- Was the New Deal a Raw Deal? By The IHS January 10, 2020 In the 11 th episode of our Ideas in Progress podcast, we sat down with Dr. David Beito, who led the discussion on “Liberty, the Welfare State, and the New Deal” at one of our fall Advanced Topics (AT) Discussion Colloquia.
- New Deal or Raw Deal? How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America. Click the Download button to download a copy of the MARC file. Export MARC - FTP.
- A sharply critical new look at Franklin D. Roosevelt's presidency reveals government policies that hindered economic recovery from the Great Depression - and are still hurting America today. In this shocking and groundbreaking new book, economic historian Burton W. Folsom exposes the idyllic legend of Franklin D. Roosevelt as a myth of epic proportions. With questionable moral.
New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America - Ebook written by Burton W. Read this book using Google Play Books app on your PC, android, iOS devices. Download for offline reading, highlight, bookmark or take notes while you read New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America. New Deal or raw deal? How FDR's economic legacy has damaged America This edition published in 2008 by Threshold Editions in New York.
NEW DEAL OR RAW DEAL?THE EXCLUSION OF AFRICAN AMERICANS FROM THE NEW DEAL
The general welfare state that was created by the New Deal was stratified. Not everyone had equal access to it. There was a hierarchy of access, where some groups had privileged or prioritized access, and some groups were excluded. African Americans were either subordinated within the New Deal, or excluded from it entirely. Thus some historians have called it the rotten deal or the raw deal.
FDR discovered that in order to get enough votes, especially in the Senate, to pass his legislation, he had to compromise with the South. Conservative Southern Congressmen and Senators opposed giving benefits to African Americans. They wanted the states and localities to be bale to decide who would receive benefits. In order to get the votes to pass his legislation, FDR gave in to these compromises with evil.
Thanks in large part to opposition by the politicians of the white South, to universal benefits, the Social Security Act of 1935 excluded agricultural workers (farm laborers or sharecroppers or tenants, as distinct from farm owners) and domestic servants (maids) from BOTH old age insurance (retirement pension) and unemployment compensation. The result was that WHITE workers received Social Security at age 65, the black sharecroppers and domestics who washed and ironed and cleaned in the homes of white people DID NOT. White sharecroppers and domestics were excluded also, but the percentage of African Americans who were sharecroppers, farm laborers and domestic workers was far greater than the percentage of whites in such occupations. The exclusion of certain categories of workers had the effect of harming the economic well-being of the African Americans at the 'bottom of the ladder.' In 1942, Social Security paid $15 a month. The prevailing wage for day laborers was $2 per 100 pounds of cotton (about the daily amount). Domestics received $2.50 a WEEK. Southern politicians did not want sharecroppers and domestics to get $15 a month in cash because if they did, the sharecroppers and domestics might not work anymore. (see Jill Quadagno, The Color of Welfare, p. 21).
Within Social Security there was a program called Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC). Southern Congressmen successfully insisted that states and localities retain the right to establish eligibility criteria and to decide who received benefits. Congress allowed the widows and children of retired (deceased) workers to receive benefits from the old age program. AFDC then became the last resort for women with children who were divorced, single, or deserted (abandoned, but no formal divorce). The Southern states used the programs to provide benefits to WHITE women, but imposed limitations on African American women. African American women could get the benefits only with the approval of the local white welfare board, subject to searches of the home to prove that there was no 'man in the house.' (until 1968, King v. Smith). In addition, the welfare boards cut poor African American women off during the cotton picking season, because the boards felt that there was work available (Quadagno, p. 119).
