answersLogoWhite

0

The president can actually appoint high ranking officials. These officials are normally secretary of state or treasury and so on..... I'm not sure if only he/she makes the final decision but it is a long strenuous process by far a hard one. You want good people in your presidential cabinet...... Hope this helps!

User Avatar

Wiki User

16y ago

What else can I help you with?

Related Questions

What if the Senate feels that the president has not made a good choice for an appointment What can the Senate do?

According to Article II, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the President shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, judges and other high ranking officials. The senate holds hearings to determine the suitability of the nominee and confirms the nomination by a majority vote.


Who said if the gladiator could live or die?

Usually it was up to the audience, although high-ranking officials who attended the games could make the final decision.


What is the Roman equivalent of a president?

During the republic Rome did not have any political position that could be likened to a president. They had consuls as their top officials but it was a shared office. However during the principate the emperor could be considered a president in a very loose way.During the republic Rome did not have any political position that could be likened to a president. They had consuls as their top officials but it was a shared office. However during the principate the emperor could be considered a president in a very loose way.During the republic Rome did not have any political position that could be likened to a president. They had consuls as their top officials but it was a shared office. However during the principate the emperor could be considered a president in a very loose way.During the republic Rome did not have any political position that could be likened to a president. They had consuls as their top officials but it was a shared office. However during the principate the emperor could be considered a president in a very loose way.During the republic Rome did not have any political position that could be likened to a president. They had consuls as their top officials but it was a shared office. However during the principate the emperor could be considered a president in a very loose way.During the republic Rome did not have any political position that could be likened to a president. They had consuls as their top officials but it was a shared office. However during the principate the emperor could be considered a president in a very loose way.During the republic Rome did not have any political position that could be likened to a president. They had consuls as their top officials but it was a shared office. However during the principate the emperor could be considered a president in a very loose way.During the republic Rome did not have any political position that could be likened to a president. They had consuls as their top officials but it was a shared office. However during the principate the emperor could be considered a president in a very loose way.During the republic Rome did not have any political position that could be likened to a president. They had consuls as their top officials but it was a shared office. However during the principate the emperor could be considered a president in a very loose way.


Why did louis xiv appoint royal officials from the middle class to his bureaucracy?

He did this so that his officials would be loyal to him, since they owed their rank to him. If he had appointed nobles, the nobles would be less dependent on him because their title was hereditary and could not be taken away. However, his bourgeois officials owed him everything.


What would happen if the president could appoint anyone as a federal judge without senate approval?

Chaos would ensue


What made it so the president could not remove federal officials from office?

Tenure of Office Act


What could the Romans do appoint in times of emergencys?

Under the republic, the Romans could appoint a dictator in times of emergencies.


What checks and balances existed in the Roman Republic government?

First of all, bear in mind that the Roman Republic was not like present day republics. The officials, although elected by the people, had different responsibilities than our present day officials. Each official had his own area of influence and a higher ranking official could veto the proposals of a lower ranking one. A tribune of the plebs could veto everyone except a dictator. In this way the Romans had their checks and balances.


How did the people of Palestine elect government officials during the times of Jesus Christ?

In the time of Jesus, Palestine consisted of several territories, including Galilee and Judea, all under the control of Roman officials or kings appointed by Rome. The people had no say in the appointment of government officials. The Jews had some say in the appointment of temple officials in Jerusalem, as did the pagans for their temples, but the Romans could veto any selection and appoint their own nominee.


What is the ranking for Iowa?

Ranking in which kind could be Capital, Government, etc.


May the president appoint his or her brother in law to the cabinet?

Yes, the president can appoint a brother-in-law to the cabinet, as there are no legal restrictions preventing family members from being appointed to such positions. However, this decision may raise ethical concerns and potential conflicts of interest, and it could face scrutiny from the public and Congress. Ultimately, the appointment would need to be confirmed by the Senate, which could consider these factors during the confirmation process.


Who could command the army lead the government for a year and appoint a dictator ruler with absolute power in times of crisis?

In many historical contexts, such as in ancient Rome, a consul or a similar high-ranking official could command the army, lead the government, and appoint a dictator with absolute power during times of crisis. This practice was often codified in law to ensure that a single leader could respond swiftly to emergencies. In modern democracies, such powers might be vested in a president or prime minister, typically requiring legislative approval to ensure checks and balances are maintained. However, the specifics can vary widely depending on the country's constitution and legal framework.