All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

"Holds" and Private Political Fights
Unformatted Document Text:  4 confirmed, at all levels of the federal judicial system (Bell 2002; Binder 2001; Binder & Maltzman 2002; Goldman 2003; Hartley & Holmes 1997, 2002; Martinek, Kemper & Van Winkle 2002; Shipan & Shannon 2003). 2 Hartley & Holmes (1997) report that the time between referral to committee and confirmation for all lower federal court nominees rose from an average of 25.4 days for Nixon to an average of 56 days for Clinton. Martinek, Kemper and Van Winkle (2002) find that this rise in delay is actually rather new: Carter Circuit Court nominees took an average of 50.9 days to move from nomination to confirmation, while Clinton Circuit Court nominees took an average of 100.3 days. Looking specifically at the Clinton years, Cohen (1998) reports that between 1995 and 1997 the length of time it took between when Clinton nominated someone for the federal bench to confirmation by the Senate rose from an average of 79 days to an average of 212 days. Finally, Goldman & Slotnick (1999) find that during the 105 th Congress (1997-1998) the time between receipt of a nomination by the Senate to when the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings rose to an average of 231 days. Additionally, they report that for Clinton’s nominees, the time between they were voted out of committee and voted on by the full Senate increased from 3.2 days in the 102 nd Congress to 38.4 days during the 105 th Congress. Some of these studies have also attempted to discern why some confirmations move faster than others. Their findings reveal that there are a number of personal and political factors that have an effect on how long it takes for nominees to be confirmed (Bell 2002; Binder & Maltzman 2002; Martinek, Kemper and Van Winkle 2002). These studies do not address, however, exactly how these confirmations are being delayed or for what reasons. Additionally, by focusing purely on macro-level analyses, these studies might be uncovering correlations 2 Most of these studies examine only those nominees who were actually confirmed. Additionally, except where noted, all of these figures include both District Court and Circuit Court nominees.

Authors: Steigerwalt, Amy.
first   previous   Page 4 of 52   next   last



background image
4
confirmed, at all levels of the federal judicial system (Bell 2002; Binder 2001; Binder &
Maltzman 2002; Goldman 2003; Hartley & Holmes 1997, 2002; Martinek, Kemper & Van
Winkle 2002; Shipan & Shannon 2003).
2
Hartley & Holmes (1997) report that the time between
referral to committee and confirmation for all lower federal court nominees rose from an average
of 25.4 days for Nixon to an average of 56 days for Clinton. Martinek, Kemper and Van Winkle
(2002) find that this rise in delay is actually rather new: Carter Circuit Court nominees took an
average of 50.9 days to move from nomination to confirmation, while Clinton Circuit Court
nominees took an average of 100.3 days. Looking specifically at the Clinton years, Cohen
(1998) reports that between 1995 and 1997 the length of time it took between when Clinton
nominated someone for the federal bench to confirmation by the Senate rose from an average of
79 days to an average of 212 days. Finally, Goldman & Slotnick (1999) find that during the
105
th
Congress (1997-1998) the time between receipt of a nomination by the Senate to when the
Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings rose to an average of 231 days. Additionally, they
report that for Clinton’s nominees, the time between they were voted out of committee and voted
on by the full Senate increased from 3.2 days in the 102
nd
Congress to 38.4 days during the 105
th
Congress.
Some of these studies have also attempted to discern why some confirmations move
faster than others. Their findings reveal that there are a number of personal and political factors
that have an effect on how long it takes for nominees to be confirmed (Bell 2002; Binder &
Maltzman 2002; Martinek, Kemper and Van Winkle 2002). These studies do not address,
however, exactly how these confirmations are being delayed or for what reasons. Additionally,
by focusing purely on macro-level analyses, these studies might be uncovering correlations
2
Most of these studies examine only those nominees who were actually confirmed. Additionally, except where
noted, all of these figures include both District Court and Circuit Court nominees.


Convention
All Academic Convention can solve the abstract management needs for any association's annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 4 of 52   next   last

©2008 All Academic, Inc.