Patronage System

Extracted Attributes

• Key Practices

  Cronyism, Nepotism

• Core Principle

  Political loyalty over merit

• Origin of Term

  "To the victor belong the spoils" (William L. Marcy, 1828)

• Alternative Name

  Spoils System

• Modern Allegation

  Systemic patronage in Minnesota involving daycare fraud for votes

• Primary Reform Legislation

  Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of 1883

Timeline

• Congress limits federal administrators to four-year terms, facilitating constant turnover and patronage. (Source: Web Search Results)

  1820-01-01

• The election of Andrew Jackson marks the widespread adoption of the spoils system at the U.S. federal level. (Source: Wikipedia)

  1828-11-01

• Beginning of the Gilded Age, where local patronage systems and political machines like Boss Tweed's emerged in large cities. (Source: Web Search Results)

  1865-01-01

• The Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act is passed, largely replacing the federal spoils system with a merit-based system. (Source: Wikipedia)

  1883-01-16

• Investigative reports by Nick Shirley allege a modern patronage system in Minnesota involving daycare fraud and the Somali community. (Source: Document 50cb012b-defb-4e4a-a485-0740769f4098)

  2024-01-01

Spoils system

In politics and government, a spoils system (also known as a patronage system) is a practice in which a political party, after winning an election, gives government jobs to its supporters, friends (cronyism), and relatives (nepotism) as a reward for working toward victory, and as an incentive to keep working for the party. It contrasts with a merit system, where offices are awarded or promoted based on a measure of merit, independent of political activity. The term was used particularly in the politics of the United States, where the federal government operated on a spoils system until the Pendleton Act was passed in 1883, following a civil service reform movement. Thereafter, the spoils system was largely replaced by a nonpartisan merit-based system at the federal level of the United States. The term was derived from the phrase "to the victor belong the spoils" by New York Senator William L. Marcy, referring to the victory of Andrew Jackson in the election of 1828, with the term "spoils" meaning goods or benefits taken from the loser in a competition, election or military victory. Similar spoils systems are common in other nations that traditionally have been based on tribal organization or other kinship groups and localism in general.

Web Search Results

• Patronage | Research Starters

  Patronage refers to the practice of appointing individuals to government positions as a reward for political support, often linked to the concept of the "spoils system." This system, which emphasizes political loyalty over merit, has roots in the early nineteenth century and became prominent in the United States during the administration of President Andrew Jackson. As patronage led to widespread inefficiency and corruption, major reforms were implemented, notably the Civil Service Act of 1883, [...] Patronage is the hiring or appointment to a government post as a reward for helping a politician win or stay in office. Political patronage is also known as the “spoils system,” which refers to appointing persons to government positions based on political support instead of merit. This practice, which became problematic, can be traced back to the early nineteenth century when President Thomas Jefferson replaced some Federalists who were appointed to their government jobs during the [...] The patronage system thrived in the US federal government until 1883. In 1820, Congress limited federal administrators to four-year terms, which led to constant turnover. By the 1860s, patronage had led to widespread inefficiency and political corruption. In the era of President Andrew Jackson, jobs in the federal government were routinely given to political supporters, which was essentially bribery. Jackson awarded allies, including journalists, who supported him, and many of his picks for

• Spoils system - Wikipedia

  In politics and government, a spoils system (also known as a patronage system) is a practice in which a political party, after winning an election, gives government jobs to its supporters, friends (cronyism), and relatives (nepotism) as a reward for working toward victory, and as an incentive to keep working for the party. It contrasts with a merit system, where offices are awarded or promoted based on a measure of merit, independent of political activity. The term was used particularly in the

• Political Patronage | Definition, History & Examples - Lesson

  Political patronage is a political system used to secure swift approval and administration of a party's or candidate's initiatives. It is the practice of giving individuals or groups political offices, money, material goods, and power in return for political support during an election. For example, an individual who was a political supporter for a winning politician might receive a government job regardless of whether or not they are qualified. In the United States, this is also called the [...] Patronage has had a significant impact on federal and local governments in America for over two centuries. Since the Gilded Age, from 1865, the patronage system was also used by local governments, especially in large cities that were becoming urbanized. This was facilitated by the development of party ''machines'' led by ''party bosses,'' such as Boss Tweed in New York. This version of the patronage system was even more corrupt and ineffective than that practiced by the federal government. [...] Political patronage is a political system used to secure swift approval and administration of a party's or candidate's initiatives. It is the practice of giving individuals or groups political offices, money, material goods, and power in return for political support during an election. For example, an individual who was a political supporter for a winning politician might receive a government job regardless of whether they are qualified. Political patronage is often used as a means of ensuring

• Political Patronage | The First Amendment Encyclopedia

  Political patronage is the appointment or hiring of a person to a government post on the basis of partisan loyalty. Elected officials at the national, state, and local levels of government use such appointments to reward the people who help them win and maintain office. This practice led to the saying, “To the victor go the spoils.” When politicians use the patronage system to fire their political opponents, those fired may charge that the practice penalizes them for exercising their First [...] Proponents of the system argued that political patronage promoted direct accountability from administrators to elected officials. They also perceived it as a means for diminishing elitism at all levels of government by allowing commoners to occupy key posts. Early presidents used patronage extensively. [...] When politicians use the patronage system to fire their political opponents, those fired may charge that the practice penalizes them for exercising their First Amendment rights of political association. The spoils system can pervade all levels of government, but in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it was particularly evident at the local level where political machines emerged in many cities. These machines became the vehicle by which a political leader, often known as a “boss,” dominated

• [PDF] Replacing Political Patronage with Merit: The Roles of the President ...

  When the govern- ment was small, patronage provided for close allegiance between appointees and their political benefactors, and as a result the behavior of the employee could be monitored at a relatively low cost. As such, patronage was a standard 16 Chapter2 and generally respected practice for promoting the ideals of equality and social mobility and was the cornerstone for the development and maintenance of the political parties.6 So long as the interests of federal politicians and the local [...] of patronage. Unlike the earlier historical literature, our approach places federal politicians at the center of the civil service reform movement. For the president and each member of Congress, a decision to alter the long- standing federal patronage system involved a calculated trade-off (in terms of votes) in expected costs and benefits. In the late nineteenth century, members of the House, senators, and the president were subject to voter scrutiny. House members were directly elected in [...] The payments ranged from 2 to 10 percent of an individual patronage worker’s salary, depending on the position held. Solicitation letters were sent by the party to each worker, return envelopes were provided to ensure that payments were made, and com- pliance was carefully monitored. Those who did not contribute the requested amount lost their positions (Fowler 1943, 157-60). Federal patronage jobs ap- pear to have paid more than the market wage for comparable private positions in order to