In 1935 the NAACP tried to get a clause included in the Wagner Act that forbade discrimination by labor unions. Many unions at that time refused to admit African Americans and other nonwhites. The Wagner Act (National Labor Relations Act) recognized the right of workers to form unions and bargain collectively. The American Federation of Labor refused to support the Wagner Act if it included this clause. The nondiscrimination clause was left out. Unions would not be prohibited from racial discrimination, nationwide, under federal law, until the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Deal Or No Deal Play From Home
Also, the housing programs were racially discriminatory. The Veterans Administration and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) financed more than $120 billion in NEW housing between 1934 and 1962. In that time period, more than 98% of the housing that was subsidized by the VA and FHA went to whites, and less than 2% to nonwhites (Quadagno, p. 91). And programs for public (low income) housing were segregated. In many cities, both North and South, on a de facto basis (unwritten custom) housing projects were for whites or for nonwhites until the 1960s.
New Deal Or Raw Deal
The benefits of the New Deal were disproportionately 'for whites only.' The discrimination was not as severe in the North as in the South when it came to welfare benefits or AFDC, but housing discrimination was just as intense in the North as in the South.
Not until the reforms of the 1960s did the promises of the New Deal finally trickle down to African Americans, Mexican Americans and other nonwhite Americans. Not until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did federal law mandate an end to segregation that was required by law in the public schools or in places of public accommodation; or an end to racial discrimination by employers and unions. Not until the Fair Housing Act of 1968 did federal law finally forbid discrimination on the basis of race in the sale and rental of housing, or in the financing of housing by banks and lenders.
FDR compromised with evil. These compromises might have been politically 'necessary.' Maybe the choice was between a racist program or no program at all, in which case no one would benefit and no one would get anything. Maybe the choice was between bad and nothing. Nevertheless, the New Deal leaves a bad taste in the mouths of African Americans, and was bittersweet at best. Not until the 1960s would men such as John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson fix the flaws in the New Deal. Not until the 1960s would the promises of the New Deal trickle down to the poorest African Americans.
New Deal Or Raw Deal Pdf
In the 11th episode of our Ideas in Progress podcast, we sat down with Dr. David Beito, who led the discussion on “Liberty, the Welfare State, and the New Deal” at one of our fall Advanced Topics (AT) Discussion Colloquia.
Host Dr. Anthony Comegna opens the conversation with his viewpoints on the New Deal, likening it to a cartoonish farce, to which Dr. Beito responds:
“There’s a lot of evidence that the New Deal administration was engaging in a lot of shady practices, repressive practices, so we add that attitude to the equation as well. And part of the craziness of the period, of course, is all this money was spent, all these agencies were created, all these rules were brought in, and you have the longest depression in American history, which is lengthened – I think the evidence is pretty strong – it’s lengthened by Roosevelt’s policies during this period.”
– Dr. David Beito“It’s a failure by all sorts of different standards,”continues Dr. Beito. “And I don’t think that Roosevelt is a very attractivehistorical character for numberless reasons, and the New Deal is certainly highup on the reasons.”
So how did our government reach a point where massiveamounts of power were delegated to the central government? Dr. Beito points toseveral theories, one being an imbalance or maldistribution of wealth, anotherbeing the type of historical figures FDR admired, including his cousin,Theodore Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson.
Roosevelt was involved in all of this wartime mobilization, centralization… I don’t think he had much understanding of business. Roosevelt was born to wealth, and he inherited wealth, and he dabbled in business in the 1920’s. He was never very successful in business. I don’t think he had really a good understanding of those things.
– Dr. David Beito
Dr. Beito also discussed the effect FDR’s failed businessattempts on his presidency. “Roosevelt was involved in all of this wartimemobilization, centralization… I don’t think he had much understanding ofbusiness. Roosevelt was born to wealth, and he inherited wealth, and he dabbledin business in the 1920’s. He was never very successful in business. I don’tthink he had really a good understanding of those things.”
Listen to the full discussion and download this episode of Ideas in Progress and others by visiting our website, SoundCloud, or iTunes. New episodes are available every Wednesday. Interested in more information on IHS programs? Visit our website for additional details on Advanced Topics Discussion Colloquia, facultyand graduateprograms, and funding opportunities.