Home / Political Appointments

Every new president faces the management challenge of filling out the leadership ranks of federal agencies with more than 4,000 presidential appointees. The most senior of those positions must go through an increasingly difficult and lengthy Senate confirmation process. While figuring out how many positions require Senate confirmation would seem to be straightforward, getting a precise count is actually quite difficult.  

For years, the Partnership for Public Service’s Center for Presidential Transition® has written that new presidents generally fill more than 1,200 such positions. By contrast, Vanderbilt Professor David Lewis—one of the leading authorities on presidential appointments—has compiled a list of 1,340 Senate-confirmed positions. Why the discrepancy? Shouldn’t there be a single, straightforward number? 

In actuality, getting a single number is quite difficult. The primary reason is that there are many positions that are “on the books” and eligible to be filled with Senate-confirmed officials, but have not been filled for years. In other words, the best available count is that there are 1,340 eligible Senate-confirmed positions, but recent administrations have not filled all of these jobs and have instead appointed people to serve in slightly more than 1,200 positions.  

Furthermore, the existence of 1,340 Senate-confirmed positions on the books – more than commonly understood – underscores the need for greater transparency and reporting. The government’s “Plum Book” listing political appointees and other top officials has traditionally been produced every four years and has been characterized by numerous omissions and other incorrect information. In 2022, Congress passed the PLUM Act, requiring the Office of Personnel Management to create and annually update a website listing such positions— a positive first step. However, more should be done to ensure that Congress and agencies provide more timely transparency when new positions are created or when positions are changed.  

Determining the number  

To arrive at his detailed list of 1,340 Senate-confirmed positions at the beginning of President Joe Biden’s presidency, Lewis cross-referenced multiple sources. These included the U.S. Government Policy and Supporting Positions book (often referred to as the Plum Book), reports from the Congressional Research Service, information from Congress’ official website Congress.gov, and the Partnership for Public Service’s political appointee tracker.  Lewis’ list is the most detailed and accurate compilation available.  

The last few presidential administrations, however, have not filled all 1,340 positions. Although the numbers change by administrations, slightly more than 1,200 of these positions have actually been filled in recent years. Some positions that are “on the books” have not been filled for decades. For example, the Peace Corps Advisory Board has 15 possible Senate-confirmed positions according to CRS reports. But no one has been nominated for any of those positions since 1992. Some positions have been kept vacant for policy reasons. There has not been an ambassador to Syria for the past decade since diplomatic relations between the countries ended.  

The following sections provide additional details into why counting positions is not a precise endeavor. 

The existing sources of information are inaccurate 

The Plum Book has consistently undercounted the number of Senate-confirmed positions. In the 2020 Plum Book, Lewis found that 276 Senate-confirmed positions were missing. The Center for Presidential Transition found at least 10 agencies were omitted completely.   

This number of missing positions is likely even higher based on information provided on the PLUM website in March of 2024, where only 1,093 Senate confirmed positions were listed—far less than the 1,340 positions included in Lewis’ list. The vast majority of the positions missing from the new Plum website are from part-time boards and commissions. OPM relies on agencies’ self-reports to identify Senate confirmed positions. Therefore, when agencies are under-resourced or inactive, OPM may not receive a timely report and omit these agencies from their accounting.  

The second governmental source of information is a series of reports from the Congressional Research Service. CRS put out seven reports on the number of Senate-confirmed positions between 2003 and 2021. While CRS’ accounting of positions tends to be more accurate than the Plum Book, the reports do not include the nearly 200 ambassador positions, one of the largest classes of Senate-confirmed appointees.  

Other challenges related to counting positions 

Beyond inaccurate or incomplete reporting—and the existence of positions that have not been filled for years—there are several other reasons why a precise accounting of Senate-confirmed positions is difficult to achieve.  

Opportunities for Increased Transparency and Reform 

The vast number of Senate-confirmed positions and the growing difficulty of the Senate confirmation process result in presidents and the Senate focusing more time than ever on processing nominations. This also means that many important agency leadership positions remain vacant for lengthy periods, without adequate transparency into which positions are vacant or who performs the role in the absence of a Senate-confirmed leader. 

The difficulty in coming to a full accounting of Senate confirmed positions suggests a need for more consistent and accurate government reporting. While the new PLUM Act database will make reporting more frequent, agencies and OPM have more work to do to ensure that more timely and accurate information is provided. And while the PLUM Act requires only an annual update of the information in the database, as OPM makes continual improvements to the database, it should aim for – and Congress should support – a system that provides as close to real-time transparency as possible.  

