The spoils system was always used until after the Civil war system's abuses prompted civil service reforms designed to cut down the number of government posts filled by appointment and to award jobs on the basis of merit. The Pendleton Federal Civil Service Act of 1883 provided the initial basis for the adoption of the merit system in the recruitment of federal officials, and by the late 20th century merit systems had almost completely replaced the spoils system at the federal, state, and city levels of government.
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
Merit vs. spoils
The spoils system and the merit system are two different things. A spoils system is a practice in which a political party, after winning an election, gives government jobs to its supporters, friends and relatives as a reward for working toward victory, and as an incentive to keep working for the party.The merit system is the process of promoting and hiring government employees based on their ability to perform a job, rather than on their political connections. It is the opposite of the spoils system.
The spoils system was always used until after the Civil war system's abuses prompted civil service reforms designed to cut down the number of government posts filled by appointment and to award jobs on the basis of merit. The Pendleton Federal Civil Service Act of 1883 provided the initial basis for the adoption of the merit system in the recruitment of federal officials, and by the late 20th century merit systems had almost completely replaced the spoils system at the federal, state, and city levels of government.
The spoils system was always used until after the Civil war system's abuses prompted civil service reforms designed to cut down the number of government posts filled by appointment and to award jobs on the basis of merit. The Pendleton Federal Civil Service Act of 1883 provided the initial basis for the adoption of the merit system in the recruitment of federal officials, and by the late 20th century merit systems had almost completely replaced the spoils system at the federal, state, and city levels of government.
Phones
Question 1:
Police had pulled over David Riley because his car registration had expired. But when they did, they found two loaded guns in the car and they also searched his phone. That is when they found text messages and videos which associated with a local gang. That's when the police arrested him. But in court there was a problem. The police didn't have permission from David Riley to look at his phone or got a warrant from a judge. And since a persons' phone is part of their property they got the information wrongly. He was suppose to serve 15 years in jail but the Supreme Court had to overtune his conviction because of the phone. It definitely is a landmark case because the court doesn't really have a law about being able to search through peoples phone. When the Founding Fathers created the Constitution they made it very vague so then in the future we would still be able to use it. Such as the First Amendment that protected the right for free speech and also the Fourth Amendment that protected the right to privacy. I believe that we should make a law that police CAN look at a persons phone without a warrant or the persons permission ONLY if there is probable cause such as two loaded guns found in the persons car.
Police had pulled over David Riley because his car registration had expired. But when they did, they found two loaded guns in the car and they also searched his phone. That is when they found text messages and videos which associated with a local gang. That's when the police arrested him. But in court there was a problem. The police didn't have permission from David Riley to look at his phone or got a warrant from a judge. And since a persons' phone is part of their property they got the information wrongly. He was suppose to serve 15 years in jail but the Supreme Court had to overtune his conviction because of the phone. It definitely is a landmark case because the court doesn't really have a law about being able to search through peoples phone. When the Founding Fathers created the Constitution they made it very vague so then in the future we would still be able to use it. Such as the First Amendment that protected the right for free speech and also the Fourth Amendment that protected the right to privacy. I believe that we should make a law that police CAN look at a persons phone without a warrant or the persons permission ONLY if there is probable cause such as two loaded guns found in the persons car.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)