Compare the speeches by Republican nominee Alfred Langdon and President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the 1936 presidential race. On what grounds does Langdon criticize Roosevelt’s New Deal policies, and how does Roosevelt defend them? What seem to be their most fundamental areas of disagreement?
Alfred Landon, “Republican Nomination Acceptance Speech” (1936)
* Franklin Roosevelt, “Speech at Madison Square Garden” (1936)
* Amos Owen on the Indian Reorganization Act (1970)
* Anita Andrade Castro, “The Los Angeles Dressmakers Strike of 1933” (1972)
1) Compare the speeches by Republican nominee Alfred Langdon and President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the 1936 presidential race. On what grounds does Langdon criticize Roosevelt’s New Deal policies, and how does Roosevelt defend them? What seem to be their most fundamental areas of disagreement?
2) Would you describe Amos Owen’s view of the effect of New Deal policies on Native Americans as negative, positive, or somewhere in between?
3) In this oral history interview from 1972, Anita Andrade Castro recalled her role in the Los Angeles Dressmakers’ Strike of 1933. Based on her recollections, what motivated dressmakers in 1933 to try to form a union, and what kinds of risks did they face? Why was Castro arrested for her activities, and what was her attitude toward the authorities and people she met in jail?
Requirements: 200 words
Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882-1945) (left) at Madison Square Garden, October 31, 1936. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Address at Madison Square Garden, New York City October 31, 1936 Senator Wagner, Governor Lehman, ladies and gentlemen: On the eve of a national election, it is well for us to stop for a moment and analyze calmly and without prejudice the effect on our Nation of a victory by either of the major political parties. The problem of the electorate is far deeper, far more vital than the continuance in the Presidency of any individual. For the greater issue goes beyond units of humanity—it goes to humanity itself. In 1932 the issue was the restoration of American democracy; and the American people were in a mood to win. They did win. In 1936 the issue is the preservation of their victory. Again they are in a mood to win. Again they will win. More than four years ago in accepting the Democratic nomination in Chicago, I said: “Give me your help not to win votes alone, but to win in this crusade to restore America to its own people.” The banners of that crusade still fly in the van of a Nation that is on the march. It is needless to repeat the details of the program which this Administration has been hammering out on the anvils of experience. No amount of misrepresentation or statistical contortion can
conceal or blur or smear that record. Neither the attacks of unscrupulous enemies nor the exaggerations of over-zealous friends will serve to mislead the American people. What was our hope in 1932? Above all other things the American people wanted peace. They wanted peace of mind instead of gnawing fear. First, they sought escape from the personal terror which had stalked them for three years. They wanted the peace that comes from security in their homes: safety for their savings, permanence in their jobs, a fair profit from their enterprise. Next, they wanted peace in the community, the peace that springs from the ability to meet the needs of community life: schools, playgrounds, parks, sanitation, highways—those things which are expected of solvent local government. They sought escape from disintegration and bankruptcy in local and state affairs. They also sought peace within the Nation: protection of their currency, fairer wages, the ending of long hours of toil, the abolition of child labor, the elimination of wild-cat speculation, the safety of their children from kidnappers. And, finally, they sought peace with other Nations—peace in a world of unrest. The Nation knows that I hate war, and I know that the Nation hates war. I submit to you a record of peace; and on that record a well-founded expectation for future peace—peace for the individual, peace for the community, peace for the Nation, and peace with the world. Tonight I call the roll—the roll of honor of those who stood with us in 1932 and still stand with us today. Written on it are the names of millions who never had a chance—men at starvation wages, women in sweatshops, children at looms. Written on it are the names of those who despaired, young men and young women for whom opportunity had become a will-o’-the-wisp. Written on it are the names of farmers whose acres yielded only bitterness, business men whose books were portents of disaster, home owners who were faced with eviction, frugal citizens whose savings were insecure. Written there in large letters are the names of countless other Americans of all parties and all faiths, Americans who had eyes to see and hearts to understand, whose consciences were burdened because too many of their fellows were burdened, who looked on these things four years ago and said, “This can be changed. We will change it.” We still lead that army in 1936. They stood with us then because in 1932 they believed. They stand with us today because in 1936 they know. And with them stand millions of new recruits who have come to know. Their hopes have become our record. We have not come this far without a struggle and I assure you we cannot go further without a struggle.
