymaking officials of the federal government. Thus, 2 points of access in the appointment process--the president's designation of a nominee and the Senate's confirmation of that nominee's appointment--provide opportunities for individuals who want to see their policy issues reflected in personnel selection. A question that arises with the appointment process is what constitutes fitness for office. Constitutional theory and legal debate have provided no consensus on the determinants of "fitness;" 200 years of political practice have. Given the absence of compelling requirements to do otherwise, the politicians who have controlled the appointment process have shown little reluctance to treat policy considerations--including the policy preferences and personal opinions of potential appointees--as perfectly acceptable tests of fitness to serve. Participants in the appointment process frequently have declared themselves concerned only with the competence and integrity, and not with the political philosophy, of presidential appointees, but these claims are little more than lip service. It is only since the 1976 election that the issue of abortion has begun to have an effect on the appointment process, and it is uncertain how large and consequential role abortion will come to have in the appointment process. Thus far, its impact has been limited to a few notable but not unmanageable appointment controversies. Its unlikely that that will continue to be the case in the future. The abortion issue has become increasingly prominent in national policies, with advocates on both sides broadening their search for avenues of influence. The appointment process has come to be recognized as one of those. It is likely that more people will attempt to exploit it to their advantage in the future. If that happens, the future effectiveness of the appointment process may be jeopardized by contention over nominee's views on abortion. The primary jeopardy is that agreement on appointments may become so elusive that administrative and judicial positions may remain vacant for long periods, or that those who survive the appointment process and fill them may be so damaged by the effects of that process as to be unable to perform effectively in office. The plea here is for caution and realism.

Keywords:

United States
Political Systems
Abortion
Population Policy
Political Factors
North America
Americas
Developed Countries
Fertility Control, Postconception
Family Planning
Social Policy
Policy