The Senate also should consider stronger mechanisms to enforce the requirement that committees justify the creation of any new Senate-confirmed position. Additionally, the Senate could ensure that there is a public report at the end of each session of Congress on the total number of new Senate-confirmed positions created, so the new confirmation responsibilities being placed on both the presidency and the Senate can be fully understood. 

The time after a presidential election typically brings shifts in agency dynamics and personnel. Career civil servants must work to support the continuity of government while some senior career executives will be called on to serve temporarily in key leadership positions previously held by political appointees to ensure that agency priorities are met.

As acting officials, these career civil servants perform five crucial functions:

– Maintaining operations and continuing to deliver on their agency’s mission.

First and foremost, acting officials must continue leading their agencies through day-to-day operations and long-term strategic goals.

– Supporting incoming political appointees.

Senior career executives in acting roles must navigate their agency through a change of administrations while keeping operations on track and brief incoming political leaders as they prepare to assume their responsibilities.

– Preparing employees for the transition.

As career leaders who likely have been through previous presidential transitions, acting officials can share their lessons learned with other career employees and provide guidance as the agency prepares for new political leadership.

– Providing continuity between administrations.

Career civil servants have long-term experience and institutional knowledge that can benefit a new administration as appointees transition into their roles.

– Facilitating a smooth and seamless leadership transition.

The acting positions filled by senior career executives are often top leadership jobs, meaning their efforts are essential for the agency to prepare for the transition to a new administration. These career leaders share their knowledge with new appointees to help them accomplish the goals of a new administration.

Former Acting Secretary of Commerce Wynn Coggins advises that in order to successfully perform all of the required functions of an acting official, leaders should “rely on subject matter experts, work closely with the career civil servants and incoming political leadership, be adaptive, communicate effectively and often, and understand that your goal is to maintain continuity and keep the organization focused on delivering against the mission.”

As acting officials perform critical functions and provide continuity between administrations, it is important that they fully understand the issues cited by Coggins, the scope of their roles and what is needed.

The Partnership for Public Service offers our Ready to Act course for senior career executives to give them strategies to be successful and effectively transition into and out of acting leadership roles.

To ensure that Ready to Act provides acting officials with the relevant information to carry out their responsibilities, the program features faculty who have previously served in an acting capacity during prior transitions and can provide participants with real-world experience and important recommendations. For more information and to schedule a session of Ready to Act, check out our website.

During a recent hearing before the Senate Rules Committee, Jenny Mattingly, the Partnership’s vice president of government affairs, called for reform of the confirmation process to make it work better for all stakeholders – the Senate, the executive branch, individual nominees and the public.

The testimony highlighted how the process required to select, nominate and vote on presidential appointees is now longer, more complicated and more uncertain than ever before.

To make this point, Mattingly highlighted data from the Center for Presidential Transition’s® research on the Senate confirmation process: 

– The number of Senate-confirmed positions increased by more than 70% between 1960 and 2020, from 779 to 1,340. 

– It now takes the Senate nearly four times longer to confirm a nominee than it did during President Ronald Reagan’s administration.  

– The number of Senate-confirmed positions increased by more than 70% between 1960 and 2020, from 779 to 1,340. 

– It now takes the Senate nearly four times longer to confirm a nominee than it did during President Ronald Reagan’s administration.  

– The percentage of Senate votes on nominations now far exceeds votes on legislation. Procedural votes, cloture votes to end debate and direct votes on presidential nominations made up 64 percent of all recorded Senate votes during President Donald Trump’s administration, and 58 percent so far into President Joe Biden’s administration. This compares with just 15 percent during the first term of George W. Bush’s presidency and 14 percent during Barack Obama’s time in office. 

– Layer upon layer of nominees has created extended delays in confirmation of lower level nominees. During the Biden administration, Cabinet secretaries and deputy secretaries have taken about 19 days and 59 days, respectively, to be confirmed. However, those further down the leadership hierarchy (e.g., assistant secretaries and directors) have taken about 200 days on average to be confirmed. 

– Senate confirmed positions are vacant more frequently and for longer periods of time than in the past. Four Cabinet departments, for example, had 30% or more of their key positions vacant as of March of this year.

The broken process is undermining the Senate’s constitutional powers, both because it has led to executive branch efforts to sidestep Senate confirmation altogether by relying on non-confirmed officials, and because the extraordinary amount of time being spent on nominations has decreased the time spent on legislating by the Senate.

