The Spoils System Reborn: Political Patronage in the Modern White House

In the 19th century, the spoils system was brazen. Presidential victory meant a wholesale reshuffling of federal jobs, rewarding political allies, donors, and loyalists with titles they often didn’t earn. It took the assassination of President James Garfield to jolt the country toward reform. The Pendleton Act of 1883 introduced merit-based hiring, promising that competence—not campaign contributions—would determine who served the American people.

And yet, here we are again.

The modern spoils system doesn’t wear a sash or wave a flag. It doesn’t always announce itself in official appointments. Instead, it creeps in through back doors: ambassadorships are handed to donors, ideologues fill key federal posts, watchdog roles are given to former lobbyists, and advisory councils are staffed by individuals whose primary qualification is loyalty to the man at the top.

Let’s be specific.

In the current administration, political loyalty has once again become a fast track to influence. Consider appointing high-dollar donors to diplomatic positions. According to data from OpenSecrets and the American Foreign Service Association, at least 40% of ambassador posts under President Biden have gone to political appointees, many of whom bundled or contributed millions to his campaign. These aren’t symbolic assignments in quiet corners of the globe—these include placements in Germany, Canada, and Australia, critical posts traditionally held by experienced diplomats.

Meanwhile, key advisory roles in education, energy, and justice are increasingly being filled by individuals with close campaign ties or partisan records, rather than expertise in the relevant subject matter. Some may bring passion and insight, but critics argue that others lack the nuance or experience to navigate federal policy with rigor. Their appointments raise uncomfortable echoes of the past, when governing was more about favors returned than service delivered.

But the most troubling aspect of the new spoils system is not who gets the jobs—it’s who doesn’t. Career civil servants with decades of institutional knowledge are being edged out or overlooked, with their insights often dismissed in favor of political optics. In agencies like the Department of Homeland Security, leadership roles have been reshuffled with each new wave of political pressure. In the Department of Education, policy shifts have been guided more by ideology than by data on what actually works in classrooms.

The phenomenon isn’t limited to federal positions. Governors and mayors, mirroring national trends, increasingly treat public offices as rewards for campaign operatives. In some states, entire commissions, from public health to environmental review boards, are being stacked with political allies, many of whom have limited or no formal training in their respective fields.

None of this is unprecedented. The Trump administration, too, elevated loyalty over merit in many cases, appointing political operatives to roles overseeing science, public health, and ethics. The difference now is that many Americans believed the pendulum had swung back. That we had recommitted to norms. That the spoils were spent.

But maybe we only modernized them. Maybe we dressed them up in résumés and press releases. Maybe the old system never really died. In reality, it just learned how to pass a background check.

This isn’t to argue that every political appointee is unqualified—far from it. Nor is it naïve to think any administration will ignore politics entirely when it comes to filling key posts. But when merit becomes optional and access becomes the currency, we risk hollowing out the institutions meant to safeguard democracy itself.

The genius of the original spoils system was its simplicity: reward loyalty, consolidate power. The danger of its revival is precisely the same. Only now, it’s dressed in bipartisan language, cloaked in committee approval, and largely overlooked by a public exhausted from years of scandal fatigue.

What we need isn’t nostalgia for a purer time that never existed. What we need is vigilance. Scrutiny. A willingness to name the pattern when we see it, and to demand better of those who govern in our name. Because a democracy where public office is bought, bartered, or bestowed on the faithful is not a democracy at all. It’s a kingdom of favors, and the people pay the price.

Typos? Not on our watch. This article has been fact-checked and finessed by our eagle-eyed editors. Have more to contribute or see something worth calling out? Let us know.