In the Wake of Reforms: The Transformation of American Machine Politics Over Time
The phrase “political machine” often conjures the image of men sitting around a table in a room hazy with cigarette smoke, discussing how to buy the next election. The term seems obsolete; it is a staple of AP United States History vocabulary flashcards. However, political machines continued to exist long past the days of the 19th century, and in fact, continue to function (with some prevalence) in America today. While they grew out of the social and political conditions of Gilded Age cities, political machines have since evolved to affect the electoral system nationally and locally through the 20th and 21st centuries.
Political machines were, initially, a product of the slums that were common in many of America’s largest cities. In an 1898 report on Boston’s settlement houses, workers described the presence of gangs and their tremendous support for “boss rule” -- “I have already referred to the loafers and semi-criminal class...It is a tradition among these men to stand in with the boss. If they get into trouble with the police, he frequently comes to their assistance” (Woods 135). Political bosses, then, relied upon the lower classes for their support; ward members who supported the Party’s campaigns received patronage jobs and other favors. As Robert Woods, the primary author of the 1898 report, wrote, “According to the ethics of the district, a man who receives a job is under the most sacred obligations to the politician who bestowed it. The lack of employment, therefore, is one of the most important factors working in the interest of the boss and boss rule” (Woods 136). The most loyal supporters of these machines did not dole out large sums of money in order to receive the good graces of the boss; their backing came in the form of, for example, voting for the Party multiple times on election day.
After the Great Depression and the New Deal, the advent of federal aid programs eliminated some of the need for local governments to provide the same type of assistance. The constituency of political machines tended to become more heavily based upon ethnicity, most famously those centered around Irish-Americans. For example, in Edwin O’Connor’s novel The Last Hurrah, Frank Skeffington is a prominent Irish-Catholic politician who has served as mayor of a large American city for over 30 years (and before that as governor of the state for two terms). Skeffington represents old-school machine politics in which the boss helps ordinary citizens in exchange for their votes; “...he had made a ritual of receiving the public in his home. Promptly at 9:45 each morning he held court, and all who came to him were ultimately received” (O’Connor 10). Small favors are a staple of his popular administration, as “In every case something was needed: a job, a letter of introduction, medical care for an ailing wife, a low rent house, a pair of glasses, a transfer from one city department to another, a lawyer, a hardship discharge for a son in the army, money” (O’Connor 12). Richard Daley, another Irish-Catholic, used similar tactics in Chicago through the 1970’s. One of Daley’s precinct captains, Arthur Varchmin, said that “‘People in my precinct don’t have to worry about a thing. All they have to do is call me...I do maybe 150 favors a year’” (Rakove 127). However, in the novel, Skeffington loses his election to a fresh, new face who takes advantage of modern campaign strategies, such as the use of television. It is a sign to him that the times are changing; there is no room for him or his machine in city politics anymore.
Furthermore, towards the end of the 20th century, the nature of machine politics changed dramatically. Political machines had always been primarily a tool of the Democratic Party because both based their support in urban, working-class immigrants. The Chicago Daley Machine represented a Democratic bastion in the sea of rural Republican Illinois in the 20th century; “In contrast to Catholic, ethnic, black Chicago, downstate Illinois has traditionally been white, Protestant, small-town, Republican, and conservative” (Rakove 152). When Richard Nixon became president, he “personally ordered the federal crackdown on corruption in Chicago as an act of political vengeance,” due to the fact that he believed the Daley Machine had been responsible for his loss in 1960 (Anderson). Nixon’s policies reduced the influence of Democratic political machines in America, but as they dissipated, different machines took their place. The predominant system of machine politics moved to rural Republican areas, and the way that machines function also transformed: “Compared to the old-style machine politics in which loyal constituencies earned municipal jobs, voting blocs in the new street-money game derive small, ephemeral benefits while local kingpins often pocket substantial gains” (Smith). Ultra-conservative Tea Party candidates, such as Michele Bachmann, have used this strategy to work around campaign contribution laws and accept millions of dollars from a few wealthy donors. Thus, the political machine changed from a support system for lower-class, disadvantaged people to a means of further increasing the influence of big money on American politics.
