What's the difference, operationally, between an "acting" official and one that has been..

[LAS14]

... approved by congress? What's to stop a president from just filling his administration with acting officials and leaving it at that?

tia
las

[SeattleVet]

1. They have all the power of that office, but it's supposed to be for a limited time.

Of course, the current administration ignores the parts of the law that it disagrees with, and there are a few that are well past their expiration dates.

[Binkie The Clown]

3. Limit them to four years. That works for me. nt

[soothsayer]

2. That's what drumpf did

[onenote]

4. There are limits to who can be named an acting cabinet secretary

And limits on how long an acting official can serve

[OAITW r.2.0]

5. Given today's Senate Republicans, I wouldn't bother seeking their approval. Make them all acting.

Biden can introduce by letting the major news outlets do an in-depth Q and A. Don't give the McConnell Senate a chance to debase these people and use this as an opportunity to kneecap the Biden administration before it starts.

They (the McConnell Senate Republicans) won't care, Trump bi-passed the Senate confirmation process to get his unqualified picks w/o Republicans giving a shit installed, so what are they going to complain about now?

[brooklynite]

8. So, you're saying we should govern the way Trump did?

That should work well...

[OAITW r.2.0]

9. Do you think Biden will govern like Trump?

Will Biden put incompetent and conflicted nominees in his cabinet? I don't think so. I do think Republicans in the Senate will use the it as an opportunity to debase the nominees, regardless as to how well qualified they are.

[Celerity]

14. so if (and this assumes we do not win both GA run-offs) McTurtle refuses votes on Biden's cabinet

nominations, what else can we do? We HAVE to have a cabinet. I fail to see how naming acting cabinet members (only doing so due to outright Rethug stonewalling) is 'governing like Trump'.

[Statistical]

6. Acting appointees are only suppose to serve 180 days.

I say suppose to because more than one Trump acting appointees are getting close to a year on the job.

So at best there is no difference. At worse the Senate pushed back and Supreme Court rules they have to leave their post Biden would need to replace them with another acting appointee.

[PoliticAverse]

10. It is longer than 180 days...

Term of office
Once a vacancy occurs, the position is eligible to be filled by an acting officer for 210 days from the date of the vacancy, as well as any time when a nomination is pending before the Senate. If a first or second nomination is rejected by the Senate or withdrawn, it activates additional 210-day periods from the date of the rejection, but this does not apply to a third or later nomination.

If an office remains vacant after 210 days after the rejection, withdrawal, or return of a second presidential appointment nomination, it remains vacant until a person is appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. In such instance, only the head of an executive agency may perform office functions until such appointment is made in the case of an office other than the office of head of an executive agency.

This period is modified around the time of a presidential transition (when a new president takes office), effectively extending the 210-day limit to 300 days.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Vacancies_Reform_Act_of_1998#cite_note-:0-2

[Statistical]

11. I stand correct. That is even better.

Nice that it also applies "as well as any time when a nomination is pending before the Senate" so Mitch would have to vote down the confirmation. He can't just not call a vote because if he doesn't call a vote then the appointee can remain there forever.

[KY_EnviroGuy]

12. Can an acting official simultaneously be put up for confirmation? n/t

[PoliticAverse]

13. A person nominated to a position may not concurrently serve ... unless...

A person nominated to a position may not concurrently serve as an acting officer for that position, unless that person is in a "first assistant" position to that office and either has served in that position for at least 90 days, or was appointed to that position through the advice and consent process

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Vacancies_Reform_Act_of_1998

[KY_EnviroGuy]

15. Thanks, good info.

KY...........

[Massacure]

16. So in essence a person can act for at least 630 days?

Person A resigns, so person B is assigned to act in their place. 209 days later, the POTUS nominates person C. Person C gets rejected by the Senate, and so 209 days after their rejection, the POTUS nominates person D. 209 days after person D gets rejected, the president nominates person E. If person E is rejected, the person B is forced to give up their temporary assignment? 607 days have passed plus however long the Senate spent considering each of the nominees?

[PoliticAverse]

7. See...

Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Vacancies_Reform_Act_of_1998

The Vacancies Act: A Legal Overview - Congressional Research Service (.pdf)
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44997.pdf