Progressivism's Profound Influence on New Deal Policies

Progressivism’s Profound Influence on New Deal Policies
In his book The Promise of American Life, Herbert Croley speaks of the importance of “social cohesion.� Social cohesion is a state where all human beings are interconnected, and therefore each individual has a responsibility toward one another. Because of these interpersonal ties, people are capable, as a whole, of accomplishing anything- including the overall betterment of the society in which everyone lives. Two ages in American history embodied Croley’s philosophy: Progressivism and the New Deal era. Although the ages of Progressivism and the New Deal did not occur simultaneously, there are stark similarities between these periods. Both movements were promulgated by individuals and associations who sought a more just and less elitist society and government, both were lead by two of the most dynamic presidents of the twentieth century, and both were times of the creation of prolific legislation to help the economy and those in need. Although Progressivism and the New Deal are no longer ubiquitous political forces, the ideals that engendered the two movements still remain. The need for improving the conditions of a destitute lower class was the impetus for the reform

Opponents of Progressivism and the New Deal voiced similar concerns. Many disliked government intervention in economic affairs. Anti- Progressives and Social Darwinists didn’t find the social structures of the time problematic, and felt that government intervention would undermine individualism and laissez faire. Conservative critics of the New Deal said that there was indeed excessive taxation and government regulation, and radicals such as Father Charles Coughlin and Huey Long thought that FDR became a pawn of big business. The primary reason for failure in both movements were the Supreme Court’s negative rulings on key reform legislation. During the Progressive era, it was the decision of Lochner v. New York (1905) that became a major setback for Progressivism, since states were permitted to retain the right to control how long a worker works. During the New Deal, in Schechter v. US (1935), the Court essentially declared FDR’s entire first New Deal null and void because the Commerce Clause did not expressly grant Congress the power to regulate intrastate business. In addition, neither Progressivism nor the New Deal eras fully supported the rights of women and African Americans. During the progressive movement, suffragists “...were beginning to reconsider womanhood itself and all the ways society constricted and limited women’s lives” (Rosenberg 64). Still, “... a woman was viewed as merely a supportive assistant, not an independent person. She therefore had no right to participate in politics in any formal way” (Rosenberg 15). Even during Progressivism, Jim Crow was repressive and blacks faced constant exclusion. Lynching was frequent. And during the New Deal, a rationale that had persisted since the Progressive movement was that, “Employers could pay women half of what they paid men... (women) still did not have to support themselves...” (Rosenberg 20). Racism still prevailed, because if Roosevelt alienated Southern Democrats by endorsing a federal anti- lynchi8ng law and the abolition of a poll tax, New Deal legislation would have never been passed. Yet despite the fact that Progressivism and the New Deal reforms were not generally long- lasting, they succeeded in challenging old ways of thinking, both in social and economic terms.

The First 100 Days of legislation almost solely concentrated on economic revival. Through the Emergency Banking Relief Bill, Economy Act, Beer- Wine Revenue Act, Agricultural Adjustment/ Farm Credit Acts, Federal Emergency relief Act, and the Federal Security/ Banking Acts, sound banks were created and farmers were granted real, tangible credit. Local governments and states were granted federal aid to improve the conditions of residents suffering through the Depr