ChinaTalk – “The American Federal Civil Service: A History”

Host: Jordan Schneider
Guest: Kevin Havochorst, Foundation for American Innovation
Date: March 31, 2026

Overview

This episode of ChinaTalk takes a deep dive into the evolution of the American federal civil service. Host Jordan Schneider is joined by Kevin Havochorst, an expert from the Foundation for American Innovation, to discuss how the U.S. bureaucracy transformed from a patronage-ridden system into (briefly) an international standard of technical excellence and then, through “functional reorganization,” slid into its modern malaise. Havochorst offers an unconventional, detail-rich history, challenges the emphasis on civil service laws like the Pendleton Act, and shares insights on what it might take to rebuild state capacity today.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Where Does the Story of American Civil Service Begin?

• Challenging the Pendleton Narrative (00:33–02:09)
  • Many cite the 1883 Pendleton Act as the birth of the civil service, but Kevin argues the true story is broader.
  • “There’s just a fundamental distinction between civil service law and the actual civil service. … The real question in my mind is how good were the people?” — Kevin (00:36)
  • Pendleton was about laws and exams, but what truly matters is when and how agencies hired competent people who earned trust.

Early Experiments and Patronage Era

• Patronage and Its Low Point (02:25–07:35)

  • Under early administrations (Federalists, Jeffersonians, then Jacksonians), federal service was for the well-connected or campaigners.
  • Post-Jackson era: “The country was just completely awash in patronage…there were about 70,000 patronage positions in just the Post Office alone.” — Kevin (02:47)
  • Only the most exceptional agencies could cut through this dysfunction—leading to early standouts.

• Emergence of Professional Bureaus (07:49–10:07)

  • Technical agencies like the Topographical Corps and, crucially, the U.S. Public Health Service (revamped in 1870s) modeled themselves after the military.
  • The U.S. Public Health Service reorganized as a quasi-paramilitary corps of surgeons.
  • USDA bureaus (Entomology, Soils, Forest Service) set a standard for technical expertise by professionalizing in the late 19th–early 20th century.

Professionalization and Its Secret Sauce

• Civil Service Modeled After Military Structure (08:17–10:07)

  • “It’s actually the more civilian-y and logistical side of the military that was the bigger inspiration… The Quartermaster Bureau… was world-class.” — Kevin (08:55)
  • Uniforms, ranks, technical schools, and long institutional memory contributed to expertise.

• Pendleton Act: Law vs. Practice (10:10–17:02)

  • Pendleton Act (1883) required merit exams to fight patronage but initially affected only a narrow set of jobs and took decades to expand.
  • The real improvement stemmed from technical agencies structuring themselves around subject-matter communities—enticing technical experts with meaningful, cross-functional work.
  • “The history of civil service law is not the history of the civil service.” — Kevin (11:23)

• How Agencies Attracted Talent (17:02–19:12)

  • Agencies like USDA bureaus recruited “slightly autistic” technical obsessives by offering roles that blended research, regulation, and outreach—making them attractive to top talent.
  • “If you’re a Bureau of Entomology filled with hard-charging experts in insects…People would not say I could do that. They would say, I’m glad that there are people who can do that.” — Kevin (16:26)

What Did This Enable?

• Major Accomplishments (19:12–27:32)
  • USDA set global standards, attracted international admiration, and drove agricultural innovation, connecting land-grant colleges and state entities with real support.
  • “European bureaucrats … considered [USDA] possibly the best run bureaucracy on the planet Earth.” — Kevin (20:11)
  • Bureau of Public Roads developed road standards and plans, laying groundwork for later milestones like the Interstate Highway System.
  • Post Office’s professionalization enabled the rise of the American mass market (think Sears & Roebuck catalog), breaking old rural power monopolies and connecting communities.
    • “The post office’s professionalization created a mass market for goods and brought modernity to rural United States.” — Kevin (25:41)

The State of the Literature

• Researching Bureaucracy: A Lost Art? (27:32–37:19)
  • Almost all systematic scholarship ends with books from the 1920s to 1950s.
  • Primary sources—internal office manuals, reports—are rich but under-read.
  • “There’s just very, very, very little written about this. But … Most of this stuff is just public domain government office manuals.” — Kevin (29:06)
  • Old monographs shine for their obsessive detail and practical insight—today’s scholars prefer sweeping narratives, missing technical realities.

