This paper assesses empirically the way in which two Latin American upper chambers - the Argentine and Brazilian senates - made use of their confirmation prerogatives between 1989 and 2003: whether taking on a deferential posture towards executive proposals or a more active role, including both consultation and oversight. The article first analyses all nominations regarding outcome (confirmed, rejected, and withdrawn) and length of process. Then, the similarities and differences are used to advance some explanatory hypotheses. Special attention is paid to the impact of political factors, especially senates’ internal rules for the organization of the legislative work.
Confirmation; Advice and consent; Senate; Latin America; Brazil; Argentina; Legislative oversight; Horizontal accountability