In addition, agencies suffer from gaps in leadership that hobble long-term planning and the execution of the responsibilities Congress has assigned to them, which is a disservice to constituents who rely on federal services. Moreover, the increasingly laborious experience that nominees—and their families— experience in going through the confirmation process discourages qualified individuals from wanting to accept a government position.

In order to make the confirmation process work better for all stakeholders, the Partnership’s testimony identified five priorities:  

– Reduce the number of positions subject to Senate confirmation by modeling the bipartisan law enacted in 2011.  

– Develop a model for “bundling” nominations which would allow for at least some nominees to be joined  together for a final vote on the Senate floor.  

– Improve the privileged nomination process designed to speed up consideration of some presidential appointees generally considered noncontroversial and pursue other changes to Senate processes for executive branch nominations that could win broad bipartisan support.  

– Revisit the 2012 and 2013 recommendations of the Working Group on Streamlining Paperwork for Executive Nominations.  

– Increase transparency into the appointments process while strengthening agency accountability to Congress when vacancies occur by improving the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. 

During the hearing, senators on both sides of the aisle engaged in a constructive conversation about how to make the confirmation process work more effectively while maintaining the Senate’s constitutional role to provide advice and consent on nominees. We continue to be optimistic that this is an area ripe for bipartisan reform and that the data will make the call to action clear.

Chris Piper is a manager on the Partnership’s Center for Presidential Transition team. 

Given the increasing delays presidents face in getting senior leaders confirmed by the Senate, it is important to understand how long those officials remain in their roles once confirmed. While our previous analysis highlights year three as a time of high appointee turnover during  a president’s first term, incumbent presidents entering a second term face even greater challenges. 

Incumbent administrations transitioning to a second term have historically confronted significant headwinds. The fifth year can be encumbered by political opposition in Congress, and the departure of knowledgeable officials can make it even more difficult for an administration to achieve its policy goals. Without sufficient personnel and resources dedicated to second term personnel planning, two-term administrations will miss an important opportunity to gain early momentum following reelection. 

Our analysis examines the turnover of Senate confirmed presidential appointees during the second term of Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama in major departments and agencies, excluding ambassadors, U.S. marshals and attorneys. 

Turnover across terms

In year five, Bush and Obama experienced average annual turnover rates of 38% and 28% respectively, the highest in their entire presidencies. For context, Bush had 135 departures out of 353 tracked positions and Obama had 101 departures out 359 positions. For Obama, this was more than doubled the peak annual turnover in his first term (13%); for Bush, the second-term peak was nearly double the first term’s (20%). 

Years six through eight for both presidents exceeded or were comparable to their third-year turnover levels, highlighting the sustained volatility in personnel departures throughout the second term. 

Personnel turnover in the fifth year is an early management obstacle for administrations starting a second term. These findings demonstrate the urgency of second term planning if incumbent administrations are to expeditiously fill senior leadership positions as they become vacant. 

Note: Data includes Senate-confirmed positions excluding ambassadors, U.S. attorneys and U.S. marshals. Yearly average turnover is weighted by the number of positions tracked for each president. 

Second-term turnover by department 

In every department, the Bush and Obama administrations experienced significantly higher turnover during the second term compared to the first. The highest turnover rate was at the Department of Education under Bush at 128%, meaning that there were 23 departures for 18 tracked positions during his time in office. Several other departments under Bush also experienced turnover rates that exceeded 100%, including the departments of Housing and Urban Development (109%), Justice (104%), Transportation (113%) and State (115%). These departments experienced several departures from the same position within one term. Departures at assistant secretary level at Bush’s Department of Education were frequent, as officials rarely remained for more than two years. 

While the Obama administration had relatively lower levels of turnover, all departments exceeded 50% turnover except for the Department of Labor (47%). For Obama, the Department of Transportation had a peak turnover rate of 100%, nearly 10 times the turnover compared to his first term (13%). 

Note: Data covers Senate-confirmed positions in executive CFO Act agencies, excluding ambassadors, U.S. attorneys and U.S. marshals. The time period covered in the first term is from the beginning of the administration through April 1 of the fourth year. 

An incumbent administration must balance the difficult tasks of managing ongoing government operations while preparing prior to the election for a transition to a possible second term. The rigor and planning needed to successfully staff some of the highest-ranking positions in the executive branch is critical for a successful second term administration.

This blog post was authored by Husam AlZubaidy, an associate at the Partnership’s Center for Presidential Transition. 

