Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
People walking down the steps of the U.S. capitol.

DNC's Proposed RCV Ban Sparks Debate Over 2028 Presidential Primaries

Francesca Hong Gains Momentum in Wisconsin Democratic Governor’s Race

Francesca Hong Gains Momentum in Wisconsin Democratic Governor’s Race

A Senior Man Using A Laptop Computer And Paying Bills With Nurse

Not All Change Is Good: Medicaid, Medicare Shifts Are Everyone’s Problem

Close-up hands of unrecognizable man holding and using smartphone standing on city street, browsing internet, checking social media, using mobile application.

ALS Doesn't Wait. Our Health Care System Still Does.

Military education. Student in soldier uniform learning at wooden table indoors, selective focus

You Shouldn't Have to Go To War to Go To College

Does it take six months on average for the Senate to confirm a president's nominees?

Two men sitting on a couch

Sen. Marco Rubio (left), President-elect Donald Trump's nominee to be the next secretary of state, meets with Sen. Lindsey Graham on Dec. 3, in advance of Senate confirmation hearings.

Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Tom Kertscher
By Tom KertscherDec 06, 2024
Tom Kertscher
Tom Kertscher, Wisconsin Watch is a contributor for The Fulcrum, a nonpartisan publication dedicated to strengthening democracy by fostering informed civic engagement and elevating diverse perspectives.
See More Writings by author

This fact brief was originally published by Wisconsin Watch. Read the original here. Fact briefs are published by newsrooms in the Gigafact network, and republished by The Fulcrum. Visit Gigafact to learn more.

Does it take six months on average for the US Senate to confirm a president's nominees?

Yes.

The average time the U.S. Senate takes to approve nominees to a president’s administration is more than six months.

The nonprofit Center for Presidential Transition reported that as of Nov. 11, 2024, the average number of days has more than doubled under presidents elected since the 1980s:

Joe Biden: 192

Donald Trump: 160.5

Barack Obama: 153.3

George W. Bush: 108.2

Bill Clinton: 100.3

George H.W. Bush: 64.7

Ronald Reagan: 69.4

The nominees include more than 1,000 leadership positions, including Cabinet posts such as attorney general.

One reason for the six-month average: Any senator can “hold” a nominee’s confirmation, sometimes to extract something in return.

An August research paper concluded it is doubtful that reducing the number of positions needing confirmation would speed up confirmations.

Trump has said he wants the Senate to allow “recess appointments,” which wouldn’t require Senate confirmation, for his next administration.

The issue was raised Nov. 21 by U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., who called for streamlining confirmations.

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one

Sources

Center for Presidential Transition: Senate Confirmations Slow to a Crawl

Bipartisan Policy Center: What’s the Hold Up on Senate Nominees?

University of Chicago Center for Effective Government: Democracy Reform Primer Series Reducing the Number of Senate-Confirmed Appointees

New York Times: Could Trump Install Gaetz Without Senate Approval? A Recess Appointment Primer

Cumulus News Talk: Donald Trump's Upcoming Confirmation Battles | The Vince Coglianese Show


Latest news

Send You to the Moon Without a Spaceship
Bridging & Common Ground

Send You to the Moon Without a Spaceship

An Iranian flag and the message "No King" graffitied on the ruins of the data center building of Sharif University of Technology after a U.S.-Israeli missile strike on April 7, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.
Governance & Legislation

The Last War We Understood

Missouri Drew a Gerrymander. Now Its Secretary of State Says Voters Can’t Say No.
Governance & Legislation

Missouri Drew a Gerrymander. Now Its Secretary of State Says Voters Can’t Say No.

How an 1876 Massacre of Black Men in South Carolina Turned Racial Terror Into Political Power
Democracy

How an 1876 Massacre of Black Men in South Carolina Turned Racial Terror Into Political Power

Read More

United States Capitol building and blurred American flag against blue sky

America’s aging Congress has no maximum age limit. Could a constitutional amendment create age limits for lawmakers and better represent younger voters?

TGI /Tetra Images

Congress Has an Age Floor and No Ceiling. That's Backwards for Gen Z.

Senator Dianne Feinstein's visible decline in her final years in office. Senator Lindsey Graham's sudden death. Senator Mitch McConnell's own recent hospitalization, and his halting explanation of it afterward. Three senators, three separate incidents, no obvious connection between them, except that the saga of these three senators is really one story about the problem of not knowing when to step down. That framing asks the right question of individual leaders. But it assumes the problem is a matter of personal judgment, each senator, in his or her own time, finding the wisdom to recognize the moment has passed. I think that gets the American version of this problem backwards. Congress's age problem is not a string of individual judgment calls. It is a structural feature of the Constitution itself, and it is quietly reshaping who gets represented in American government.

The Constitution sets a floor for federal office and no ceiling. A representative must be at least twenty-five. A senator must be at least thirty. A president must be at least thirty-five. Nothing in the document says how old is too old. Combine that asymmetry with the enormous advantages of incumbency, better name recognition, fundraising networks, committee seniority, and the result is predictable: a Congress that can start young but can never age out. It can only age up. The 119th Congress is now the third oldest in American history, with an average member age of nearly fifty-nine and a Senate averaging in the mid-sixties. This is not a temporary blip. It is the natural output of a system with a gate on one end and no gate on the other.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Enduring Illusion of Article the first
a large white building with a flag on top of it
Photo by Stephen Walker on Unsplash

The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

This is the third and final installment of our series on “Article the first.” Previous parts examined the history of the single inverted word that turned an intended floor into a ceiling and its impact on the amendment’s failed ratification. This concluding part outlines the path forward for enlarging the House today.

Part 3 — The Path Forward

Keep ReadingShow less
The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

Painting from 1856 by Junius Brutus Stearns of George Washington at the Constitutional Convention of 1787.

The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

This is the second of a three-part series on the First Amendment proposed by Congress in 1789—often called “Article the first”—which was never ratified. Part 1 explained how a single inverted word in the text created a mathematical absurdity that has been misread for 237 years. This second part explores the untold history of how that defect affected the original ratification process in state legislatures.

Part 2 — The Untold History

Keep ReadingShow less
Bill of Rights
Happy 230th birthday, Bill of Rights
leezsnow/Getty Images

The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

This is the first of three parts exploring “Article the First,” the forgotten proposal in the original Bill of Rights. For 237 years, a single, inverted word has created a “semantic illusion,” leading historians and policymakers to misread the founders' intended guarantee of a growing House as a ceiling. This series uncovers the error, tracks its consequences, and explores why reclaiming the founders’ original vision is the path to meaningful representation reform.

Part 1 — The Inverted Word

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026