The term “unitary executive” is being used by Donald Trump and Patrick Morrisey to justify making public service more politically partisan.

That theory means the chief executive has complete control of the entire executive branch of government. President Trump and West Virginia Governor Morrisey both think this gives them more control over the hiring and firing of public servants.

So far, Trump has gone farther than Morrisey. But both have been clear that civil service rules should protect fewer employees than they do now.

Civil service protections for employees came about as a result of the “spoils” system of hiring public workers. “To the victor belong the spoils” was the catchphrase used to justify firing employees who worked for an administration whose party had just lost an election.

The “spoils” idea reached its apex when Andrew Jackson was elected president, and he summarily fired many of the previous administration’s employees. The idea of civil service rules was a reaction to Jackson’s action.

After years of debate, the public agreed that much of the public workforce should not be determined by either party or personal loyalty. By the 1880s, the majority of Americans supported the idea of civil service protections for public employees. Certainly those chosen for policymaking positions should be loyal to the chief executive, but the “worker bees” should not have to fear the next election.

While the federal government and most states had adopted civil service rules by the 1930s, it took West Virginia until the 1970s to get on board. When I was first elected to the Legislature in 1982, there were still workers who had been hired due to political loyalty, and had been “grandfathered” in.

Governor Morrisey has given the Legislature several bills to reorganize the executive branch of state government. His ideas for top management make sense to me, but embedded in these bills are provisions to remove civil service protection from thousands of those worker bees. We should beware of those political land mines.

The “unitary executive” theory is merely a regurgitation of the “spoils” system, to my mind. If I run for an executive position (president, governor, sheriff, mayor, etc.) and win, I get to fire everybody and hire my friends, even if my friends aren’t nearly as capable as the veteran employees I fired.

I think this is beyond stupid. It presumes that public workers are useless, and that those jobs should exist solely so that the victor in an election can reward his or her supporters. That is the essence of corruption.

And it’s nonsense. Most public employees do essential work, and we citizens usually only notice it when we individually need it.

Some say civil service protects the incompetent. Not if it’s done right, as it can be and has been done almost all the time. Others argue that civil servants constitute the “deep state,” which interferes with elected politicians ability to do what they wish. Actually, good civil servants remind elected officials what laws they need to change, if they want to do things that are prohibited.

Finally, “spoils” may have made some sense, when most government jobs were rudimentary. But there isn’t a “Democratic” versus “Republican” way of doing even a menial job. And the knowledge now required of much public employment argues for employees who seek careers.

John Doyle is a 26-year former member of the West Virginia House of Delegates. He can be reached at rjohndoyle@comcast.net.