The more respondents knew about the appointments process, the lower they rated the benefits of service and the more they worried about the costs. Thus 9 percent of respondents who knew little or nothing about the system said salaries would be much or somewhat better than other comparable senior positions, compared with just 2 percent of those who knew a great deal or something. Many corporate and civic leaders know little about the process. Nearly half of all respondents said they knew little or nothing about the appointments process. Lobbyists, think tank scholars, and university presidents were the most knowledgeable, nonprofit executives were in the middle, and corporate CEOs and state and local government officials were the least informed.
Many potential appointees base their impressions of the system on what they see in the media.
All the groups interviewed said the media had some influence in forming their impressions of the process. Think tank scholars and lobbyists were more likely than the other groups to base their impressions on personal experiences or the experiences of their friends or colleagues. Role of the Senate in the Appointments Process Let me speak for a moment about the role of the Senate in the appointments process. I'm sure there are some presidential appointees who wish the Senate wasn't involved in the process at all. But I think that the Founding Fathers were correct when they wanted a system of checks and balances, wanted the Senate to have a role of advice and consent.