THE
PROGRESSIVES
Introduction
If you study European history, you will find that it’s the 19th
century
that gets the nickname the “Age of Progress,” and for good
reason. The 19th century was a time of unprecedented
scientific,
technological, and economic expansion. For the US too, the
19th
century was an age of industrial progress—as we’ve seen
already.
But in US history, it’s not the 19th century but the early years
of the
20th century that are most associated with the progress label—but
for
progress of an entirely different sort. In the early years
of the
20th century, crusaders of various types took on all of the many
evils
plaguing American society-- crime, disease, corruption, poverty,
ignorance, and injustice--and won! At least, sort of.
The forces of darkness....
For those people we call “progressives,” the people who wanted to
see
major changes in America, taking on the many evils of American
society
was a daunting task, like David taking on Goliath or, perhaps a
better
analogy, like Heracles taking on the Hydra. Cut off one head, and
the
head will grow right back unless you figure out which is the
“immortal”
head and can find a way to deal with that.
Consider the problems facing America at the time:
• Exploitation of workers
• Destruction of independent farmers
• Crime and poverty in the cities
• The growth of the trusts
• America’s support of economic imperialism
On top of all this, there was the corrupt political system: cities
controlled by bosses, and, at the national level, the ability of
big
business to buy elections—as it had in the 1896 contest between
Bryan
and McKinley.
And if the magnitude of the problems wasn’t discouraging enough,
there
was the failure of so many earlier attempts at reform:
• The Sherman Anti-trust Act used to stop
striking
workers instead of monopolistic big business practices
• The Knights of Labor collapsing because of
unfavorable press treatment following the Haymarket riot.
• The Grange reverting to a social organization
after
its efforts to compete with John Deere, etc. failed
• The Populist defeat of 1896 when not even
William
Jennings Bryan (a splendid candidate who ran a splendid campaign
and
who was also nominated by the Democratic Party) could overcome
Mark
Hannah and his $16,000,000.
At first, the 20th century looked like it was just going to be
more of
the same. Certainly the 1900 presidential election suggested
that
that would be the case.
1900 Presidential Election
The presidential candidates were the same as they had been in
1896,
McKinley for the Republicans, Bryan for the Democrats. Once
again, “free silver” was an important issue. But Bryan had
another important theme: American imperialism. In 1900, the
Filipinos
were still waging a campaign to drive the Americans out, and
American
forces responded to the insurrection with a brutality every bit as
great as the Spaniards had displayed earlier.
The American death toll kept mounting: ultimately, we lost 4,390
soldiers during the Philippine insurrections. We killed
20,000 Filipino soldiers. But, more disturbing was the
civilian death toll. There were probably 200,000 Filipino
deaths, with many Filipinos killed directly by American
soldiers. Apparently in some situations, soldiers were given
orders to kill every Filipino male over ten years old.
Mark Twain
unleashed his “pen warmed up in hell” against our occupation of
the
Philippines, and it seemed that the anti-imperial theme should
have
been a winner for Bryan. But it wasn’t. Partly, this
is
because running an anti-war campaign when American boys are
actively
fighting is hard to do. Anti-war sentiment at home encourages
enemies
abroad to fight harder and longer—and, done the wrong way, an
anti-war
campaign all by itself increases American casualties.
Besides,
most Americans don’t really understand or care about issues so far
away
from their own lives. Bryan, realizing this, quickly dropped
the
anti-war emphasis to focus on domestic issues. But here,
too, the
Republicans gained the upper hand. McKinley used perhaps the
most
effective campaign slogan he could have found, “Let well enough
alone.” In my opinion, that's a winning slogan most of the
time in
American politics! Another McKinley slogan: “Four more years of
the
full dinner pail.”
Things weren’t perfect, maybe, but Americans were better off than
any
other people in the world. A major reason not to experiment
with
reform!
By voting for the Republicans, the American people gave their
approval
to four more years of the status quo, leaving things as they
were. But, as it turns out, they had elected a man who would
make
major changes in the U.S. system.
Not, of course, William McKinley—Mark Hanna’s McKinley, his slave,
his
echo, his suit of clothes. No. but in electing McKinley they
had
also elected his running mate, Theodore Roosevelt.
Teddy Roosevelt and the (sort of)
Square Deal
Roosevelt is a fascinating man. A Phi Beta Kappa graduate of
Harvard, a squinty-eyed, glasses wearing scholar, author of over
30
books, and an expert on—well, if you asked him, nearly
everything. But there were other sides to Roosevelt.
He was
a ranch owner and cowboy, spending some very rugged winters in the
North Dakota badlands. He was also a military man, serving
as
Assistant Secretary of the Navy during McKinley’s first
term. But
when the Spanish American War started, he resigned so that he
could
fight himself. He ended up leading a famous charge up San Juan
Hill,
and he clearly enjoyed the fighting, writing about his delight at
seeing a Spaniard “curl up like a jackrabbit.”
