This is an important legal technicality, as federal law prohibits \ufffdpayment of services\ufffd for certain recess appointments. However, if the recess appointee in question agrees that he or she will take an unpaid position and not sue the government at a later date for compensation, then the appointment can go forward, at least as the White House sees it.

So as long as Fox \ufffd a multi-millionaire \ufffd agreed not to sue the Bush administration later for not paying him, the White House would be comfortable with giving him an unpaid, \ufffdvoluntary service\ufffd recess appointment as ambassador to Belgium.

But here\ufffds the rub that makes Democrats view Bush\ufffds recess appointment of Fox as a major-league no-no: Federal law prohibits \ufffdvoluntary service\ufffd in cases where the position in question has a fixed rate of pay, as an ambassadorship does. That\ufffds how the Government Accountability Office, an arm of the Democratic-controlled Congress, interprets the law.

[link|http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=5585|http://blog.thedemoc...daily.com/?p=5585]