For twelve years this Nation was afflicted with hear-nothing, see-nothing, do-nothing Government. The Nation looked to Government but the Government looked away. Nine mocking years with the golden calf and three long years of the scourge! Nine crazy years at the ticker and three long years in the breadlines! Nine mad years of mirage and three long years of despair! Powerful influences strive today to restore that kind of government with its doctrine that that Government is best which is most indifferent. For nearly four years you have had an Administration which instead of twirling its thumbs has rolled up its sleeves. We will keep our sleeves rolled up. We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace—business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering. They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob. Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred. I should like to have it said of my first Administration that in it the forces of selfishness and of lust for power met their match. I should like to have it said of my second Administration that in it these forces met their master. The American people know from a four-year record that today there is only one entrance to the White House—by the front door. Since March 4, 1933, there has been only one pass-key to the White House. I have carried that key in my pocket. It is there tonight. So long as I am President, it will remain in my pocket. Those who used to have pass-keys are not happy. Some of them are desperate. Only desperate men with their backs to the wall would descend so far below the level of decent citizenship as to foster the current pay-envelope campaign against America’s working people. Only reckless men, heedless of consequences, would risk the disruption of the hope for a new peace between worker and employer by returning to the tactics of the labor spy. Here is an amazing paradox! The very employers and politicians and publishers who talk most loudly of class antagonism and the destruction of the American system now undermine that system by this attempt to coerce the votes of the wage earners of this country. It is the 1936 version of the old threat to close down the factory or the office if a particular candidate does not win. It is an old strategy of tyrants to delude their victims into fighting their battles for them. Every message in a pay envelope, even if it is the truth, is a command to vote according to the will of the employer. But this propaganda is worse—it is deceit. They tell the worker his wage will be reduced by a contribution to some vague form of old-age insurance. They carefully conceal from him the fact that for every dollar of premium he pays for that insurance, the employer pays another dollar. That omission is deceit. They carefully conceal from him the fact that under the federal law, he receives another insurance policy to help him if he loses his job, and that the premium of that policy is paid 100 percent by the employer and not one cent by the worker. They do not tell him that the insurance
policy that is bought for him is far more favorable to him than any policy that any private insurance company could afford to issue. That omission is deceit. They imply to him that he pays all the cost of both forms of insurance. They carefully conceal from him the fact that for every dollar put up by him his employer puts up three dollars three for one. And that omission is deceit. But they are guilty of more than deceit. When they imply that the reserves thus created against both these policies will be stolen by some future Congress, diverted to some wholly foreign purpose, they attack the integrity and honor of American Government itself. Those who suggest that, are already aliens to the spirit of American democracy. Let them emigrate and try their lot under some foreign flag in which they have more confidence. The fraudulent nature of this attempt is well shown by the record of votes on the passage of the Social Security Act. In addition to an overwhelming majority of Democrats in both Houses, seventy-seven Republican Representatives voted for it and only eighteen against it and fifteen Republican Senators voted for it and only five against it. Where does this last-minute drive of the Republican leadership leave these Republican Representatives and Senators who helped enact this law? I am sure the vast majority of law-abiding businessmen who are not parties to this propaganda fully appreciate the extent of the threat to honest business contained in this coercion. I have expressed indignation at this form of campaigning and’ I am confident that the overwhelming majority of employers, workers and the general public share that indignation and will show it at the polls on Tuesday next. Aside from this phase of it, I prefer to remember this campaign not as bitter but only as hard-fought. There should be no bitterness or hate where the sole thought is the welfare of the United States of America. No man can occupy the office of President without realizing that he is President of all the people. It is because I have sought to think in terms of the whole Nation that I am confident that today, just as four years ago, the people want more than promises. Our vision for the future contains more than promises. This is our answer to those who, silent about their own plans, ask us to state our objectives. Of course we will continue to seek to improve working conditions for the workers of America—to reduce hours over-long, to increase wages that spell starvation, to end the labor of children, to wipe out sweatshops. Of course we will continue every effort to end monopoly in business, to support collective bargaining, to stop unfair competition, to abolish dishonorable trade practices. For all these we have only just begun to fight. Of course we will continue to work for cheaper electricity in the homes and on the farms of America, for better and cheaper transportation, for low interest rates, for sounder home financing, for better banking, for the regulation of security issues, for reciprocal trade among nations, for the wiping out of slums. For all these we have only just begun to fight.
