No, both are found in the Constitution in Article II, section 2. Clause 2 gives the Senate the power to advise and consent to nominations, while Clause 3 says:

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

This enables the President to make an appointment during a Senate recess that would otherwise require the advise and consent of the Senate, including cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, federal judges, directors of federal agencies, and members of federal boards and commissions -- even Supreme Court Justices. Since 1791, 15 Supreme Court Justices began their tenure with a recess appointment, the most recent being Justice Potter Stewart in 1958.

President Clinton has now made 56 recess appointments in his 6 ½ years, the last being James Hormel as Ambassador to Luxembourg on June 4, 1999. President Bush made 77 recess appointments during his 4 year tenure, and in 8 years as President, Ronald Reagan made 243 such appointments. President Carter made 68 recess appointments over 4 years in office.

Any recess appointment the President makes during the first session of a Congress will last until the end of its second session [each Congress is split into two sessions of approximately one year each]. Recess appointments made in the second session of a Congress would expire at the end of the first session of the next Congress. Once this time period has expired, an official would have to receive formal confirmation from the Senate in order to remain in office.

The original purpose behind granting the President the power of recess appointments was to get around a practical problem. At the time the Constitution was written, short sessions and long periods of adjournment were the meeting pattern expected for Congress: the early Senate would routinely be in recess from March through December. Moreover, sessions were sometimes delayed because difficult travel conditions meant waiting a long time for enough Senators to arrive to assemble a quorum. The power given the President to make recess appointments was granted so that he wouldn’t be without top officials of government for long periods while waiting for the Senate to assemble.

Today, Congress meets for longer periods throughout the year, with shorter recesses. The motivation for recess appointments is rarely scheduling concerns any longer. Recess appointments are now more often made to avoid the Senate confirmation process. However, Presidents have to balance the political advantages of circumventing the Senate confirmation process with the political risks of alienating the Senate when it comes to future appointments.

All modern Presidents have made recess appointments both during the shorter breaks within a session of Congress as well as during the longer recess between the two sessions. Senate leaders have frequently complained about the appointments made during short intra-session recesses. Some have threatened to litigate the matter to the Supreme Court, but none have yet done that. A federal appeals court did rule in 1962 that the President had broad authority to make recess appointment decisions [U.S. vs. Alloco].