This week marks the beginning of Pride month, a time in which we reflect on the history and achievements of the LGBTQ+ community and reaffirm our unwavering support for equality and inclusivity. The Partnership for Public Service and Center for Presidential Transition honor the service of countless LGBTQ+ public servants who have served across administrations.

The service of LGBTQ+ individuals in the federal government has not always been celebrated. Beginning in the late 1940s, in the midst of the Cold War, there was a “Lavendar Scare” that focused on purging the federal civil service, along with government contractors, of gays and lesbians. President Dwight Eisenhower formalized the policy in April of 1953 with Executive Order 10450 which authorized the investigation and firing of civil servants for “sexual perversion.” Due to this policy, tens of thousands of civil servants were investigated and thousands lost their careers.

The policy of targeting gay and lesbian civil servants continued for decades. It was not until 1975 that the Civil Service Commission ended the ban on gays and lesbians in the federal civil service and 1977 that the Department of State ended its ban within the Foreign Service. It took another two decades until discrimination based on sexual orientation was banned in granting access to classified information, when President Bill Clinton issued Executive Order 12968 in 1995.

Even as formal constraints on the service of LGBTQ+ individuals were removed over time, LGBTQ+ individuals continued to face opposition because of their identities. Roberta Achtenberg, the first openly LGBTQ+ Senate-confirmed appointee who won approval in 1993, and James Hormel, the first openly LGBTQ+ ambassador who took office through a recess appointment in 1999, faced questions about their ability to serve based on their identities alone.

Despite obstacles, openly LGBTQ+ individuals have served in appointed leadership roles in each of the last five administrations. Clinton led the way by making the first nominations of openly LGBT individuals, appointing about 140 to serve in his administration. President Barack Obama nearly doubled that number, appointing over 250 openly LGBTQ+ officials during his administration.

Milestones of LGBTQ+ Service and Leadership in the Federal Government

Biden has appointed more openly LGBTQ+ officials than any of his predecessors. As of October of 2023, Biden had appointed over 340 openly LGBTQ+ officials across the executive branch. Annise Parker, president of the LGBTQ Victory Institute, which works to advance LGBTQ+ elected and appointed government officials, described the Biden administration as “the most LGBTQ-inclusive in history…”

Our government is best when it is representative of its people and inclusive to all. Despite discrimination and bigotry, LGBTQ+ individuals have always strived to serve their government and country. Thanks to social and legal progress over time, the government benefits more than ever from the leadership of LGBTQ+ officials.

Given the long hours and tough responsibilities at Cabinet agencies, presidents can expect departures among Senate-confirmed leadership. While turnover is expected, high departure rates can pose significant challenges for day-to-day agency operations and long-term planning. 

Turnover in the modern context is more troublesome than ever before. Our research shows that Senate confirmation times have grown for each subsequent administration while nomination success rates have progressively declined. This means that, when agency leaders depart, it will take significantly longer to replace them than it did for previous presidents. As a result, many positions remain vacant for extended periods of time. 

Using our political appointee tracker and other data sources, we have examined the rates of Senate-confirmed appointee turnover during the four most recent administrations. As we look to personnel changes following the November election—whether it be a second term for the incumbent or a new administration—a retrospective on turnover helps put recent personnel challenges in context.  

We analyzed turnover among presidential nominees in major departments and agencies,1 excluding U.S. marshals and attorneys. To make an equivalent comparison with the ongoing Biden administration, we looked at each president’s first term up until April 1 of their fourth year in office.

AdministrationBushObamaTrumpBiden
Total Departures10573 94 34 
Tracked Positions353 359 385 392 
Total Turnover Rate30% 20% 24% 9% 
Note: Data covers Senate-confirmed positions in executive CFO Act agencies, excluding ambassadors, U.S. attorneys and U.S. marshals. The time period covered is from the beginning of the administration through April 1 of the fourth year.  

The Bush administration experienced the highest total turnover at 30% during this period of time. Trump and Obama had lower and more comparable turnover rates at 24% and 20%, respectively. Biden experienced significantly less turnover than his predecessors at 9%. 

Note: Data includes Senate-confirmed positions excluding ambassadors, U.S. attorneys and U.S. marshals. The time period from the beginning of the administration through April 1 of the fourth year.

