THE BROKEN-DOWN PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENT PROCESS.

Jim Doty, Dan Marron, Oliver Pennington, William Steere, Bill Heyman, Laura Unger and Rep. Chris Cox. What do these people have in common? They are all being considered -- or have been considered -- for the position of chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission for the Bush Administration.

Why is it taking so long to fill such an important job? A large part of the problem is the presidential appointment process itself. Good candidates are frequently repelled by the sheer weight of the nominating process, since it is generally recognized that it frequently takes six months to a year just to find a qualified nominee willing to serve. Then there is the morass of inquiries and questionnaires and Senate confirmation hearings that the candidate must get through.

According to the 1996 Task Force on Presidential Appointments, the appointment process has discouraged and demoralized qualified and talented candidates. An article in Brookings Review makes reference to a recent survey, polling former appointees from the past three administrations, which elicited such descriptions of the process as "embarrassing," "confusing" and "a necessary evil."

Given the protracted appointment process, it's likely we won't see a new SEC chairman until sometime next winter, which is a devastating prospect given the volatile stock market and turbulent economic conditions. Although a handful of candidates have made it to a short list for the top SEC job, the names keep changing, for many reasons.

Some potential candidates don't want to make the extensive financial disclosures required of appointees; others are viewed as potential captives of the SEC professional staff; still other candidates don't want to take a pay cut. Then there are those candidates who do surrender to the rigorous investigations and questionnaires, but ultimately give up out of sheer frustration over the protracted process.

William Steere, the recently retired chairman and CEO of Pfizer, was a contender for the SEC chairmanship but asked that his name be with drawn. FEI had encouraged Steere to accept the nomination because his corporate experience and perspective would have enhanced the effective ness of the commission. Jim Doty, a former SEC general counsel and now a senior partner at the law firm of Baker & Botts, had been under serious consideration but is no longer because he was viewed by some on Capitol Hill as being a captive of the SEC staff.

Rep. Chris Cox, a securities lawyer and a member of the House of Representatives from California since 1989, is well-qualified to make the move from the legislative branch to the executive branch. He is a respected and well-regarded member of the House who has had a leadership role in advocating New Economy policies.

Being from California, Cox was the point person for several technology and Internet companies during the debate over the FASB business combination exposure draft. He co-sponsored legislation that would have placed a moratorium on the implementation of the FASB business combination proposal to ensure that a complete economic impact study was conducted.

As this is being written, Cox is still on a short list of active candidates, but there has been little word on how quickly the administration might move or just what criteria is being used to winnow the field. As a result, the SEC's top presidential appointment positions are left unfilled, and the effectiveness of this important federal agency is diminished. This "hunt-and-peck" strategy to identify candidates for the SEC chairmanship shows just how dys-functional the presidential appointment process has become.