Of course we will continue our efforts in behalf of the farmers of America. With their continued cooperation we will do all in our power to end the piling up of huge surpluses which spelled ruinous prices for their crops. We will persist in successful action for better land use, for reforestation, for the conservation of water all the way from its source to the sea, for drought and flood control, for better marketing facilities for farm commodities, for a definite reduction of farm tenancy, for encouragement of farmer cooperatives, for crop insurance and a stable food supply. For all these we have only just begun to fight. Of course we will provide useful work for the needy unemployed; we prefer useful work to the pauperism of a dole. Here and now I want to make myself clear about those who disparage their fellow citizens on the relief rolls. They say that those on relief are not merely jobless—that they are worthless. Their solution for the relief problem is to end relief—to purge the rolls by starvation. To use the language of the stock broker, our needy unemployed would be cared for when, as, and if some fairy godmother should happen on the scene. You and I will continue to refuse to accept that estimate of our unemployed fellow Americans. Your Government is still on the same side of the street with the Good Samaritan and not with those who pass by on the other side. Again—what of our objectives? Of course we will continue our efforts for young men and women so that they may obtain an education and an opportunity to put it to use. Of course we will continue our help for the crippled, for the blind, for the mothers, our insurance for the unemployed, our security for the aged. Of course we will continue to protect the consumer against unnecessary price spreads, against the costs that are added by monopoly and speculation. We will continue our successful efforts to increase his purchasing power and to keep it constant. For these things, too, and for a multitude of others like them, we have only just begun to fight. All this—all these objectives—spell peace at home. All our actions, all our ideals, spell also peace with other nations. Today there is war and rumor of war. We want none of it. But while we guard our shores against threats of war, we will continue to remove the causes of unrest and antagonism at home which might make our people easier victims to those for whom foreign war is profitable. You know well that those who stand to profit by war are not on our side in this campaign. “Peace on earth, good will toward men”—democracy must cling to that message. For it is my deep conviction that democracy cannot live without that true religion which gives a nation a sense of justice and of moral purpose. Above our political forums, above our market places stand the altars of our faith-altars on which burn the fires of devotion that maintain all that is best in us and all that is best in our Nation. We have need of that devotion today. It is that which makes it possible for government to persuade those who are mentally prepared to fight each other to go on instead, to work for and to sacrifice for each other. That is why we need to say with the Prophet: “What doth the Lord require of thee—but to do justly, to love mercy and to walk humbly with thy God.” That is why
the recovery we seek, the recovery we are winning, is more than economic. In it are included justice and love and humility, not for ourselves as individuals alone, but for our Nation. That is the road to peace. Franklin D. Roosevelt, Address at Madison Square Garden, New York City Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/208385
Anita Andrade Castro (1907-1980) Anita Andrade Castro, “The Los Angeles Dressmakers Strike of 1933” (1972) Anita Andrade Castro: After the strike in New York, and I was talking to the girls in the shop one day, and I said, “It’s funny,” I said, “they have a union in New York, and I wish we had one in Los Angeles.” So this girl says to me, “Well, what would you do if they had one?” I said, “Boy,” I said, “they wouldn’t even — my heels wouldn’t touch the floor. I would go so fast to the union.” So in the same afternoon, the one girl says to me, “And how would you like to go to a meeting with us?” So I said, “What kind of a meeting?” I know they good Catholic, but I don’t change religions. So she says, “Oh, it’s a union meeting, silly.” And I said, “All right. I’ll go.” So I went with them, and they spilled the beans, everything they were doing, how we was, piecework, and they sometimes, the tickets would get lost and you made $4 or $5 a week and you kill yourself… So anyhow, we talked, and I talked most, more than anybody else. And, believe it or not, there was a stool pigeon1 among the group, because when we came to work the next day, the boss knew everything that had happened. So, of course, I didn’t have no idea what had happened. So the boss called me in and he told me, “Well, you owe me $10 and something for a dress.” He says, “I’ll forget about it if you just drop that union that you’re going to a meeting.” And I guess have been awfully surprised. So I says, “No, sir.” I said, “You’re not going to buy me with a dress.”I got highly insulted, you know. So anyway, I got fired. Gluck: During this period of the general strike, were you arrested at all during that time? 1 Someone working as an informer or a spy for the boss and/or police.