Looking closer at these departments by president, the total turnover rates during the Bush and Obama administrations (59% and 30% respectively) were greatly impacted by Treasury Department departures. As for the Department for Veterans Affairs, Bush and Trump received the highest rates of turnover (50% and 33% respectively). The Department of Commerce—despite undergoing some of the highest rates of turnover on average—did not experience any turnover during the Biden administration through this past April. Moreover, there were no departures of Biden appointees during this period at the Environmental Protection Agency, or at the departments of Education and Energy. Similarly, the Trump administration had no turnover of its appointees at the Department of Agriculture despite turnover rates at other departments. 

The departments of Transportation and Homeland Security also highlight differences. Trump experienced roughly five times more turnover than previous administrations at DHS (53%), the second highest rate of any other department. As for Biden, the DOT experienced the second highest rate of total turnover so far during his presidency (17%), exceeding two previous administrations but trailing the Bush administration (38%). For context, DHS had an average turnover rate of 21% while DOT’s rate was 20% during the past four administrations. While Trump had more than double the average turnover at DHS, Biden remains below the DOT average. 

Note: Data covers Senate-confirmed positions in executive CFO Act agencies, excluding ambassadors, U.S. attorneys and U.S. marshals. The time period covered is from the beginning of the administration through April 1 of the fourth year. 

For each administration, turnover peaked during year three with relatively low turnover in other years. Compared to recent presidents, Biden has maintained low turnover, rising only to 6% during his third year. Obama was the next lowest in year three turnover, but the rate was nearly double at 13%. The second year of administrations has had low turnover in general, with the highest turnover occurring during the Trump administration (6%). For all four presidents, the first year had turnover rates at or below 1%. 

Recent success during the Biden administration at limiting turnover rates is an important development in light of increasing confirmation delays. Even as turnover appears to have tempered during the current administration, there are greater ramifications for each departure as it becomes more difficult to confirm a replacement. 

The challenger candidate in the 2024 election must consider how to staff an entire administration, but even the incumbent candidate must take proactive steps to avoid trends from previous second term presidents to retain leaders in key positions in order to achieve policy goals. 

1 As defined by the Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act of 1990 (Public Law 101–576).

This blog post was authored by Husam AlZubaidy, an associate at the Partnership’s Center for Presidential Transition.

As we celebrate Asian and Pacific Heritage Month, it’s crucial to recognize the significant contributions made by Asian American and Pacific Islander Americans to our federal government. While there has been a notable rise in the representation of Asian American and Pacific Islander Americans in federal government roles in recent years, there remains room for further progress and development.  

Many Cabinet agencies have yet to see Asian American and Pacific Islander Americans in high-level roles. Important leaderships positions, such as president, have never been filled by Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. This month, it is important to celebrate the contributions and historic firsts throughout history, knowing there is more progress to be made. 

In recognition of May as Asian and Pacific American Heritage Month, here is a list of prominent Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders who have served in the federal government. 

Daniel Kahikina Akaka – Senator from Hawaii

Akaka was elected to the House of Representatives in 1976 where he served seven consecutive terms. Akaka became the first U.S. senator of Native Hawaiian ancestry when he was appointed to the Senate in1990. During his long career in public service, he was an advocate for veterans and Native Hawaiian rights. Prior to his time in Congress, Akaka was a high school teacher and vice principal. From 1969 to 1971, he was the chief program planner for the Hawaii Department of Education.

Elaine Chao – Secretary of Labor and Secretary of Transportation

President George W. Bush appointed Chao to be secretary of Labor in 2001, making her the first Asian American woman and first Taiwanese American in U.S. history to be appointed to a Cabinet position. President Donald Trump later appointed Chao to be secretary of Transportation in 2017. Prior to holding those positions, Chao had been a successful businesswoman, the director of the Peace Corps and served in the administrations of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

Tammy Duckworth – Senator from Illinois

Tammy Duckworth was elected to the Senate in 2016 following two terms representing Illinois in the House. of Representatives. Duckworth also served in the Army during the Iraq War and is a Purple Heart recipient. Prior to taking office, she was appointed to assistant secretary of Veterans Affairs by President Barack Obama in 2009.

Mervyn Dymally – Representative from California

Dymally served six terms in the House of Representatives, beginning in1981. His father was from Trinidad and his mother from India, making him the first person of mixed African and Indian descent to serve in Congress. Throughout his time in the House, he was an advocate for human rights and economic development worldwide. Following his retirement from public service, he worked as a foreign affairs consultant for Caribbean, African and Asian interests and was a professor at the Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science.

