Skocpol Ch. 2 –
“Public Aid for the Worthy Many: The Expansion of Benefits for Veterans of the Civil War”



Skocpol restates her claim that the United States government was a major welfare provider at
the turn of the 20th century, as evident by the extensive Civil War pension (CWP) system
CWP developed due to political factors
CWP was different from contemporary European pension systems
The Politics of Civil War Pensions, 1860s-1910s



Skopcpol characterizes the Civil War, as well as the French revolutionary wars, as a “democratic”
war, in that all men were subject to military service
Civil War was the costliest war in the nation’s history
US had already developed far more limited pension systems for veterans of its previous wars
Raising Massive Armies in a Democracy

1862 law lays the foundation for CWP, providing monetary compensation for veterans, or their
dependents, with disabilities directly linked to combat
Patterns of Pension Growth after the Civil War



Following the end of the Civil War, an increasing number of veterans applied for pension,
pausing around 1870, possibly because everyone with a disability had already applied
After this pause, the number of pensioners continues to rise; Skocpol suggests this was due to
political factors. She introduces two previous arguments:
o “Pressure group thesis” or “social demand” argument, whereby interest groups like the
Grand Army of the Republic lobbied for more robust CWP
o Expansion of protective tariffs linked to expansion of CWP
Skocpol does not entirely dismiss these, but says they are incomplete arguments. Her argument
is that the structure of the state and the dynamics of party politics influenced the expansion of
CWP
The Arrears Act and the Competitive Politicization of the Pension Question


1879 Arrears of Pension Act expands CWP, giving new incentives for more veterans to apply for
CWP
This bipartisan bill passes due to a genuine desire to reform a flawed system, and as a result of
lobbying by pension attorneys, who were losing business as the number of new pensioners
tapered off
Defeat for an Attempt to Centralize the Application Process


Influx of new pensioners flowed through preexisting administrative channels; Congress fails to
pass the “Sixty Surgeon Pension Bill” that attempted to revamp the US Pension Bureau to help it
process these new claims
Pension application system remains a central agency linked with a dispersed and loosely
regulated network of constituents and voluntary groups
Pensions Become Fuel for Congressional and Party Patronage



Passage of Arrears Act and failure to update the Pension Bureau allowed for CWP to become a
fuel for patronage politics, compounded by massive backlog of pension applicants
Backlogs led to congressional intervention in individual cases; Skocpol argues that these cases
took up a large amount of a congressman’s time
Pension Bureau leaders were party-appointed; Skocpol argues that expansion of Pension Bureau
budgets and personnel and higher rates of approval for new claims correspond to Republican
executive control between 1878-1899
Party Differentiation and Republican Sponsorship of the Dependent Pension Act




Pensions, once a bipartisan policy, become partisan: Republicans support CWP expansion, while
Democrats support cutbacks; this corresponds to a treasury surplus in the wake of growing
industrialization and increased tariffs
Democrats support lowering tariffs, which would benefit their constituents
Republicans support reinforcing tariffs and liberalizing CWP, mobilizing the Grand Army of the
Republic for the 1888 election, in which they took both houses and the presidency, replacing
Democrat President Cleveland with Republican President Harrison
1890 Dependent Pension Act expands CWP and the number of pensioners applying for it,
turning CWP into a mainly old-age and survivors’ benefits system
A Precocious American Welfare State? Civil War Benefits in Comparative Perspective

Skocpol asks if the US had its own form of welfare state, and if the groups benefiting were
similar or different to those in other Western states at the time
European Beneficiaries and U.S. Pensioners


Skocpol characterizes contemporary European social insurance as “working men’s insurance,”
whereby the state attempted to partially protect wage-workers against losses from illness,
disability, and old age
Compared to the European system, CWP benefits were more generous, but unlike in Europe,
applicants were not accepted by income or employment criteria
Who Benefited in the United States?

CWP beneficiaries were generally white, working-to-middle-class Union veterans living primarily
in the Northeast

CWP was not, unlike other contemporary institutions, characterized by formalized racism; black
Union veterans received comparatively equal coverage
State-Level Provision for Confederate and Union Veterans


Confederate veterans received benefits through state-level pension systems, which were far less
robust than their federal equivalents
Union veterans could supplement their CWP benefits with state-level services and financial aid
Individual Initiative, Social Networks, and Political Location


Skocpol acknowledges that an unknown number of successful CWP applications were
fraudulent, though fake applicants probably were not characteristically different from their
legitimate counterparts
How soon an applicant got his pension and how much he got largely depended on the
individual’s effort and his social-network connections; applicants also benefited from living in
Republican districts, enjoying outreach by party officials
Civil War Pensioners as the Morally Worthy



Skocpol concludes her comparison by characterizing European social programs as being
culturally and politically understood in categorical-economic terms
In contrast, CWP was not conceptualized in socioeconomic terms; those who benefited were
divided from those who did not along a “morally deserving” line
European welfare-state programs extended to the broadest numbers of the least economically
privileged, while America’s CWP system went to those who had “earned aid,” privileging Union
veterans and the Republican Party which spearheaded the political cause they fought for