Roosevelt wasn’t afraid of a fight—and he was certainly willing to
fight for reform. On his return from Cuba, he was elected
governor of New York and he proved to be a real thorn in the side
to
political bosses.
It was these bosses who cooked up a scheme to get rid of Teddy—by
kicking him upstairs—all the way to the vice presidency.
They
engineered a “draft Teddy” movement at the Republican convention,
with
hundreds chanting, “We want Teddy!” The rather egotistical
Roosevelt just couldn’t let his admirers down.
Mark Hanna was no fool. He knew the Republicans were playing
with
fire. “Don’t any of you realize that there is only one life
between that madman and the White House?” he asked.
Well, apparently they didn’t—but they should have. Six
months
into his 2nd term, McKinley was assassinated by an anarchist (Leon
Czolgosz) and
Roosevelt was president. The big question: what was he going
to
do? Well, Roosevelt made it clear very quickly what he hoped
to
accomplish. He promised Americans what he called a “Square
Deal.” What did he mean by that? Well, here’s TR’s own
explanation:
“When
I say I
believe in a square deal, I do not mean to give every man
the best hand. If the cards do not come to any man, or if
they do
come, and he has not got the power to play them, that is his
affair. All I mean is that there shall be no crookedness
in the
dealing.”
A nice sentiment, but with Roosevelt, it was more than a
sentiment. An example: the way Roosevelt settled a
Pennsylvania
coal mining strike. The workers had wanted minimal
concessions: a
nine hour day and a 20% pay increase. But the mine owners
wouldn’t negotiate, and let the strike drag on. Schools,
hospitals, and factors began to shut down as coal supplies ran
short.
Roosevelt said one should speak softly but carry a big
stick.
Well, Roosevelt seldom spoke softly, but he wasn’t afraid to pick
up a
big stick as well. In this case, he forced the mine owners
to
cooperate, threatening to use federal troops if they didn’t. For
the
first time, the federal government was intervening on behalf of
labor
rather than business.
Far more important, Roosevelt’s role as a trust-buster. J.P.
Morgan and J.D. Rockefeller had bid up the stock of the Burlington
railroad, each trying to gain control for themselves. When
neither could get the upper hand, they joined forces to form the
Northern Securities Company and shared control of the
railroad.
In the meantime, their unscrupulous actions had proved costly to
many
investors as Burlington stock prices first spiked and then
collapsed.
No Square Deal here, thought Roosevelt, so he picked up his big
stick. He brought an antitrust suit against the NSC, and
forced
it to disband. Score one for the trust-busters. Roosevelt
likewise launched suits to break up other trusts: the sugar trust,
the
fertilizer trust, the tobacco trust, and the beef trust. Not
all
the suits were successful, but big business had to watch out.
Roosevelt also pushed reform legislation through Congress, gaining
passage of the Elkins Act, and act forbidding railroad “rebates”
and
the giving of free passes.
Roosevelt also got legislation setting aside 125 million acres of
timber reserves, with additional land set aside for coal and water
reserves. The newly-designated lands would be available for
recreation, sustainable-yield logging, watershed land, and
grazing:
sound conservation policies.
Limits to progress under
Roosevelt
So David had defeated Goliath? Well, not quite. David
had
slung a stone or two, but not much more. The trusts were
behaving
better perhaps, but big business was as strong as ever. J.D.
Rockefeller supported Roosevelt’s reelection campaign—with good
reason!
Further, Teddy pushed the US farther down the imperialist
path.
The “Roosevelt Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine said we would
intervene in Western hemisphere countries not only to stop
European
advances into those countries, but whenever unsettled conditions
made
it *look* like European countries were likely to move in.
The creation of the Panama Canal likewise shows Roosevelt’s
quasi-imperial policy. The US wanted a canal built through
Central America, either through Nicaragua or Panama. Panama
seemed promising, but the Colombian government (which controlled
Panama) wanted a fair price for permitting use of this valuable
resource. Roosevelt offered $10 million and $250,000 per
year,
but the Bogota government said that wasn’t enough. So what
could
Roosevelt do?
Well, in 1903 there was a revolt in Panama. Roosevelt seized his
big
stick, sending American ships in to prevent Colombia from
maintaining
control. Once the Panamanians established a government of
their
own, Roosevelt could now negotiate exactly the terms he
wanted.
Well, the canal got built—a good thing too—but our friendly
relationship with South America was going…South.
Overall, then, the Roosevelt presidency is a good example of the
“sort
of” victory won by progressives. It was at most a partial
victory
for the forces of light.
