Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories
Protestors holding signs that read "protect trans kids."

Trump's Orders Threaten Transgender Americans’ Rights

Trump Declares War on Democratic Cities

Trump Declares War on Democratic Cities

The U.S. Pentagon.

Congress Bill Spotlight: Department of War Restoration Act

A Trump 2020 flag outside of a home.

Trump’s 2.0 Actions Have Harmed Rural America Who Voted for Him

Indiana Republicans Could Lose at the Ballot over Redistricting Plan

Indiana Republicans Could Lose at the Ballot over Redistricting Plan

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, Wisconsin Watch
By Tom Kertscher, Wisconsin WatchDec 06, 2024
Tom Kertscher, Wisconsin Watch
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

Guarding What? The Moral Cost of Militarizing Our Cities
Governance & Legislation

Guarding What? The Moral Cost of Militarizing Our Cities

Joe Manchin on Taxpayer-Funded Primaries: 'They're Locking Us Out!'
Governance & Legislation

Joe Manchin on Taxpayer-Funded Primaries: 'They're Locking Us Out!'

Read More

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

President Donald Trump speaks at a White House press briefing on Jan. 30, 2025.

Credit: Jonah Elkowitz/Medill News Service

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

WASHINGTON — Paul Ingrassia withdrew his nomination to lead the Office of Special Counsel on Tuesday night after facing Republican pushback over past controversial statements.

While Ingrassia joins a growing list of President Donald Trump’s nominees who have withdrawn from consideration, many who have aired controversial beliefs or lack requisite qualifications have still been appointed or are still in the nomination process.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making
low light photography of armchairs in front of desk
Photo by Joakim Honkasalo on Unsplash

A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making

The dysfunction of today’s federal government is not simply the product of political division or individual leaders; it is rooted in the internal rules of Congress itself. The Founders, in one of their few major oversights, granted Congress the authority to make its own procedural rules (Article I, Section 5) without establishing any framework for how it should operate. Over time, this blank check has produced a legislative process built to serve partisan power, not public representation.

The result is a Congress that often rewards obstruction and gridlock over compromise and action. The Founders imagined representatives closely tied to their constituents—one member for every 30,000 to 50,000 citizens. Today, that ratio has ballooned to one for every 765,000 in the House, and in the Senate, each member can represent tens of millions (e.g., California). As the population has grown, representation has become distant and impersonal, while procedural rules have tightened the grip of party leadership. Major issues can no longer reach the floor unless the majority party permits it. The link between citizens and decisions has nearly vanished.

Keep ReadingShow less
Lasting peace requires accepting Israel’s right to exist

US President Donald Trump hailed a "tremendous day for the Middle East" as he and regional leaders signed a declaration on Oct. 13, 2025, meant to cement a ceasefire in Gaza, hours after Israel and Hamas exchanged hostages and prisoners. (TNS)

Lasting peace requires accepting Israel’s right to exist

President Trump took a rhetorical victory lap in front of the Israeli parliament Monday. Ignoring his patented departures from the teleprompter, which violated all sorts of valuable norms, it was a speech Trump deserved to give. The ending of the war — even if it’s just a ceasefire — and the release of Israel’s last living hostages is, by itself, a monumental diplomatic accomplishment, and Trump deserves to take a bow.

Much of Trump’s prepared text was forward-looking, calling for a new “golden age” for the Middle East to mirror the one allegedly unfolding here in America. I’m generally skeptical about “golden ages,” here or abroad, and especially leery about any talk about “everlasting peace” in a region that has known “peace” for only a handful of years since the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

Keep ReadingShow less
A child looks into an empty fridge-freezer in a domestic kitchen.

The Trump administration’s suspension of the USDA’s Household Food Security Report halts decades of hunger data tracking.

Getty Images, Catherine Falls Commercial

Trump Gives Up the Fight Against Hunger

A Vanishing Measure of Hunger

Consider a hunger policy director at a state Department of Social Services studying food insecurity data across the state. For years, she has relied on the USDA’s annual Household Food Security Report to identify where hunger is rising, how many families are skipping meals, and how many children go to bed hungry. Those numbers help her target resources and advocate for stronger programs.

Now there is no new data. The survey has been “suspended for review,” officially to allow for a “methodological reassessment” and cost analysis. Critics say the timing and language suggest political motives. It is one of many federal data programs quietly dropped under a Trump executive order on so-called “nonessential statistics,” a phrase that almost parodies itself. Labeling hunger data “nonessential” is like turning off a fire alarm because it makes too much noise; it implies that acknowledging food insecurity is optional and reveals more about the administration’s priorities than reality.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2025