Castro: I started getting arrested right away. I was arrested altogether close; Of course, not that strike only, because there was other strikes years later. But altogether, I was in jail thirty-seven times. Gluck: And were you arrested during the general strike? Castro: Yeah. Oh, yeah. Gluck: Do you recall your first arrest? Castro: The first arrest was funny. They gave me. . . I didn’t do anything. I was giving out leaflets. And, of course, I wasn’t a citizen. So, of course, that’s the most important thing. When you come to this country, you want to be good so you can become a citizen. And they gave me a bunch of leaflets, and I gave out as many as I could, and they—somebody called the police and they arrested me and—Let’s see. There was quite a few of us arrested, about six, I think. And I was new yet, so if I only could swallow those leaflets, I would have swallowed them, because I figured if they had no proof, they can’t do anything to me. And I didn’t know what they were going to do or what I had done, because the only thing—I hadn’t been fighting at all at this time because I didn’t know anything about it yet. But… Gluck: What happened when they came up to arrest you? Castro: They arrest me and they arrested a few others and they take us to jail. And they had told us at the union, if you get arrested, they let you make one telephone call, so be sure to call the union. So we were arrested, and the first thing, they took all our clothes and they gave us a bath and gave us one of those jail dresses, you know, long down to here. So I tied the belt like this, and then I pulled the dress up. And there were a bunch of us in the same room. There was all kinds of women. I think there was about four from the union. And there was all kinds. There was prostitutes and there was thieves or whatever. So anyway, there was, I was sitting in there and I was kind of worried—not because I was in jail. I was afraid firstly because I want to be a citizen, and I couldn’t get rid of the leaflets. And the leaflets only said, “Join the union,” or “Come to a meeting.” I don’t know what else it said. So I stayed all day in jail. One woman is sitting, a young woman, and she’s crying. And I said, “Why are you crying? Why are you in jail?” and she says, “Because I was soliciting.” But I didn’t know what soliciting meant. So, “What were you doing?” and I says, “Well, I was distributing.” I thought it’s cute, she’s soliciting, I’m distributing. So I asked her what she was soliciting. So she told me. So I said, “Oh, gosh.” I says, “Why do you have to do that for?” I says, “You shouldn’t do that. That’s, I’ll tell you what,” I says, “I belong to the union.”I said, “We’re garment workers and we have a strike. But when the strike is over, then there will be plenty of jobs.” I says, “You come over and see us at the union, and you can get a job sewing. You don’t have to go looking for men.” And the reason she was crying is because she was married, and her husband was coming home and he was going to find her in jail, so I guess she was cheating.
So anyway, they all laughed at the union when I told them. Of course, to me, it’s so funny, you know.
Alfred Landon (1887-1987) delivers his Republican Party nomination acceptance speech, Topeka, Kansas, July 23, 1936 Alfred Landon, Republican Party nomination acceptance speech, Topeka, Kansas, July 23, 1936 Mr. Chairman, Members of the Notification Committee, Ladies and Gentlemen: I accept the nomination of the Republican Party for the Presidency of the United States. In accepting this leadership I pray for Divine Guidance to make me worthy of the faith and the confidence which you have shown in me. This call, coming to one whose life has been that of the everyday American, is proof of that freedom of opportunity which belongs to the people under our government. It carries with it both an honor and a responsibility. In a republic these cannot be separated.
