Progressive Era. The "spoils system" of distributing government jobs as a reward for political services takes its name from an 1832 speech by the Democratic senator William L. Marcy of New York. Defending President Andrew Jackson's partisan dismissals from office, Marcy avowed that he and his fellows saw "nothing wrong in the rule, that to the victor belong the spoils of the enemy."
Although Jackson is usually credited with inaugurating the system, he never justified it on Marcy's blunt grounds. Under the long reign of Virginia Democratic-Republican presidents, permanent tenure had become the de facto rule in many federal offices. Honoring tradition, Jackson's predecessor John Quincy Adams refused to remove even overt political opponents. Despite this, Jackson accused the federal establishment of opposing his election in 1828. He proclaimed a policy of "rotation in office" to curb official arrogance and corruption and democratize opportunities for public service. Disclaiming anyone's inherent right to continue in office, Jackson dismissed political foes along with some career bureaucrats, replacing them with partisan newspaper editors and other active supporters.
Opponents condemned Jackson for introducing political "proscription," but soon learned to follow his example. By the 1840s both Jackson's Democrats and the opposing Whigs routinely wielded patronage to inspire and discipline party workers. Partisan removals grew ever more extensive, reaching down from Washington bureau chiefs and clerks to land and customs and territorial officials to village postmasters. Thousands of eager supplicants besieged each new administration, making the redistribution of offices every four years a major undertaking.
By the 1850s the spoils system was thoroughly entrenched as an instrument of political warfare both between the parties and among factions within them. Calls for reform surfaced before the Civil War and gathered impetus during Reconstruction from Andrew Johnson's attempted purge of Republican office holders and the scandals of the Grant administration. Chastising the system for promoting official incompetence and corruption and for adulterating the purity of elections, critics demanded that federal employment be removed from party politics and grounded on merit as determined by competitive examination.
Eradicating the spoils system became a major crusade in the 1870s, championed by good-government reformers, cautiously advanced by presidents, and vehemently opposed by congressional party chieftains. President James Garfield's assassination by a "disappointed office-seeker" undermined resistance and led to the passage of the Pendleton Civil Service Act in 1883. The act inaugurated a merit system of employment for certain classes of federal employees under the supervision of a bipartisan Civil Service Commission and banned the common practice of dunning office holders for contributions to party coffers.
In the remainder of the century, presidents put more offices under civil service protection, largely replacing the spoils system with a career bureaucracy. Political patronage survives in some federal as well as state and municipal appointments, but its range has been drastically curtailed. Scholars disagree whether politicizing government service improved or damaged its efficiency, integrity, and responsiveness. For good or ill, the spoils system certainly opened office to a broader range of citizens. It also buttressed the operations of mass political parties, and rose and declined in tandem with them.
Please provide more information/context/clarification to help us answer this question. You can post your response in this answer text by clicking "Edit."
The idea of the spoils system is that the winner of an election rewards the people who helped get elected. He gives the government jobs under his control to his supporters.
No, the spoils system was based around corruption. In general there wasn't much anyone could do to reduce corruption, it was a corrupt government.
In the spoils system, also known as the patronage system, elected officials give government jobs to their supporters, friends, and relatives, regardless of how qualified they are for the job. In the merit system, government employees are hired or promoted based on their ability to perform a job, regardless of their political connections.
presidential appointment
The statement "Through the spoils system government positions were filled by trained civil servants regardless of party affiliation" is false.
One effect that the spoils system had on government was to open office to a wide range of citizens.
what is the spoils system
The spoils system....
The spoils system....
The spoils system evolved as way to get the most money from government projects. Those who won the contracts felt as if they deserved the "spoils".
A spoils system is when a president replaces people on government, and hire people that will agree with your political stands. AKA your friends, and so forth.
Spoils system
positions in government office
The spoils system refers to a practice in which once a political party wins an election, it rewards its voters with government jobs. This is also referred to as patronage system.
The Spoils System..."To the Victor goes the Spoils"
No, the spoils system was just the opposite. Government positions were filled by those within the party.
This question refers to the spoils system (as opposed to a competitive merit based promotions and appointments). The spoils system is used synonymously with the concepts of corruption and the party machine politics.