Editorial: A nomination isn't a political promise

There is a difference between an appointment and a nomination.

In an appointment, a government leader is able to place someone in a position with nothing more than their own say-so. Pick a chief of staff or a press secretary? That’s completely up to a governor or senator.

A nomination is what happens when a leader says, “This is who I want,” and the lawmakers around him have to vote that position up or down. The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for Biden Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson would be the most obvious example at the moment.

Because these events happen just once or twice in a president’s term doesn’t mean nominations are uncommon. They happen at every level of government all the time and are seldom as dramatic as a lifetime appointment to the top court in the land.

In Pennsylvania, for example, the governor gets to appoint people to a lot of positions. However, the state Senate gets to weigh in on those recommendations for everything from cabinet secretaries to license boards.

That is why the Tuesday meeting of Allegheny County Council with its list of appointments by County Executive Rich Fitzgerald to approve was nothing special. At least, not until the votes were called and three appointments were shot down.

State Rep. Nick Pisciottano, D-West Mifflin, and Sylvia Wilson were knocked out of the nomination for the Allegheny County Sanitation Authority board by a one-vote margin each. The nomination of William Stickman III to the Jail Oversight Board was voted down 9-6.

County Councilwoman Bethany Hallam accused Fitzgerald of handing out the positions as political favors, saying “council is putting a stop to that unethical practice.”

That may be a bit dramatic, but whether the job is being done by the U.S. Senate or a municipality with fewer than 100 people, the job remains the same. It’s not about a partisan fight or asserting power.

The responsibility to evaluate a nomination and make a decision is important. It is part of the legal process for a reason. If it wasn’t supposed to be taken seriously, it would be replaced with a rubber stamp rather than a vote.

However, it is just as incumbent upon those doing the voting to make their advice and consent constructive rather than merely political.