The Obama Spoils System

[Geee]

National Review:

The Obama Spoils System
In using government positions to reward loyalty to the Democratic party, the Obama administration broke the law.


A disturbing precedent appears likely to emerge from the controversy surrounding the job offers by White House officials to Pennsylvania congressman Joe Sestak and former Colorado house speaker Andrew Romanoff in exchange for their withdrawal from primary challenges to sitting Democratic United States senators. The White House counsel’s office has asserted that a desire to protect the campaign coffers of the president’s political party is a “legitimate interest,” and that White House officials may therefore offer taxpayer-funded positions in the federal government to further that interest. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs elaborated on this theory, arguing, “The president has, as the leader of the party, has an interest in ensuring that supporters don’t run against each other in contested primaries.” Gibbs later added, “Again, does the leader of the party have an interest in ensuring that primaries that tend to be costly aren’t had so that you’re ready for a general election? Of course.”


Political cronyism, as the Obama administration has repeatedly tried to remind the American people, is not a new phenomenon. In 1883, Congress passed the Pendleton Act, a major reform designed to rein in the political spoils system that had tainted Washington politics since the days of Andrew Jackson and replace it with a professional workforce of career civil servants. By abolishing the patronage system whereby public employees were awarded their posts based on their campaign contributions and party loyalties, Congress protected voters from the threat that their elected representatives would use their official positions to advance the careers of party allies instead of the public good.

More than 50 years later, Congress passed the Hatch Act, a sweeping reform that strictly limited the use of federal funds and forbade public officials from using promises of employment, compensation, or any other benefit to affect the outcome of an election. In unambiguous language, the Hatch Act prohibits all federal executive-branch employees, among others, from engaging in political activity while on duty or using government resources for partisan political purposes.

Federal statute leaves no room for doubt: “Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress . . . to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

[NCTexan]

The White House counsel’s office has asserted that a desire to protect the campaign coffers of the president’s political party is a “legitimate interest,” and that White House officials may therefore offer taxpayer-funded positions in the federal government to further that interest. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs elaborated on this theory, arguing, “The president has, as the leader of the party, has an interest in ensuring that supporters don’t run against each other in contested primaries.”

Another unbelievable statement from the inhabitants of BizarroWorld who have taken over the White House...