Political machines, though often corrupt, represented an opportunity for working-class Americans to interact with government, getting what civic aid they needed in return for engagement in the political process. Now, however, that type of machine is dead. On election night, Frank Skeffington watched the election results tell him what he had already suspected; that his political career was dead, and that he had to make way for a new type of politics headed by vapid candidates and pictured on television. Skeffington understood that he was, in essence, presiding over his own wake. Similarly, Americans are witnessing the death of democratic politics as government becomes less and less responsive to the needs of ordinary people and more focused on the wants of big businesses and corporate donors.
After the Great Depression and the New Deal, the advent of federal aid programs eliminated some of the need for local governments to provide the same type of assistance. The constituency of political machines tended to become more heavily based upon ethnicity, most famously those centered around Irish-Americans. For example, in Edwin O’Connor’s novel The Last Hurrah, Frank Skeffington is a prominent Irish-Catholic politician who has served as mayor of a large American city for over 30 years (and before that as governor of the state for two terms). Skeffington represents old-school machine politics in which the boss helps ordinary citizens in exchange for their votes; “...he had made a ritual of receiving the public in his home. Promptly at 9:45 each morning he held court, and all who came to him were ultimately received” (O’Connor 10). Small favors are a staple of his popular administration, as “In every case something was needed: a job, a letter of introduction, medical care for an ailing wife, a low rent house, a pair of glasses, a transfer from one city department to another, a lawyer, a hardship discharge for a son in the army, money” (O’Connor 12). Richard Daley, another Irish-Catholic, used similar tactics in Chicago through the 1970’s. One of Daley’s precinct captains, Arthur Varchmin, said that “‘People in my precinct don’t have to worry about a thing. All they have to do is call me...I do maybe 150 favors a year’” (Rakove 127). However, in the novel, Skeffington loses his election to a fresh, new face who takes advantage of modern campaign strategies, such as the use of television. It is a sign to him that the times are changing; there is no room for him or his machine in city politics anymore.
Furthermore, towards the end of the 20th century, the nature of machine politics changed dramatically. Political machines had always been primarily a tool of the Democratic Party because both based their support in urban, working-class immigrants. The Chicago Daley Machine represented a Democratic bastion in the sea of rural Republican Illinois in the 20th century; “In contrast to Catholic, ethnic, black Chicago, downstate Illinois has traditionally been white, Protestant, small-town, Republican, and conservative” (Rakove 152). When Richard Nixon became president, he “personally ordered the federal crackdown on corruption in Chicago as an act of political vengeance,” due to the fact that he believed the Daley Machine had been responsible for his loss in 1960 (Anderson). Nixon’s policies reduced the influence of Democratic political machines in America, but as they dissipated, different machines took their place. The predominant system of machine politics moved to rural Republican areas, and the way that machines function also transformed: “Compared to the old-style machine politics in which loyal constituencies earned municipal jobs, voting blocs in the new street-money game derive small, ephemeral benefits while local kingpins often pocket substantial gains” (Smith). Ultra-conservative Tea Party candidates, such as Michele Bachmann, have used this strategy to work around campaign contribution laws and accept millions of dollars from a few wealthy donors. Thus, the political machine changed from a support system for lower-class, disadvantaged people to a means of further increasing the influence of big money on American politics.
Political machines, though often corrupt, represented an opportunity for working-class Americans to interact with government, getting what civic aid they needed in return for engagement in the political process. Now, however, that type of machine is dead. On election night, Frank Skeffington watched the election results tell him what he had already suspected; that his political career was dead, and that he had to make way for a new type of politics headed by vapid candidates and pictured on television. Skeffington understood that he was, in essence, presiding over his own wake. Similarly, Americans are witnessing the death of democratic politics as government becomes less and less responsive to the needs of ordinary people and more focused on the wants of big businesses and corporate donors.
Works Cited
Anderson, Jack. "Nixon Ordered Crackdown on Corruption in Chicago." Lakeland Ledger 9 Mar. 1973: 6A. Print.
O'Connor, Edwin. The Last Hurrah. Boston: Little, Brown, 1956. Print.
Rakove, Milton L. Don't Make No Waves, Don't Back No Losers: An Insider's Analysis of the Daley Machine. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1975. Print.
Smith, Jeffrey. "'Walking-Around Money': How Machine Politics Works in America Today." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 12 June 2013. Web. 21 May 2015.
Woods, Robert A., ed. The City Wilderness: A Settlement Study. Rep. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1898. Annals of American History Online [Encyclopaedia Britannica]. Web. 21 May 2015.
No comments:
Post a Comment