But more importantly, the proof of the pudding is in the eating: We’ve run America with and without a “professional, independent civil service,” and there was more trust in government — and better execution of policy — before the creation of the civil service than after, and particularly before the now-overturned case of Humphrey’s Executor, which protected “independent agencies” from presidential supervision.
But the ramifications of this new decision suggest that the Pendleton Act itself might be at risk, and it should be.
Prior to the adoption of the Pendleton Act in 1883, government employment operated according to the “spoils system,” which meant that hiring in the executive branch was controlled by the Executive. When a new administration came in, everyone’s job was up for grabs, at least potentially. This “rotation in office” had several advantages, which were widely appreciated at the time, and propounded by presidents from Jefferson to Jackson to Lincoln.