Why Did It Fall Apart?

• Paradise Lost: Functional Reorganization (37:25–47:23)

  • From the 1930s–1950s, “functional reorganization” restructured agencies around abstract functions (research, grants, regulation) instead of concrete subjects (e.g., entomology, soils).
  • This collapsed the technical communities that made agencies effective.
  • “They were reorganized out of existence and the new org chart was around functions. … That is kind of why the names of these old bureaus sound old fashioned.” — Kevin (41:10)

• The Loss of Technical Community (42:53–47:23)

  • “If you’re just wild about bugs, this is the place to be. … But under the functional system, there just isn’t really a logical place for technical communities to exist.” — Kevin (43:00)
  • Research bureaus became academic and aloof; grant bureaus became mere conduits for interest group funding; regulation became divorced from practical insight.
  • The old system kept technical culture and balanced incentives; the new system created monocultures and eroded independent judgment.

What Would It Take to Go Back?

• Is a Path Back Possible? (47:27–55:59)
  • There’s growing realization that ossified bureaucratic practices (e.g. federal hiring, permitting) must change.
  • The experience of “Trump Round Two” has shaken assumptions—there’s new focus on state capacity and practical competence.
    • “There has been a real, shall we say, an expansion of people’s conception of what is possible.” — Kevin (48:16)
  • Active think tanks and philanthropic initiatives (“Recoding America Fund”) point to broader efforts to reform how government hires and operates.
  • “The United States has an incredible capacity to get ourselves deep into a problem and also ... find the solution in our hearts all along.” — Kevin (50:45)
  • Real optimism: younger policy entrepreneurs, civil society, and focused reformers may rebuild technical culture and a sense of mission.

Notable Quotes

On what made old agencies effective

“If the government was making a pitch to entomologists, … it’s going to be literally the most interesting job in the world for an entomologist. … You’re going to be able to see every corner of it in your career … and that was just a very attractive proposition for technical people.”
— Kevin (13:40)

On the limits of ‘functional reorganization’

“You no longer have that pitch. …The government just didn’t have a pitch to recruit technical people because it didn’t really have a place to put them anymore.”
— Kevin (43:24)

On optimism and change

“The belief that you really can just make things better if you get together and argue and fight hard enough to change the rules of the game… There is definitely groundwork and there is definitely a semi-realistic world where things get better.”
— Kevin (51:35)

On the state of bureaucratic scholarship

“A book from 1957 is one of the more comparatively recent books on my bibliography. ... Many of them are from, from the 20s and 30s. ... Primary sources are way better than secondary literature because it’s the words of the bureaucracy talking about itself.”
— Kevin (28:30)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:33–02:09: Why Pendleton is overrated; defining civil service by talent, not law
• 02:25–07:49: Patronage’s low point and early models of professionalization
• 08:17–10:07: How military models shaped expert bureaucracies
• 10:10–17:02: What mattered more than Pendleton: subject-matter technical communities
• 19:12–27:32: USDA’s global acclaim, Bureau of Public Roads, and the transformative post office
• 27:32–37:19: The dearth and utility of scholarly literature; why old books matter
• 37:25–47:23: Functional reorganization—how agencies lost their technical cores
• 47:27–55:59: Is reform possible? Current movement toward state capacity and practical reform

Final Thoughts & Call to Action

Kevin’s pitch:

“If there’s anyone out there who thinks that it does sound cool to read 400 pages about the budgetary system of the United Kingdom in 1910 and talk about what that means for IT procurement today, please get in touch with me … there are just a few enough people who care about making things work well.” (56:06)

Jordan’s send-off:

“This world needs more young, hungry historians, policy entrepreneurs trying to make the civil service more exciting and vibrant.” (57:09)

Key Takeaway:
Rebuilding state capacity and excellence isn’t about laws or org charts, but about making federal service once again the most exciting, meaningful, and respected career option for America’s technical obsessives—and there might just be a generational opportunity to try.