The Structure of Appointment Politics: Consistency or Change?

Abstract

Given its importance and level of conflict in recent decades, scholars have expended great effort analyzing appointment politics. However, despite descriptions that might lead to conclusions that the structure of how nominees are dealt with has changed over time, quantitative analyses have not investigated possible structural changes. We remedy this by conducting a changepoint analysis using data on executive nominations from 1885–2016. Two breaks involving Senate‐initiated institutional changes are uncovered: one associated with postwar congressional reorganization, the other with post‐Watergate era alterations to the relationship between Senate and President. By contrast, neither executive‐initiated changes nor disruptions in norms produced breaks. Thus, our analysis defines three different historical eras of the appointment process, suggests what causes one period to be replaced by another, and details what factors drove appointment politics in different eras. It also urges caution in generalizing from analyses of appointments incorporating features only measurable for more recent years.