Hiram Fong – Senator from Hawaii

In 1959, Fong was the first person of Chinese descent elected to Congress and the first Asian Pacific American elected to the Senate, where he served for nearly two decades. In 1964, he was the first Chinese American candidate for the presidency, and he is the only Republican to serve as the senator from Hawaii.

Kamala Harris – Vice President

Harris became the highest-ranking female official in U.S. history when she was elected vice president in 2020. Harris – whose mother was born in India – also became the first Asian American and African American vice president. Harris was the attorney general of California from 2011 to 2017 and a senator from California beginning in 2017.

Mazie Hirono – Senator from Hawaii

Hirono has been a senator from Hawaii since 2013. She was the first Asian American woman elected to the Senate and the first elected female senator from Hawaii. She was elected to the House in 2006. Hirono was born in Japan and was the only person of Asian ancestry serving in the Senate from 2013 until 2017.

Daniel Inouye – Senator from Hawaii

Inouye became the first Japanese American to serve in the House of Representatives in 1959 and the first Japanese American to serve in the Senate in 1962. He did not lose an election in 58 years. Prior to holding office, Inouye served in the Army during World War II and was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, the Distinguished Service Cross, the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart with Cluster.

Pramila Jayapal – Representative from Washington

Representing the state of Washington since 2017, Jayapal is the first Indian American to serve in the House. of Representatives. Her work throughout her career has focused on immigration, income inequality and global public health. She is currently a member of the House Judiciary Committee, the House Education and Workforce Committee and is the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Gary Locke – United States Secretary of Commerce

Locke was appointed as secretary of Commerce from 2009 to 2011 during the Obama administration. Prior to holding this position, he was elected as the governor of Washington State in 1997. He was the first Chinese American governor in U.S. history and was the first Asian American governor in the continental U.S. During his time as governor and secretary of Commerce, he focused on education, employment, trade, health care and human rights. He later served as the 10th ambassador to China from 2011 to 2014.

Chris Lu – Deputy Secretary of Labor

Lu was confirmed as deputy secretary of Labor under President Barack Obama in 2014, making him the second Asian American to hold such a position in a Cabinet department. From 2009 to 2013, Lu was assistant to the president and the White House cabinet secretary. He also co-chaired the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Lu is currently the representative to the U.N. for management and reform.

Spark Matsunaga – Senator from Hawaii

Matsunaga was a Japanese American congressman and senator for Hawaii. Throughout his time in Congress, he advocated for the bill that led to the creation of the U.S. Institute for Peace, legislation that created the position for the United States Poet Laureate and a measure to address the discrimination faced by Japanese Americans during the World War II interment. He was a member of the House Rules Committee. Prior to his career in public service, Matsunaga was a member of the Hawaii National Guard and a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army during WWII.

Norman Mineta – Secretary of Commerce and Secretary of Transportation

Appointed by President Bill Clinton in 2000 to be secretary of Commerce, Mineta was the first Asian American and Pacific Islander to be appointed to a Cabinet position. He was later appointed in 2001 by George W. Bush to be secretary of Transportation and went on to serve in this position for the longest amount of time in the department’s history.

Patsy Mink – Representative from Hawaii

Mink began her career in the Hawaii State Senate before later winning her 1964 campaign for the newly created second position for Hawaii in the House of Representatives. This made her the first Asian-American woman to serve in Congress and the first woman of color elected to the House. of Representatives. Throughout her time in Congress, Mink focused on gender and racial equality, affordable childcare and Title IX.

Pat Saiki – Administrator of the Small Business Administration

President George H. W. Bush appointed Pat Saiki to be administrator of the Small Business Administration in 1991. In 1986, Saiki was the first Republican elected to represent Hawaii in the House since it gained statehood.

Eric Shinseki – Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Eric Shinseki was President Barack Obama’s choice for secretary of Veterans Affairs in 2009, making him the first Asian American to serve in that position. Previously, Shinseki had a long career in the military, where he served as the 34th Army chief of staff and was the first Asian American four-star general. He served two tours during the Vietnam War for which he was awarded three Bronze Star Medals for valor and two Purple Hearts.

This blog post was authored by Meredith Boldman, a communications intern at the Partnership for Public Service

The Senate confirmation process for executive branch nominees has become more difficult during the last 40 years.

President Joe Biden’s nominees have taken nearly three times longer to be confirmed during his first three years compared to the nominees in the George H.W. Bush administration.

Confirmation delays continued to grow under the Trump administration and have worsened further under Biden. Delays faced by Biden’s nominees in the first three years were 13% longer than Trump’s nominees.

