PATRONAGE

The practice or custom observed by a political official of filling government positions with qualified employees of his or her own choosing.

When the candidate of a political party wins an election, the newly elected official has the right to appoint a certain numbers of persons to jobs in the government. This is the essence of the patronage system, also known as the spoils system ("To the victor go the spoils"): appointing persons to government positions on the basis of political support and work rather than on merit, as measured by objective criteria. Though the patronage system exists at all levels of U.S. government, the number of positions that are available through patronage has decreased dramatically since the 1880s.

The patronage system thrived in the U.S. federal government until 1883. In 1820 Congress limited federal administrators to four-year terms, leading to constant turnover. By the 1860s and the Civil War, patronage had led to widespread inefficiency and political corruption. Where patronage had once been confined to the cabinet, department heads, and foreign ambassadorships, by the 1860s low-level government positions were subject to patronage. The loss of a presidential election by a political party signaled wholesale turnover in the federal government. When President benjamin harrison took office in 1889, 31,000 federal postmaster positions changed hands.

The assassination of President james garfield in 1881 by a disgruntled office seeker who did not receive a political appointment spurred Congress to pass the Civil Service Act, or Pendleton Act of 1883 (5 U.S.C.A. § 1101 et seq.). The act, which at the time only applied to 10 percent of the federal workforce, created a Civil Service Commission and advocated a merit system for the selection of government employees. By 1980, 90 percent of federal positions had become part of the civil service system. In addition, the passage in 1939 of the hatch act (53 Stat. 1147) curtailed or restricted most partisan political activities of federal employees.

State and local governments have employed large patronage systems. Big-city political machines in places such as New York, Boston, and Chicago thrived in the late nineteenth century. A patronage system not only rewards political supporters for past support, it also encourages future support, because persons who have a patronage job try to retain it by campaigning for the party at the next election.

Large-scale patronage systems declined steadily during the twentieth century. During the Progressive Era (1900–1920), "good government" reformers overthrew political machines and installed civil service systems. Chicago, under Mayor Richard J. Daley, remained the last bastion of patronage, existing in its purest form until the late 1970s.

Patronage has its defenders. It is a way to maintain a strong political organization by offering campaign workers rewards. More importantly, patronage puts people into government who agree with the political agenda of the victor. Cooperation, loyalty, and trust flow from this arrangement. Finally, patronage guarantees some turnover, bringing new people and new ideas into the system.

Opponents have long agreed that patronage is acceptable at the highest levels of government. Presidents, governors, and mayors are entitled to select their cabinet and department heads. However, history indicates that patronage systems extending far down the organizational chain are susceptible to inefficiency and corruption.

Congress took another look at patronage issues in the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (92 Stat. 1121–1131, 5 U.S.C.A. 1201–1209). Concerned that federal bureaucrats were too independent and unresponsive to elected officials, the act replaced the Civil Service Commission with the Office of Personnel Management, under closer control of the president. The act also created the Senior Executive Service, which gives the president greater discretion in reassigning top officials to departments and agencies.

cross-references

Bureaucracy; Civil Service; Tammany Hall.

Patronage

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The term patronage describes the practice of distributing public sector posts in exchange for political support. In the absence of binding civil service rules, a party boss (patron) rewards loyal partisans (clients) by providing them with public sector employment. Patronage therefore can be included among a broad range of clientelistic political practices in which parties use public resources to deliver private and club benefits to particular groups of voters in order to maximize electoral support. Different from other types of clientelistic practices, patronage provides the client with a steady source of income whose stability depends on the reelection of the patron.

To successfully develop a patronage system requires: (1) the selection of political leaders through elections, (2) mass adult suffrage, (3) a high degree of electoral competition within or between parties, and (4) weak civil service rules. The first three requirements—elections, mass political participation, and party competition—lead to increasing demands on political elites by their core constituency. In the absence of civil service rules, the distribution of public sector posts becomes an appealing strategy that ties the survival of the voter (client) to the survival of the party boss (patron).

Because patrons can only sustain a limited number of clients, two crucial functions of the patronage exchange are the selection and monitoring of clients. In selecting clients, patrons seek to either maintain their vote or to expand it. For maintaining their vote, patrons target loyal voters. For expanding their vote, patrons target swing voters and invest considerable more resources in monitoring the patronage exchange. The practice of patronage is intimately connected to the rise of political machines specialized in organizing and allocating political influence by controlling the supply of public sector jobs and by monitoring the vote of large constituencies. Because the cement that binds the patron and the client is not ideological, political allegiance to the machine is based on the distribution of particularistic, material rewards over different types of political personnel.

