GOP Goes Nuclear—Trump’s Team Confirmed at Blistering Speed as Democrats Fume

Paul Riverbank, 12/19/2025President Trump's first-year nominee confirmations surged to record levels after Senate Republicans invoked rule changes, overcoming Democratic resistance. This rapid pace underscores a pivotal shift in Senate dynamics, revealing how political strategy and procedural tools can dramatically reshape the federal appointments landscape.

The pace was hardly accidental. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a Republican from South Dakota, began the year on a war footing: there was a seriousness of purpose not often seen in the upper chamber. His team, fresh to majority power, kept the machinery of confirmation rolling late into evenings, sometimes with little warning. The most dramatic move came on a frenzied Thursday, when 97 nominees were pushed across the finish line in one go. Eyes around Washington widened: the long-simmering logjam had been dynamited.

That’s not to say it was a smooth ride. Democratic resistance surfaced early—sometimes over positions that would barely rate a press release in quieter times. Even for assistant secretaries and administration lawyers, objections kept cropping up. Republican Whip John Barrasso summed up the year’s whiplash pace with weary satisfaction: “We started by moving Trump’s Cabinet faster than anyone expected.” Yet he was quick to note, with characteristic understatement, that “unprecedented obstruction” followed soon after.

Those obstacles led Republicans to deploy the so-called nuclear option by September. Changing Senate rules, especially the ones related to sub-Cabinet picks, is a move steeped in both risk and history. The adjustment eased the gridlock, and immediately, confirmations surged. Democrats called it an abuse of power. Thune, for his part, didn’t waste the opportunity to frame it as a necessary answer to “pointless political obstruction” — an accusation lobbed with more than a touch of calculation.

A few confirmations stood out against the tide. Take the case of Anthony D'Esposito, an ex-Congressman with a brief but colorful stint representing New York's 4th district. His nomination to become inspector general at the Labor Department languished for months, reportedly snagged on both sides of the aisle. Eventually, in that headline-making Thursday session, the logjam gave way. D’Esposito was confirmed 53-43. Though some Democrats immediately pounced, with Lauren Gillen—the Representative who unseated him—calling him “completely unqualified,” D'Esposito shot back on social media: “No excuses. Only results.” The appointment has sparked quiet speculation on whether D'Esposito will attempt a political comeback—perhaps eyeing his old House seat.

While controversy simmered over individual picks, procedural changes transformed the overall tempo. Republicans avoided relying on voice votes—usually a way to expedite less controversial appointments—and instead subjected most nominations to full roll calls. Still, progress ticked on. By year’s end, fewer than twenty Trump nominees remained bogged in committee or awaiting floor time.

Among the names still drawing interest: James Murphy and Scott Mayer, both nominated to the National Labor Relations Board; Tammy Bruce, tapped to serve as Deputy Ambassador to the United Nations; and Brent Bozell, in line to head the U.S. mission in South Africa. Perhaps most consequentially, the Senate has teed up Joshua Simmons for CIA special counsel, a post that’s certain to draw scrutiny—and perhaps more fireworks—in confirmation hearings.

All this, while a looming spending bill hangs over Capitol Hill like a mid-winter fog. Democrats have pushed back at the practice of bundling multiple appropriations into a single legislative package; late-night meetings and perimeter negotiations have become a familiar backdrop again. And yet, if you’re watching the nomination scoreboard, the message is plain: with tight control of Senate rules and a unified majority, the confirmation process becomes a sprint rather than a slog.

When the dust settles, the 417-name figure hangs over Washington as much more than a bureaucratic victory. It’s a reminder—maybe even a warning—of how political momentum, manipulated rules, and a determined majority can redefine precedent, sometimes overnight.

Not many years ago, it would have been hard to imagine a Senate confirmation process moving at breakneck speed. But 2023 brought something of a political spectacle. President Trump, often derided for chaos and unpredictability, suddenly found himself with a record-setting pace of nominee approvals: 417 confirmations in his first year alone. Even seasoned Senate watchers blinked twice at the number; the tally not only trounced President Biden's first-year figure of 365, but also set a blistering modern precedent.The pace was hardly accidental. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a Republican from South Dakota, began the year on a war footing: there was a seriousness of purpose not often seen in the upper chamber. His team, fresh to majority power, kept the machinery of confirmation rolling late into evenings, sometimes with little warning. The most dramatic move came on a frenzied Thursday, when 97 nominees were pushed across the finish line in one go. Eyes around Washington widened: the long-simmering logjam had been dynamited.That’s not to say it was a smooth ride. Democratic resistance surfaced early—sometimes over positions that would barely rate a press release in quieter times. Even for assistant secretaries and administration lawyers, objections kept cropping up. Republican Whip John Barrasso summed up the year’s whiplash pace with weary satisfaction: “We started by moving Trump’s Cabinet faster than anyone expected.” Yet he was quick to note, with characteristic understatement, that “unprecedented obstruction” followed soon after.Those obstacles led Republicans to deploy the so-called nuclear option by September. Changing Senate rules, especially the ones related to sub-Cabinet picks, is a move steeped in both risk and history. The adjustment eased the gridlock, and immediately, confirmations surged. Democrats called it an abuse of power. Thune, for his part, didn’t waste the opportunity to frame it as a necessary answer to “pointless political obstruction” — an accusation lobbed with more than a touch of calculation.A few confirmations stood out against the tide. Take the case of Anthony D'Esposito, an ex-Congressman with a brief but colorful stint representing New York's 4th district. His nomination to become inspector general at the Labor Department languished for months, reportedly snagged on both sides of the aisle. Eventually, in that headline-making Thursday session, the logjam gave way. D’Esposito was confirmed 53-43. Though some Democrats immediately pounced, with Lauren Gillen—the Representative who unseated him—calling him “completely unqualified,” D'Esposito shot back on social media: “No excuses. Only results.” The appointment has sparked quiet speculation on whether D'Esposito will attempt a political comeback—perhaps eyeing his old House seat.While controversy simmered over individual picks, procedural changes transformed the overall tempo. Republicans avoided relying on voice votes—usually a way to expedite less controversial appointments—and instead subjected most nominations to full roll calls. Still, progress ticked on. By year’s end, fewer than twenty Trump nominees remained bogged in committee or awaiting floor time.Among the names still drawing interest: James Murphy and Scott Mayer, both nominated to the National Labor Relations Board; Tammy Bruce, tapped to serve as Deputy Ambassador to the United Nations; and Brent Bozell, in line to head the U.S. mission in South Africa. Perhaps most consequentially, the Senate has teed up Joshua Simmons for CIA special counsel, a post that’s certain to draw scrutiny—and perhaps more fireworks—in confirmation hearings.All this, while a looming spending bill hangs over Capitol Hill like a mid-winter fog. Democrats have pushed back at the practice of bundling multiple appropriations into a single legislative package; late-night meetings and perimeter negotiations have become a familiar backdrop again. And yet, if you’re watching the nomination scoreboard, the message is plain: with tight control of Senate rules and a unified majority, the confirmation process becomes a sprint rather than a slog.When the dust settles, the 417-name figure hangs over Washington as much more than a bureaucratic victory. It’s a reminder—maybe even a warning—of how political momentum, manipulated rules, and a determined majority can redefine precedent, sometimes overnight.