Political Machines
I
INTRODUCTION
The Tweed Ring: "Let Us Prey"
A Thomas Nast cartoon lampoons New York City political boss William Marcy Tweed and his cronies as vultures. In
the 1870s Nast's cartoons in Harper's Weekly often attacked the corruption of the Tammany Society, the
Democratic Party political machine run by Tweed.
REUTERS/THE BETTMANN ARCHIVE/Corbis
Political Machines, local political party organization capable of mobilizing or “manufacturing” large
numbers of votes on behalf of candidates for political office. Political machines developed in the United
States in the early 19th century, reached the peak of their power toward the end of the century, and
declined in importance after 1900. Political party machines dominated political life in most American
cities in the decades between the Civil War (1861-1865) and the Great Depression (1930s). In some
areas, political machines, such as Chicago's Democratic Party organization, continued to be important
into the 1970s. Today, traditional political machines are virtually extinct in the United States.
Strong political party organizations, such as Germany's Social Democratic Party, also developed in
Europe during the latter half of the 19th century. European governments tended to be centralized,
however, in contrast to America's federal structure, which disperses power between national, state,
and local levels of government. For this reason, political parties in Europe were generally more
powerful at the national rather than the local level. Today, most European nations continue to possess
vigorous party organizations that have strong ties to their members. By contrast, American political
parties have weakened as their organizational structures have decayed at the local level and with that
their capacity to mobilize and activate voters.
II
MACHINE ORGANIZATION
The traditional American political machine consisted of three elements: a county committee, which
governed the machine; a cadre of ward and precinct leaders who mobilized and organized support at
the neighborhood level; and party loyalists who supported the machine with votes and financial
support in return for benefits provided by ward and precinct leaders.
A
The County Committee
The county committee consisted of professional politicians and the party's top office holders within the
county. In some cases, a single leader, called the “party boss,” would dominate the committee. In the
20th century, individuals such as Kansas City's Thomas J. Pendergast, Boston's James Michael Curley,
and Chicago's Richard J. Daley exercised a controlling influence on their city's political affairs through
their command of the county committee. Often, however, no single individual dominated the county
committee, which operated through a principle of collective leadership. The Tammany Hall machine
that influenced New York City's politics from late in the 18th century until midway into the 20th
century was seldom dominated by a single “boss.”
The power of the county committee depended upon its ability to dominate both electoral politics and
the agencies of county and municipal government within its jurisdiction. The county committee had
absolute control over party nominations and almost total control over the money and votes needed to
win election. As a result, the machine's leaders possessed enormous influence with elected
government officials, including mayors, judges, county commissioners, and prosecutors. Machines also
played important roles in statewide and national political campaigns and could therefore demand jobs
and other favors from state and national officials as well as local government leaders. In some cases,
county committee members held important government posts themselves. For example, Richard J.
Daley simultaneously served both as head of the Cook County Democratic Committee and as Mayor of
Chicago.
Through their control of local government offices and influence over elected officials, members of the
county committee controlled government “patronage” jobs that could be used to reward loyal party
workers. At the same time, county committee members were in a position to demand financial
contributions from businesses within the county in exchange for preferential treatment from the
government. Firms that contributed to the machine might receive government contracts, favorable tax
treatment, and prompt municipal services. Those that refused would often be harassed by county
health and safety inspectors, find their tax assessments increased, and have difficulty obtaining
municipal services, such as trash collection and snow clearance.
Political machines often accepted payments from criminal enterprises in exchange for protection from
police interference with their activities. In New York City, for example, protection money paid by
gambling and prostitution rackets offered the infamous political machine led by William Marcy Tweed a
steady source of income during the mid-19th century. On election day, a massed army of small-time
thugs and hoodlums returned the favors of the Tweed Ring by stuffing ballot boxes with votes for
Tweed and intimidating voters.
B
Wards and Precincts
The county committee's control of government jobs and its ability to secure contributions from
business firms enabled it to establish and maintain the machine's second organizational tier, the
precinct or ward organization. A precinct is the smallest electoral district within a county. Cities are
usually divided into wards, each containing a number of precincts, for the purpose of electing
members of the municipal council. The machine's ward organization consisted of a ward
committeeman who, in turn, directed the activities of precinct captains. Usually the committeeman
and the captains received government jobs in exchange for their party efforts. Often these individuals
did little actual government work. Their real job was to serve the needs of friends, families, and
neighbors; secure the loyalty and votes of these constituents; and thereby strengthen the party. Many
ward leaders also benefited financially from the preferential treatment they could offer local
businesses and contractors. Among the most famous ward bosses was George Washington Plunkitt, a
Tammany Hall ward boss of the late 1800s and early 1900s. Plunkitt's personal credo was “I seen my
opportunities and I took 'em.”
The precinct captains were the machine's workhorses. Each precinct captain was responsible for
establishing relationships with the several hundred families in the precinct. Captains offered a variety
of services to their constituents. They could help family members find jobs with the municipal
government or with businesses obligated to the government. Captains could assist with minor legal
problems. Captains often operated informal social service agencies, providing money, food, clothing,
and shelter to destitute constituents.
C
Party Loyalist
Benefits at the ward and precinct level provided the machine's link to the foundations of its
organization, the party loyalists in the electorate. Individuals with city jobs obtained through the
machine were usually expected to contribute approximately 10 percent of their salaries to the party.
More important, they and members of their families were expected to participate in party work during
election campaigns. In a national election, hundreds of thousands of these loyalists knocked on doors,
handed out leaflets, persuaded their friends and neighbors to support the party, and helped bring
voters to the polls. Party machines were particularly effective in mobilizing immigrant voters who often
spoke little or no English and had only a rudimentary understanding of American politics. The machine
provided immigrants with social services and jobs in return for their votes.
III
DECLINE OF THE MACHINE
Political machines began to decline in importance after 1900. Progressive Era reformers at the turn of
the century successfully compelled local governments to introduce civil service merit systems to
replace party patronage in government employment. Once they lost their control over government
jobs, political machines had difficulty recruiting workers and activists. At the same time, the
introduction of the primary election diminished the ability of machine leaders to dominate party
nominations—this freed elected officials from the machine's control. During the 1930s the federal
government began developing national social service and welfare institutions. As these grew, the
capacity of the machine to secure support by providing social services also diminished in importance.
By the 1960s, only a small number of political machines remained in the United States, largely in
cities such as Chicago that had been able to escape full-scale civil service reform. Democratic Party
reformers undermined these remaining machines between 1968 and 1972, though a handful still exist.
The Republican Party of Nassau County, New York, for example, retains control of more than 20,000
patronage jobs in the county.
Today, most party organizations in the United States are sustained by social ties and ideology, rather
than by control of jobs, services, and favors. This has reduced governmental corruption in the United
States. In some municipal governments, however, the loss of the strong leadership of the machine
has made it difficult to develop and implement coherent solutions to municipal problems. Under the
leadership of “Boss” Daley, Chicago was known as “the city that works.” It is now more difficult for
some American cities to make that claim.
Contributed By:
Benjamin Ginsberg