Tonight, facing this honor and responsibility, I hope for the gift of simple and straightforward speech. I want every man and woman in this nation to understand my every word, for I speak of issues deeply concerning us all. The citizen who assumes the direction of the Executive branch of our Government, takes an oath that he will “faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will,” to the best of his ability, “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” This oath carries the obligation, so to use executive power that it will fulfill the purposes for which it was delegated. No man, in common good faith to his fellow citizens, may rightfully assume the duties of the high office of Chief Executive and take the oath that goes with the office, unless he shall intend to keep and shall keep his oath inviolate. It is with a full understanding of the meaning of this oath that I accept this nomination. The 1936 platform of the Republican Party has my complete adherence. It sets out the principles by which we can achieve the full national life that our resources entitle us to enjoy. There is not time to lay our whole program before you tonight; I can touch only upon a few phases of it. The others, I hope to discuss with you in detail as the campaign progresses. I intend to approach the issues fairly, as I see them, without rancor or passion. If we are to go forward permanently, it must be with a united nation—not with a people torn by appeals to prejudice and divided by class feeling. The time has come to pull together. No people can make headway where great numbers are supported in idleness. There is no future on the relief rolls. The law of this world is that man shall eat bread by the sweat of his brow. The whole American people want to work at full time and at full pay. They want homes, and a chance for their children, reasonable security, and the right to live according to American standards. They want to share in a steady progress. We bind ourselves with a pledge we shall not ignore, thrust aside, or forget, to devote our whole energy to bringing these things about. The world has tried to conquer this depression by different methods. None of them has been fully successful. Too frequently recovery has been hindered, if not defeated, by political considerations. Our own country has tried one economic theory after another. The present Administration asked for, and received, extraordinary powers upon the assurance that these were to be temporary. Most of its proposals did not follow familiar paths to recovery. We knew they were being undertaken hastily and with little deliberation.
But because the measures were supposed to be temporary, because everybody hoped they would prove successful, and because the people wanted the Administration to have a fair trial, Congress and the country united in support of its efforts at the outset. Now it becomes our duty to examine the record as it stands. The record shows that these measures did not fit together into any definite program of recovery. Many of them worked at cross-purposes and defeated themselves. Some developed into definite hindrances to recovery. They had the effect generally of extending control by Washington into the remotest corners of the country. The frequent and sudden changes in the Administration’s policy caused a continual uneasiness. As a result, recovery has been set back again and again. This was not all of the failure. Practical progressives have suffered the disheartening experience of seeing many liberal objectives discredited during the past three years by careless thinking, unworkable laws and incompetent administration. The nation has not made the durable progress, either in reform or recovery, that we had the right to expect. For it must be remembered that the welfare of our people is not recorded on the financial pages of the newspapers. It cannot be measured in stock market prices. The real test is to be found in the ability of the average American to engage in business, to obtain a job, to be a self-supporting and a self-respecting member of his community. Judged by the things that make us a nation of happy families, the New Deal has fallen far short of success. The proof of this is in the record. The record shows that in 1933 the primary need was jobs for the unemployed. The record shows that in 1936 the primary need still is jobs for the unemployed. The time has come to stop this fumbling with recovery. American initiative is not a commodity to be delivered in pound packages through a Governmental bureau. It is a vital force in the life of our nation and it must be freed! The country is ripe for recovery. We are far behind in expenditures for upkeep and improvements and for expansion. The total of this demand—in industry, in new enterprises, in our homes and on our farms—amounts to billions of dollars. Once all this consumer demand is released, the problem will be not where to find work for the workers, but where to find workers for the work. One of the signs of the ending of past depressions was the launching of new business ventures. It is true that most of them were small. Altogether, however, they provided work for many millions of people. In the present depression this demand for work has not yet appeared. Few new ventures have been started. Why? Because the small business man, the working man who would like to become his own boss—the average American—has hesitated to start out for himself. He lacks confidence in the soundness of Federal policy; he is afraid of what may come next.