Roosevelt himself realized that the work of reform was far from
complete. In the natural course of things, he would have run
for
another term in 1908. But quite early in his presidency,
Roosevelt had promised not to violate the two-term limit that had
become traditional. So, having committed himself not to run
for a
third term, Roosevelt did the next best thing, supporting a man
who, he
thought, would continue his policies, William Howard Taft.
Taft the progressive--sort of
Taft in some ways was an excellent choice. He had been successful
as a
lawyer and judge—and particularly impressive while serving as
governor
of the Philippines. Taft had gone a long way toward
reconciling
the Filipinos to the American presence—no small task. Taft
had
been effective as a trouble shooter for Roosevelt in places like
the
Canal Zone and as Secretary of War.
Taft had never held elective office, though, and he wasn’t much of
a
campaigner. And he was up against a splendid
campaigner—William
Jennings Bryan. But Bryan didn’t have the issue he needed to
run
a successful campaign. The imperialism issues was gone now
that
the Filipino insurrection was over. Roosevelt’s movements
toward
reform likewise stole Bryan’s thunder. Bryan did better than the
conservative Democrat who had been the nominee in 1904, but he
still
lost by a substantial margin, and Taft was president.
Taft continued some of the progressive reforms begun by Roosevelt,
bringing suits against the big trusts (including Standard Oil,
U.S.
Steel, and International Harvester). He pushed for laws
further
strengthening railroad regulation and preventing stock
watering.
And, right at the end of his administration, the Constitution was
amended to permit an income tax, something reformers had long
wanted,
but that the courts had ruled unconstitutional. Taft also pushed
for
tariff reform.
But Taft was not politician, not at all skillful in the practical
implementation of his reform measures or in using them for
political
advantage. Worse for Taft, his deteriorating relationship
with
Roosevelt. After leaving office, Teddy had gone on an
African
hunting trip. His enemies said they were rooting for the
lions—or
hoping some lion would do its duty. But, when Teddy got
back, he
found that Taft had been bringing lawsuits against companies he
himself
would not have sued. And Taft was dismissing from office
some men
that Roosevelt had appointed—including the Sectretary of the
Interior
who Taft had dismissed for insubordination.
Teddy was offended and began attacking Taft, pulling the
“progressive”
rug right out from under Taft’s feet. Naturally enough, Taft
turned to more conservative Republicans for support. The
now-divided Republicans were vulnerable, and the Democrats took
control
of the House in the 1910 midterm elections.
The 1912 election--reform in the
air
And as the 1912 presidential election rolled around, the stage was
set
reformers of one type or another to take over. But who would
end
up the progressive leader?
One possibility: Robert M. Lafollette. Lafollette had served
as
congressman, Governor of Wisconsin, and senator. As
governor, he
had succeeded in implementing major reform legislation, and, while
in
the Senate, he pushed for similar legislation on the national
level.
But Teddy was not quite convinced that Lafollette was the best man
for
the job. No. There was somebody better available—much
better. Who? Well, Roosevelt himself, of course. But
wait—hadn’t Teddy promised he wouldn’t run for a third term.
No,
said Roosevelt. He had only meant three consecutive
terms.
Stepping to the sidelines for four years meant he could run again
without breaking his promise.
But another problem. Simply elbowing Lafollette out of the
way
would look bad and alienate many potential supporters. So Teddy
waited
for his chance—and he got it. In the middle of one of his campaign
speeches, Lafollette collapsed, and that was all the excuse Teddy
needed. He threw has hat into the ring, saying, “I am fit as
a
bull moose.”
Going into the 1912 Republican convention, it was at first unclear
who
was going to get the nomination, and unclear even who the voting
delegates would be. But when the party apparatus choose to
seat
Taft delegates rather than rival Roosevelt supporters to fill 250
disputed seats, it was clear Taft would have sufficient support to
gain
the nomination.
Unhappy Roosevelt supporters broke away to form a part of their
own,
the Progressive Party, better known as the Bull Moose Party.
By this time, Roosevelt's thinking on national issues had
evolved. He was very much influenced by Herbert Croly's The
Promise of American Life. Croly had argued that earlier
American political history had pivoted around two poles, the
Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian positions on the role of
government. The Jeffersonian element was more democratic,
and tended to favor limited federal government, viewing democratic
interests better served when decisions were made on the state and
local government levels. The Hamiltonians were more top-down
in their thinking, favoring strong federal government. Croly
argued that, with the economic changes of the post-Civil War
period, the old Jeffersonian limited/decentralized government idea
wasn't an effective tool for democratic interests any more.
Croly argued that it was time to achieve "Jeffersonian ends" with
"Hamiltonian" means.
This is an enormously important change in American political
thinking. For a relatively little known thinker, Croly had a far
larger impact on American life than one might imagine. In
large part, this is because he influenced people like Roosevelt,
who now saw strong central government as key to positive
reform. "New Nationalism" they called it.