Beyond confirmation times, presidents during the last 40 years have seen fewer and fewer of their nominees confirmed by the Senate. Through year three, Presidents Donald Trump and Biden each had approximately 150 fewer nominees confirmed compared to President Barack Obama and 250 to 300 fewer nominees confirmed compared to Presidents H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

The broken process leaves critical positions vacant for long periods of time, which is a disservice to the public in carrying out the fundamental roles of government, from national security to infrastructure to health and safety.

Using an analysis of our Political Appointee Tracker, we have been able to gain a clearer view of vacancy rates under the Biden and Trump administrations.

From our analysis of the state of vacancies in Cabinet Departments as of March 19th in the fourth year of the last two administrations, we found that:

Vacancies are widespread across Cabinet departments

As of March 19, 2024, 98 of 547 Cabinet department positions (18%) followed on our tracker were vacant in the Biden administration. At the same point in time, 157 of 526 Cabinet department positions (30%) followed on our tracker were vacant during the Trump administration. 

Some Cabinet departments have alarmingly high rates of vacancies

Four Cabinet departments had 30% or more of their positions vacant as of March 19, 2024. At the equivalent date during Trump’s fourth year, nine Cabinet departments had 30% or more of their positions vacant. For both administrations, the Department of Homeland Security had the highest vacancy rate at 35% in the Biden administration and 65% in the Trump administration. The departments of Housing and Urban Development and Justice also have consistently had high rates of vacancies, totaling more than 30% across the last two administrations.

Note: Excludes U.S. attorneys and U.S. marshals

Many Cabinet positions have yet to be filled more than three years into last two administrations

As of March 19, 2024, 50 Cabinet positions (9%) had never been filled with a Senate confirmed appointee since the beginning of the Biden administration. At the same point in time, 66 Cabinet positions (13%) had never been filled with a Senate confirmed appointee since the beginning of the Trump administration. The Department of Justice has been particularly affected by this problem, with over 25% of Senate confirmed positions never having someone confirmed by the Senate through March 19 of the fourth year of the last two administrations.

Note: Excludes U.S. attorneys and U.S. marshals

Nineteen Cabinet positions were not filled by either the Trump or Biden administration by March 19 of their fourth year

Across the Trump and Biden administrations, there are 19 positions in common that remained vacant during the first three years of each administration. Four of these positions are the chief financial officers at the departments of Agriculture, Homeland Security, State and Treasury. The list also includes high-level positions like the director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Positions Not Filled by the Fourth Year of Each of the Last Two Administrations

PositionAgency
Chief financial officerDepartment of Agriculture
Assistant secretary for civil rightsDepartment of Agriculture
Assistant secretary for communications and outreachDepartment of Education
Assistant secretary for planning and evaluationDepartment of Health and Human Services
Chief financial officerDepartment of Homeland Security
Director, Immigration and Customs EnforcementDepartment of Homeland Security
Assistant attorney general for the tax divisionDepartment of Justice
Deputy administrator, Drug Enforcement AdministrationDepartment of Justice
Commissioner, U.S. Parole Commission (2)Department of Justice
Special counsel for immigration-related unfair employment practicesDepartment of Justice
Chairman, Foreign Claims Settlement CommissionDepartment of Justice
Chief financial officerDepartment of State
Coordinator for threat reduction programsDepartment of State
Ambassador, BahamasDepartment of State
Ambassador, CubaDepartment of State
Director, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and EnforcementDepartment of the Interior
Special trustee for American IndiansDepartment of the Interior
Chief financial officerDepartment of the Treasury

These findings highlight the challenges in filling certain key roles in government. Reform of the confirmation process is urgently needed, starting with a reduction in the number of appointments subject to Senate approval.

Chris Piper is a manager at the Center for Presidential Transition.

Keep satellites in orbit! Keep the lead out of the drinking water! Keep your cool, even though you have no idea, as a political appointee, whether you will have a job next year. This is the dilemma appointees face in an election year.

A political appointee’s job is always busy and never easy, especially in the lead up to a presidential election. An election may mean continued employment (if the incumbent wins) or a sudden date with the door (if the challenger prevails). Either way, uncertainty can create stress and campaign battles only serve to increase such anxiety.

Below is some advice, sourced from former officials, for political appointees about maintaining sanity and staff morale during the months ahead.

1. Deal fairly and honestly with the agency transition requirements.

Political appointees must model professionalism and good faith as they support efforts by career officials to prepare for a possible transition as required by law. Agencies must meet a series of transition requirements including preparing briefings and written materials. This will help ensure a smooth transition of power if there is a change of administration.

