Appointments to regulatory agencies are rarely the subject of empirical analysis, and when they are scrutinized, the focus is institutional factors. Instead, the authors examine the policy environment to determine if external factors influence the appointment process. To illustrate this, accident rates are analyzed to determine their effect on appointment duration at the National Transportation Safety Board. The most important explanatory variable for delay is a statutorily required cross-party nomination—an institutional factor. However, the policy environment is also important: A 1 standard deviation increase in the accident rate leads to a 30% increase in vacancy duration for the agency.
Allison, G. W. (1996). Delay in senate confirmation of federal judicial nominees. Judicature, 80(1), 8-15.
2.
Barrow, D., Gryski, G., & Zuk, G. (1996). The Federal judiciary and institutional change. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
3.
Baumgartner, F. R.,& Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Binder, S. A., & Maltzman, F. (2002). Senatorial delay in confirming federal judges, 1947-1998. American Journal of Political Science, 46, 190-199.
5.
Brauer, C. (1987). Tenure, turnover, and post-government employment trends of presidential appointees. In G. C. Mackenzie (Ed.), The in-and-outers(pp. 174-194). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
6.
Cameron, C. M., Cover, A. D., & Segal, J. A. (1990). Senate voting on supreme court nominees: A neoinstitutional model. American Political Science Review, 84, 525-534.
7.
Deering, C. J. (1987). Damned if you do and damned if you don't: The Senate's role in the appointments process. In G. C. Mackenzie (Ed.), The in-and-outers(pp. 100-119). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
8.
Hagle, T. M. (1993). Strategic retirements: Apolitical model of turnover on the United States Supreme Court. Political Behavior, 15(1), 25-48.
9.
Hammond, T. H.,& Hill, J. S. (1993). Deference or preference? Explaining Senate confirmation of presidential nominees to administrative agencies. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 5, 23-59.
10.
Hartley, R. E., & Holmes, L. M. (1997). Increasing Senate scrutiny of lower federal court nominees. Judicature, 80, 274-278.
11.
Havrilesky, T., & Gildea, J. (1992). Reliable and unreliable partisan appointees to the board of governors. Public Choice, 73, 319-417.
12.
Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks in the executive establishment. In A. King (Ed.), The new American political system(pp. 87-124).Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
13.
Hettinger, V., & Zorn, C. (2005). Explaining the incidence and timing of congressional responses to the U.S. Supreme Court. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 30, 5-28.
14.
Jacobs, L. R. (1993). The health of nations: Public opinion and the making of American and British health policy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
15.
Kohlmeier, L. M., Jr. (1969). Regulators: Watchdog agencies and the public interest. New York: Harper and Row.
16.
Krutz, G. S., Fleisher, R., & Bond, J. R. (1998). From Abe Fortas to Zoe Baird: Why some presidential nominations fail in the Senate. American Political Science Review, 92, 871-881.
17.
Lowi, T. J. (1969). The end of liberalism: Ideology, policy, and the crisis of public authority. New York: Norton.
18.
Mackenzie, G. C. (1981). The politics of presidential appointments. New York: Free Press.
19.
Maller, R., & Zhou, X. (1996). Survival analysis with long-term survivors. New York: John Wiley.
20.
McCarty, N., & Razaghian, R. (1999). Advice and consent: Senate responses to executive branch nominations, 1885-1996. American Journal of Political Science, 43, 1122-1143.
21.
McCubbins, M. D., & Schwartz, T. (1984). Congressional oversight overlooked: Police patrols versus fire alarms. American Journal of Political Science, 28(1), 165-179.
22.
Moe, T. M. (1982). Regulatory performance and presidential administration. American Journal of Political Science, 26, 197-224.
23.
Nixon, D. C. (2001). Appointment delay for vacancies on the federal communications commission. Public Administration Review, 61, 483-492.
24.
Nixon, D. C.,& Goss, D. L. (2001). Confirmation delay for vacancies on the circuit courts of appeals. American Politics Research, 29, 246-274.
25.
Nokken, T. P., & Sala, B. R. (2000). Confirmation dynamics: A model of presidential appointments to independent agencies. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 12(1), 91-112.
26.
Posner, R. (1974). Theories of economic regulation. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 5, 335-358.
27.
Quirk, P. J. (1980). Food and drug administration. In J. Q. Wilson (Ed.), The politics of regulation(pp. 191-235).New York: Basic Books.
28.
Ragsdale, L. (1998). Vital statistics on the presidency. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
29.
Rose, N. L. (1990). Profitability and product quality: Economic determinants of airline safety performance. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 944-964.
30.
Ruckman, P. S., Jr. (1993). The Supreme Court, critical nominations, and the Senate confirmation process. Journal of Politics, 55, 793-805.
31.
Spriggs, J.,& Wahlbeck, P. (1995). Calling it quits: Strategic retirement on the federal courts of appeals, 1893-1991. Political Research Quarterly, 48, 573-597.
32.
Wood, B. D., & Waterman, R. W. (1991). The dynamics of political control of the bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 85, 801-828.
33.
Yamaguchi, K. (1991). Event history analysis.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
