Hacker News Reader

Comment by parineum | Hacker News Reader

So, by this logic, it wouldn't make sense if programs like this hadn't been _started_ under administrations of both parties, right?

I'm looking for what evidence it would take to convince you that this isn't a partisan issue.

View on HN

Republican Chester Arthur signed the Pendleton Act / civil service reform, which arguably virtually assured the way to gain power in the civil service was to add people or resources, meaning each president after had to grow the apparatus in order to implement their campaign promises or favors rather than just shit-canning all the previous people and regrowing it to the old size.

Before that the "spoils" system was able to check size of the executive branch as the people were allowed to elect someone to shit-can the previous servants. As it stands now the people have been essentially ripped of their previous voting power to elect an executive to make significant reductions of the civil service.

So I'd argue the Republicans did start it.

And Democrats are fighting against it, right?

https://calmatters.org/economy/technology/2025/10/newsom-vet...

I think at this point both parties love the effects of civil service reform. Any handwaving about DOGE notwithstanding. It assures that the size of government can really only ratchet up, at least without stars aligning in congress, and bigger civil service means more executive power.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com