Politics

Teachable Moments: A Brief History of Patronage and the Spoils System

Learn Politics on mps-politics.com. Teachable Moments: A Brief History of Patronage and the Spoils System article will help answer your questions on Politics.We at mps-politics.com specialize in Politics. Politics at mps-politics.com provides the most up to date news and articles. If you have questions please do not hesitate to contact us.

The disaster that ensued in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and the President's most recent nomination to the Supreme Court have brought a number of great teachable moments in my history class. In order to assess the danger of political cronyism, we need to take a look at the history of political patronage and its many downfalls.

Many believe that the "spoils system" (to the victor belongs the spoils) began under the administration of Andrew Jackson. Not so. The system of political patronage goes back to our first administration. George Washington didn't like political parties, in fact he warned against them in his farewell address. Nonetheless, Washington found it useful to be surrounded by like-minded individuals when performing the business of government.

His successor, John Adams, pulled one of the smoothest lame duck moves ever attempted. On his LAST day in office, John Adams appointed dozens of loyal supporters to federal judgeships created by the Judiciary Act of 1801. By doing so, Adams hoped to win Federalist influence in the court for years to come.

Thomas Jefferson hoped to pull the plug on this maneuver, and ordered his Secretary of State, James Madison NOT to deliver the commissions to the "midnight judges." At Adams' urging, one of the judges, Stephen Marbury sued the Secretary of State for his commission. Marburg ended up losing his commission and the case but Adams succeeded in leaving a strong cadre of Federalists on the Supreme Court, including the incorrigible John Marshall, who shaped the court for years to come.

When Jefferson took over as president, many thought he would sweep the federalists from all important offices. Jefferson could have invoked the spoils system far more than he did, and he surprised many in Washington by retaining federalists in many important government positions, simply because they were good at their jobs.

In the 1820's, the spoils system took on tremendous momentum. While all the previous American presidents had dabbled in cronyism, Andrew Jackson brought it completely out in the open, and took it to greater extremes than any of the previous presidents combined.

Jackson believed strongly that the spoils system was vital to democracy. Jackson believed that most Americans were worthy of holding political office, but that no one should remain in that office for very long, lest the person become corrupt and complacent. Imagine, a government employee becoming corrupt and complacent!

Jackson brought his supporters in by the throngs. Washington society was mortified. Jackson's inaugural ball was referred to as a "drunken brawl." Jackson invited supporters from all walks of life to the gala. The entrenched Washington establishment watched in horror as Jackson put people representing a much wider social spectrum in important government positions, including his "kitchen cabinet," a group of advisors from different sectors in American society who, although not powerful politically, had a great deal of influence on the President's decisions.

For all his grandiose talk and intentions, Jackson didn't completely uproot the Washington establishment, but he definitely put it on its toes. Many of the people he put into office were incompetent and corrupt, and milked their offices for all the material reward they could get. Unfortunately, this was the rule rather than the exception.

Once established, the spoils system was difficult to slow down. Many politicians groomed the spoils system into well running, but often horribly corrupt political machines. These "machines" like New York's Tammany Hall, dominated the governments of larger cities and even spread their influence into state and national politics. Whereas the pre-Jacksonian Age was call the "Era of Good Feelings," the post civil war age was known as the "Era of Good Stealings."

As urban blight and poverty brought havoc and chaos to the nation's cities, progressive reformers began a crusade to reform the spoils system. Muckrakers exposed the corruption of Tammany Hall, and progressive politicians, including President Grover Cleveland, began to support what became known as the Civil Service movement, culminating with the Pendleton Civil Service Act, which required people holding many government jobs to pass a test showing their qualifications. Ironically, President James Garfield, a strong advocate for civil service reform, was assassinated by a spurned office seeker.

Patronage didn't disappear completely after that. It never completely disappears in any political system, but the dangers of patronage and spoils have become acutely apparent in light of recent events.

President Bush's appointment of Michael Brown to be chief of the Federal Emergency Management Agency ultimately became one of the costliest patronage deals in our nation's history. Brown no experience in emergency management; he was an influential lobbyist lawyer and a stalwart Bush supporter, and so he became the top man at FEMA. His mistakes and incompetence have been well documented in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

The President apparently didn't learn even the most recent lesson about patronage and spoils. His nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court is painful evidence. Miers has never been a judge. Although John Roberts infuriated many Senators with his lame, vague testimony, he pacified his opponents with his tremendous legal skill and acumen with regards to the constitution. Ideologies aside, Roberts is well qualified for the position of the most important judge in the nation.

Miers may bring to the judiciary what Andrew Jackson hoped his appointees would bring to Washington, a new perspective from someone outside the traditional loop of the Supreme Court. It only takes a brief look at Miers' resume however, to draw the conclusion that this patronage appointment, like Brown's, spells potential disaster for the nation.

More Articles: