Scratch & Win: Episode Summary – "Should We Be Nostalgic for Machine Politics?"

Release Date: March 26, 2025

In this compelling episode of Scratch & Win, hosted by Ian Coss from GBH News, the conversation delves deep into the evolution of the Democratic Party in America, exploring the transition from patronage-driven machine politics to modern meritocratic and professional class liberalism. Featuring an insightful interview with Lily Geismer, a history professor at Claremont McKenna College and co-editor of the book Mastery and Drift: Professional Class Liberals Since 1960, the episode questions whether there is a sense of nostalgia for the bygone era of machine politics and examines the ramifications of this political shift.

Introduction: The Legacy of Patronage Politics

The episode opens with Ian Coss reflecting on the resurgence of discussions around patronage politics, a system historically rooted in loyalty, relationships, and transactional exchanges within political realms. He introduces Bob Crane, the State Treasurer pivotal to Massachusetts’ lottery system, epitomizing the patronage model where relationships and mutual support were central to political success.

"Patronage was the beating heart of the Massachusetts lottery in its early days." – Ian Coss [00:00]

Coss sets the stage by juxtaposing the historical patronage system with contemporary governance, questioning the transformation within the Democratic Party and its implications.

The Golden Age of Patronage Politics

Lily Geismer provides a thorough backdrop of the Democratic Party in the 1960s and 1970s, highlighting its dominance through the enduring New Deal coalition. This coalition, established by Franklin D. Roosevelt, was a diverse yet fragile alliance comprising union members, people of color, farmers, and middle-class intellectuals.

"The Democratic party in the 1960s and 1970s was at the end of what had been a very dominant place in American politics." – Lily Geismer [03:28]

Geismer cites influential figures like Hubert Humphrey and Tip O'Neill, illustrating how the party thrived on deep connections and a commitment to helping constituents through government programs and patronage.

Shift to Meritocracy and Professional Class Liberalism

As the episode progresses, Geismer discusses the seismic shift in the Democratic Party during the late 1970s and 1980s, marked by the rise of the "Watergate babies"—a new generation of politicians advocating for a meritocratic and technocratic approach, distancing themselves from the patronage-laden practices of their predecessors.

"The essence of patronage. Crane used to be the norm in the Democratic Party." – Ian Coss [05:09]

This shift was influenced by demographic changes, the increasing prominence of suburban professionals, and broader societal movements questioning the ethics of patronage. The decline of patronage was also catalyzed by political scandals like Watergate, which eroded public trust in traditional party machines.

The Impact of Patronage on the Democratic Party

Geismer elaborates on patronage's dual role in strengthening the Democratic Party by fostering loyalty and delivering tangible benefits to constituents through job creation and government programs. However, she acknowledges the inherent corruption and inefficiency that often accompanied these practices.

"Patronage is actually like a continuation of that idea that your government is creating programs to help people." – Lily Geismer [10:11]

The conversation touches upon how the transition to a meritocratic model reshaped the party's identity, moving away from direct, relationship-based governance to a focus on expertise and systemic reforms. This evolution, while intended to enhance efficiency and fairness, also distanced the party from its grassroots base and the traditional labor movement.

Modern Reflections and Counterexamples

Coss introduces a critical perspective by referencing a Supreme Court dissent by Antonin Scalia, who defended patronage as a component of American political tradition. Geismer concurs that while patronage systems fostered deep connections, they were invariably tied to corruption and exclusion.

"That's what patronage does—it weaves a web of mutual support, but it also opens the door to corruption." – Ian Coss [35:37]

To balance nostalgia, Coss presents contemporary political figures like Michelle Wu, Mayor of Boston, and Eric Adams, Mayor of New York, to illustrate the ongoing tension between the old patronage ethos and the modern professional approach. Wu represents the technocratic, merit-based leadership, while Adams exemplifies a return to neighborhood-centric, relationship-driven politics.

"Michelle Wu, I think she captures so much about the professional class Democratic Party." – Ian Coss [29:00]

Geismer observes that cities remain strongholds of Democratic machine politics, albeit in evolved forms, highlighting the nuanced landscape of current political practices.

Conclusion: Weighing Nostalgia Against Progress

In the episode's closing segments, Geismer reflects on the loss of deep, personal connections inherent in the patronage system and the consequent weakening of party loyalty and identity. She expresses a nuanced nostalgia for the relational aspect of past politics, while critically acknowledging the systemic flaws that necessitated change.

"I am nostalgic for that idea of the deep connections that came from that vision of politics." – Lily Geismer [23:21]

Coss reinforces the complexity of patronage politics, emphasizing that while it facilitated governance through relationships, it was also fraught with ethical dilemmas and inefficiencies.

The episode wraps up by teasing future discussions on the operational disparities within government entities, reinforcing the series' commitment to unraveling historical narratives to comprehend contemporary issues.

Key Takeaways

• Patronage Politics: Central to the Democratic Party's early success, fostering loyalty and facilitating government programs but inherently linked to corruption and inefficiency.

• Shift to Meritocracy: Driven by demographic changes, political scandals, and a growing professional class, the Democratic Party moved towards a merit-based system, reshaping its identity and distancing from grassroots patronage.

• Modern Political Dynamics: The legacy of patronage persists in various forms within city politics, while national party dynamics reflect ongoing tensions between relational governance and technocratic ideals.

• Nostalgia vs. Progress: While the relational depth of patronage politics is nostalgically remembered, its systemic flaws underscore the necessity of its evolution towards more equitable and efficient governance models.

Notable Quotes

• "Patronage was the beating heart of the Massachusetts lottery in its early days." – Ian Coss [00:00]

• "The Democratic party in the 1960s and 1970s was at the end of what had been a very dominant place in American politics." – Lily Geismer [03:28]

• "Patronage is actually like a continuation of that idea that your government is creating programs to help people." – Lily Geismer [10:11]

• "I am nostalgic for that idea of the deep connections that came from that vision of politics." – Lily Geismer [23:21]

Further Reading

• Lily Geismer's Don't Blame Us: Suburban Liberals and the Transformation of the Democratic Party – A recommended exploration of the historical shifts within the Democratic Party.

• Mastery and Drift: Professional Class Liberals Since 1960 – Co-edited by Lily Geismer and Brent Siebel, offering a collection of essays on the Democratic Party's evolution.

Produced by GBH News and distributed by PRX, "Scratch & Win" continues to unravel the intricate tapestry of America's gambling and political systems, providing listeners with historical insights to better understand present-day dynamics.