The Bull Moosers were filled with righteous zeal. “We stand
at
Armageddon, and we battle for the Lord,” they sang, along with
“Onward
Christian Soldiers,” and the “Battle Hymn of the Republic.” And
then
there is this: “I want to be a Bull Moose, and with the Bull Moose
stand, with antlers on my forehead and a big stick in my
hand.”
More important the songs, the Bull Moose platform—a call for
thorough
reforms including the following:
• Initiative (laws implemented by the people
directly
at the ballot box)
• Referendum (laws overturned by the people
directly
at the ballot box)
• Recall
• Recall of judicial decisions
• Workman’s compensation
• Minimum wage for women
• Women’s suffrage
• Child labor legislation
• Creation of a federal trade and tariff
commission
to regulate business
As the election season heated up, Roosevelt and Taft tore each
other
apart with Taft calling Roosevelt a “dangerous egotist” and a
“demagogue,” while Roosevelt called Taft “a fathead with the
brains of
a guinea pig.”
This meant that the Democrats had a very good chance of capturing
the
White House if they could find the right candidate. This,
however, was not so easy. The 1912 Democrat convention went
through 45 ballots without reaching agreement. At this
point,
Bryan (still a dominant player in the party) through his support
to a
relative unknown, Thomas Woodrow Wilson.
The philosopher
president--Woodrow
Wilson
Wilson was a first-rate scholar with an undergraduate degree from
Princeton, a law degree from the University of Virginia and a
Ph.D.
from Johns Hopkins. He had taught history, law, and
economics,
eventually becoming president of Princeton University.
In 1910, Wilson was persuaded to run for governor of New Jersey,
picked, ironically enough, by political bosses who thought they
could
lead the politically inexperience academic by the nose. They
had
misjudged badly. Wilson was not a man to compromise with
injustice (or with what he perceived as injustice), and he soon
became
a real problem for the machine politicians.
Wilson was an effective speaker (you could waltz to his speeches
some
said), and he used his eloquence to expose political corruption,
turning New Jersey around, and getting legislation every bit as
progressive as that passed by Lafollette in Wisconsin.
The 1912 election stirred passions all over the country—and,
perhaps
not surprisingly, someone took a shot at assassinating
Roosevelt.
Despite the chest wound, the Bull Moose finished his speech
without
even bothering to change his bloody shirt, and, within two weeks,
Roosevelt was back on the campaign trail.
Eventually, though, the split between the Bull Moosers and
the
Republicans left the door open for Wilson who, even though he won
only
41% of the popular vote, managed a 435 (Wilson) to 33 (Roosevelt)
to 8
(Taft) electoral college victory.
In some ways,
though, everyone came out a winner. Taft was
tremendously relieved not to be president anymore, and eventually
took
a position for which he was far more suited: supreme court
justice. Roosevelt, a rich man, had plenty of things to
occupy
his time. William Jennings Bryan got a nice consolation
prize,
Secretary of State. And for Americans as a whole, a real
progressive as president. Coupled with state-level reforms
of the
Lafollette type and a senate now more responsive to popular
pressure
(the 17th Amendment of 1913 provided direct election of senators),
a
new era was well under way.
During the campaign, Wilson had attacked the New Nationalism of
Roosevelt. He advocated instead what he called the New
Freedom. But once in office, Wilson decided that the Croly
"Jeffersonian ends by Hamiltonian means" idea was perfectly fine
after all. This meant greatly expanding the role of federal
government:
Some Wilson reforms:
1. Tax reform. The tariff was cut from 40 to 29 %,
replaced
by an income tax of 1% on income above $4000 with rates up to 6%
on
higher incomes.
2. Banking. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 created
the
Federal Reserve System with its 12 regional banks and its board of
governors appointed by the president. This bank issued
federal
reserve notes, notes backed by 40% gold and “commercial and
agricultural paper”—whatever that means. Also, Wilson got
adopted
the Federal Farm Loan Board which issued farm loans at no more
than 6%
interest.
3. Trust-busting. The 1914 Federal Trade Act set up a
federal trade commission to investigate anti-trust violations and
empowered to stop illegal acts. The Clayton Antitrust Act
forbid
price discrimination, tying contracts, and interlocking
directorships.
4. Labor. Child labor in factories was limited—no one
under
14 could work in the factories. The 8 hour day was mandated
for
certain industries, e.g., railroads. A Workman’s
Compensation Act
provided assistance to workers injured on the job, while a
Seaman’s Act
mandated safety standards on shipboard.
Wilson had kept his promises to America—a series of real victories
for
the progressives. But the progressive movement ran into
trouble
because of the one promise Wilson failed to keep. What was
that? Stay tuned....