A widespread political phenomenon, patronage is also known in the United States by the term spoils system, where the “spoils” of the political system go to the “victor” of the electoral contest. The spoils system that emerged during the Gilded Age was eventually dismantled by the enactment of the Pendleton Act in 1883 and the creation of the Civil Service Commission, which introduced meritocratic rules for the recruitment and promotion of public service employees. The introduction of these rules significantly reduced the available pool of public jobs that political machines could allocate to voters. Such reforms also weakened the political grip of party bosses, such as William M. “Boss” Tweed in New York, Huey P. Long Jr. in Louisiana, and Edward H. Crump in Chicago. Since the late twentieth century, as an increasing number of countries have democratized, comparative scholars have emphasized the negative consequences of patronage for the development of an independent citizenship capable of holding politicians accountable for their performance in office.

SEE ALSO Political Parties

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Cox, Gary W., and Matthew D. McCubbins. 1986. Electoral Politics as a Redistributive Game. Journal of Politics 48 (May): 370–389.

Fox, Jonathan. 1994. The Difficult Transition from Clientelism to Citizenship: Lessons from Mexico. World Politics 46 (January): 151–184.

Scott, James C. 1969. Corruption, Machine Politics, and Political Change. American Political Science Review 63 (4): 1142–1158.

Ernesto F. Calvo

patronage, literary, traditionally, individual patronage, in the form of financial help, payment in kind, or more indirect assistance, exercised by royalty and the wealthy in return for dedications, entertainment, and prestige (as well as sometimes for more altruistic motives). Among innumerable examples, Chaucer was assisted by John of Gaunt, Shakespeare by the earl of Southampton, Donne by Sir Robert Drury, Dr Johnson (belatedly) by the earl of Chesterfield, Wordsworth by Sir G.Beaumont. The relationship was not always happy, as Johnson's definition of a patron as ‘a wretch who supports with insolence and is paid with flattery’ suggests, but it also directly inspired many fine works, such as Jonson's tribute to the Sidneys in his ‘country house poem’, ‘To Penshurst’ (see Penshurst Place).

Patronage was also exercised through the gift of clerical livings; Crabbe, befriended by the duke of Rutland, wrote of the possible misfortunes of such an experience in ‘The Patron’ (1812). Another indirect form of patronage was through subscription publishing (see publishing, subscription).

Early in the 18th cent. new sources of support for authors began to develop. The circulating libraries offered new openings for sales, and the rising success of periodicals provided more work until well into the 20th cent. Patronage thus passed largely from men of individual wealth to men of professional power or commercial interest, such as literary editors and library owners and suppliers.

In 1790 the Royal Literary Fund was founded and in 1837 the Civil List Act permitted the Treasury to assist authors by the grant of pensions (and by the occasional gift of a ‘bounty’), provided they could demonstrate ‘desert and distress’. Over 750 authors (and their dependants) have benefited, including Wordsworth, Tennyson, M. Arnold, W. H. Hudson, W. B. Yeats, and T. F. Powys. Pensions are awarded on the recommendation of the Royal Literary Fund, the Society of Authors, the Poetry Society, and other bodies. The Arts Council also has provided grants to individual writers, as well as assisting literature in more indirect ways.

pa·tron·age / ˈpatrənij; ˈpā-/ • n. 1. the support given by a patron: the arts could no longer depend on private patronage. 2. the power to control appointments to office or the right to privileges: recruits are selected on merit, not through political patronage. 3. a patronizing or condescending manner: a twang of self-satisfaction—even patronage—about him. 4. the regular business given to a store, restaurant, or public service by a person or group: the direct train link was ending because of poor patronage. 5. (in ancient Rome) the rights and duties or the position of a patron.

493. Patronage (See also Philanthropy.)

1. Alidoro fairy godfather to Italian Cinderella. [Ital. Opera: Rossini, Cinderella, Westerman, 120–121]
2. Alphonso, Don supports Bias in return for political favors. [Fr. Lit.: Gil Blas ]
3. Dionysus inspired men through wine; considered a patron of the arts. [Gk. Myth.: NCE, 767]
4. Fairy Godmother maternal fairy abets Cinderella in ball preparations. [Fr. Fairy Tale: “Cinderella”]

Patronage (nominating to a benefice): see ADVOWSON.

patronage •damage •image, scrimmage •pilgrimage •homage, West Bromwich •plumage •rummage, scrummage •manage, mismanage, pannage, stage-manage •carnage •cranage, drainage •spinach • concubinage • libertinage •linage • nonage • coinage •dunnage, tonnage •orphanage • baronage • patronage •parsonage • personage • Stevenage •cozenage • seepage • slippage •equipage • stoppage • warpage •groupage