2. Collaborate with top leadership to plan for a potential second term.

At the same time, an incumbent administration should be preparing for a second term if victorious. Political appointees should fulfill any requests to support transition planning while continuing to do their jobs.

3. Prepare succession plans.

The start of a new presidential term triggers high turnover in political roles, even if an incumbent wins. Political leaders should direct agencies to prepare lines of succession and identify potential acting officials to be ready for any departures.

4. Identify high-performers and allow opportunities for advancement.

If the incumbent wins, election year turnover can create openings for top performers to advance within the political ranks. Top appointees should identify and offer opportunities for strong performers to stay during and after the transition period.

5. Communicate clearly with colleagues.

Given the external turmoil and election uncertainty, clear internal communication about continued expectations is essential for maintaining trust among employees.

6. Share success stories internally and externally.

Members of the civil service faces many challenges. Sharing stories of success can boost staff morale despite outside pressures.

7. Create or join a supportive community.

Participation in communities with those who have the same professional or personal identities can be an opportunity to share struggles and successes, and provide support across silos or lines of reporting. Affinity groups or professional convenings, such as those facilitated by the Partnership for Public Service, are great examples of these.

8. Take this opportunity to review and publicize leave and self-care benefits.

Appointees should create a culture that encourages their entire organization to make use of their vacation, sick leave and other benefits.

9. Show your people some love.

Small gestures can mean a lot. Political appointees should share invitations to White House gatherings when available such as the upcoming White House Easter Egg Roll or other administration events. This is also a great time to plan retreats for staff to bond, share strategies and refocus on their mission.

10. Show yourself some love.

Take a break from the news. Take a walk. Take a deep breath. The next few months may be difficult and stressful, so do what you need to get through it and support those around you.

As we celebrate Women’s History Month both in the U.S. and worldwide, it’s a good time to examine the contributions women have made in the federal government. The Biden administration has seen a number of historic firsts for women: In 2021, Kamala Harris became the country’s first woman vice president, Janet Yellen became the first woman secretary of the Treasury and Avril Haines became the first woman director of National Intelligence.

Despite these wins, there’s still a long way to go. There are still important leadership positions that have never been held by a woman. For example, not only has no woman ever been president or chief justice of the Supreme Court, but two Cabinet agencies have never had a woman secretary: the departments of the Defense and Veterans Affairs.

The following are 10 important positions in the federal government that have never been filled by a woman.

1. President – None of the 45 individuals who served as president have been women. Hillary Clinton was the first woman to be nominated by a major political party in 2016.

2. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – Twenty-one men and no women have filled the most senior position in the U.S. armed forces since its creation in 1949.

3. Chief Justice of Supreme Court – Only six justices in the more than 230-year history of the Supreme Court have been women, and none have been appointed chief justice.

4. Chief of Staff to the President – Since President Harry Truman appointed the first chief of staff in 1946—called the assistant to the president at the time—none of the 31 people to hold this position have been women.

5. Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation – The first leader of the FBI was appointed in 1908, and none of the 20 directors (including those in an acting capacity) have been women.

6. Director of the National Security Agency – Women have never held the highest-ranking position in the NSA since the intelligence agency was founded in 1952.

7. Secretary of Defense – The Department of Defense has never been led by a woman since its inception in 1947.

8. Secretary of Veterans Affairs – The Department of Veterans Affairs was formed in 1989, and all 11 of the Senate-confirmed officials who led the agency have been men.

9. Senate Majority Leader – No Senate majority leader has been female since that role was created in the 1920s.In fact, no Senate minority leader has been a woman during that period either.

10. NASA Administrator – None of the 14 people who have been confirmed to lead the agency since its founding in 1958.

This list is not exhaustive. Other important positions, such as the ambassadorships to China, Israel, and Russia have not been held by a woman. Other positions have only had a woman official recently.

As the country honors women’s history, those who have served as leaders of our democracy deserve recognition and appreciation. At the same time, their absence from key positions in government, and thus from critical conversations in domestic and foreign policy, is worth highlighting. As President Joe Biden proclaimed, “Throughout history, the vision and achievements of powerful women have strengthened our Nation and opened the doors of opportunity wider for all of us.”

Extensive research indicates diverse and inclusive teams produce better outcomes, and that well-qualified women are ready to lead. While we have made progress in the last 100 years, more work needs to be done to ensure the top levels of our government resemble the country they serves.