Appointment and Confirmation of Executive Branch Leadership: An Overview

"The Constitution divides the responsibility for populating the top positions in the executive branch of the federal government between the President and the Senate. Article II, Section 2 empowers the President to nominate and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint the principal officers of the United States, as well as some subordinate officers.

These positions are generally filled through the advice and consent process, which can be divided into three stages:
1. The White House selects and clears a prospective appointee before sending a formal nomination to the Senate.
2. The Senate determines whether to confirm a nomination. For most nominations, much of this process occurs at the committee level.
3. The confirmed nominee is given a commission and sworn into office, after which he or she has full authority to carry out the duties of the office.

The President may also be able to fill vacancies in advice and consent positions in the executive branch temporarily through other means. In some cases, the President may be able to designate an official to serve in a vacant position on a temporary basis under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act or under statutory authority specific to the position. Alternatively, if circumstances permit and certain conditions are met, the President could choose to give a recess appointment to an individual. Such an appointment would last until the end of the next session of the Senate. In practice, recess appointments have become less common in recent years.

Congress has selectively included certain types of statutory provisions when establishing specific executive branch positions. These provisions include those that require appointees to have specified qualifications, set fixed terms of office, limit the circumstances under which the President can remove an officeholder, specify how the chair of a collegial board or commission will be selected and may be removed, and allow an incumbent to remain in office past the end of a term until a successor is appointed (also referred to as a holdover provision). Although these types of provisions may be found in the establishing statutes for a variety of positions, they are particularly common for members of regulatory and other collegial boards and commissions. In some cases, these types of provisions have influenced the dynamics of the Senate confirmation process. They may also be factored into the selection and vetting process in the Administration..."
Executive Branch Leadership 

Executive Branch Ethics and Financial Conflicts of Interest: Disqualification

"Newly proposed legislation in the 116th Congress concerns government ethics reform, including conflicts of interest among executive branch officials. Federal officials have a basic duty not to allow private gain to influence their government service, which includes “not hold[ing] financial interests that conflict with the conscientious performance of duty.” Federal statutes, as well as a code of conduct for executive branch employees, make this principle part of a federal regulatory scheme intended to prevent officials from benefiting personally from their offices. The current federal statutory scheme regulating conflicts between an official’s personal financial interests and his or her official duties has three prongs: disclosure, disqualification, and divestiture (i.e., a 3-D system). This discussion of the disqualification requirement, also known as recusal, is the second in a three-part series examining conflicts of interest in the executive branch.

Disqualification Requirements in the Executive Branch 

The principal disqualification statute for executive branch officials—18 U.S.C. § 208 (section 208)— imposes criminal penalties for executive branch officials who fail to recuse themselves when their official role would conflict with their financial interests. Section 208 broadly applies to “officers and employees” within executive branch agencies regardless of the officials’ seniority or rate of pay. It also expressly applies to special government employees (SGE) who serve in temporary or intermittent government roles. Although the statute was originally silent regarding its applicability to the President and Vice President, Congress later amended it to exclude those officials by definition..."
Executive banch ethics

Presidential Executive Order on a Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch

"EXECUTIVE ORDER- - - - - - -

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR REORGANIZING THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Purpose.  This order is intended to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of the executive branch by directing the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (Director) to propose a plan to reorganize governmental functions and eliminate unnecessary agencies (as defined in section 551(1) of title 5, United States Code), components of agencies, and agency programs.

Sec. 2.  Proposed Plan to Improve the Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Accountability of Federal Agencies, Including, as Appropriate, to Eliminate or Reorganize Unnecessary or Redundant Federal Agencies.  (a)  Within 180 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall submit to the Director a proposed plan to reorganize the agency, if appropriate, in order to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of that agency. 

(b)  The Director shall publish a notice in the Federal Register inviting the public to suggest improvements in the organization and functioning of the executive branch and shall consider the suggestions when formulating the proposed plan described in subsection (c) of this section..."
Reorganizing the Executive Branch