We must dispel his fear, restore his confidence and place our reliance once more in the initiative, intelligence and courage of these makers of jobs and opportunities. That is why I say, in all earnestness, that the time has come to unshackle initiative and free the spirit of American enterprise. We must be freed from incessant governmental intimidation and hostility. We must be freed from excessive expenditures and crippling taxation. We must be freed from the effects of an arbitrary and uncertain monetary policy. And, through a vigorous enforcement of the anti-trust laws, we must be freed from private monopolistic control. Once these things are done, the energies of the American economic system will remedy the ravages of depression and restore full activity and full employment. Out of this depression has come, not only the problem of recovery but also the equally grave problem of caring for the unemployed until recovery is attained. Their relief at all times is a matter of plain duty. We of our Party pledge that this obligation will never be neglected. In extending help, however, we will handle the public funds as a public trust. We will recognize that all citizens, irrespective of color, race, creed or party affiliation, have an equal right to this protection. We would consider it base beyond words to make loyalty or service to party a condition upon which the needy unemployed might obtain help. Those who use public funds to build their political machines, forfeit all right to political consideration from true Americans. Let me emphasize that, while we propose to follow a policy of economy in Government expenditures, those who need relief will get it. We will not take our economies out of the allotments to the unemployed. We will take them out of the hides of the political exploiters. The question is not as stated by the Administration—how much money the American people are willing to spend for relief. The question is how much waste the American people are willing to stand for in the administration of relief. The destruction of human values by this depression has been far greater than the American people suffered during the World War. When the depression began millions of dependable men and women had employment. They were the solid citizenry of America; they had lived honestly and had worked hard. They had dealt fairly with the Government which, in turn, had depended upon their support. Then they found themselves deprived of employment by economic forces over which they had no control. Little by little they spent their life savings while vainly seeking new jobs. We shall undertake to aid these innocent victims of the depression. In addition, we shall amend the Social Security Act to make it workable. We recognize that society, acting through government, must afford as large a measure of protection as it can against involuntary unemployment and dependency in old age. We pledge that the Federal Government will do its proper share in that task.
But it must be kept in mind that the security of all of us depends on the good management of our common affairs. We must be able to produce and accumulate enough to finance our normal progress, as well as to take care of ourselves and of those entitled to protection. Mounting debts and increasing taxes constitute a threat to all of these aims. They absorb the funds that might be used to create new things or to reduce the cost of present goods. Taxes, both visible and invisible, add to the price of everything. By taking more and more out of the family purse, they leave less for the family security. Let us not be misled by those who tell us that others will be made to carry the burden for us. A simple inquiry into the facts and figures will show that our growing debts and taxes are so enormous that, even if we tax to the utmost limits those who are best able to pay, the average taxpayer will still have to bear the major part. While spending billions of dollars of borrowed money may create a temporary appearance of prosperity we and our children, as taxpayers, have yet to pay the bill. For every single dollar spent we will pay back two dollars! Crushing debts and taxes are usually incurred, as they are being incurred today, under the guise of helping people—the same people who must finally pay them. They invariably retard prosperity and they sometimes lead to situations in which the rights of the people are destroyed. This is the lesson of history, and we have seen it occur in the modern world.
Our party holds nothing to be of more urgent importance than putting our financial house in order. For the good of all of us, we must re-establish responsibility in the handling of Government finances. We must recognize that a government does not have an unlimited supply of money to spend. It must husband its resources just as truly as does the head of a family. Unless it follows such a course it cannot afford the services which the people themselves expect. No sound national policy looking to the national welfare will neglect the farmer. This is not because the farmer needs or wishes to be coddled, or that he asks for undue help. It is necessary because the needs of a great nation require that its food producers shall always stand upon a social and economic plane in keeping with the national importance of their service. The present Administration’s efforts to produce this result have not been successful. Payments under the Triple-A did help to tide farmers over a difficult period. But, even before it was ruled out by the Supreme Court, the Triple-A was rapidly disorganizing American agriculture. Some of its worst effects continue. By its policies the Administration has taken the American farmer out of foreign markets and put the foreign farmer into the American market. The loss of markets, both at home and abroad, far outweighs the value of all the benefits paid to farmers. Worse than this, from the standpoint of the public, is the fact that the Administration, through its program of scarcity, has gambled with the needed food and feed supplies of the country. It overlooked the fact that Mother Nature cannot be regimented. The time has now come when we must replace this futile program with one that is economically and socially right. The wealth of our soil must be preserved. We shall establish effective soil conservation and erosion control policies in connection with a national land use and flood prevention program—and keep it all out of politics. Our farmers are entitled to all of the home market they can supply without injustice to the consumer. We propose a policy that protects them in this right. Some of our farmers, dependent in part upon foreign markets, suffer from disadvantages arising from world disorder. Until these disadvantages are eliminated we propose to pay cash benefits in order to cushion our farm families against the disastrous effects of price fluctuations and to protect their standard of living. The American people, now as always, are responsive to distress caused by disasters, such as the present drouth. Our platform reflects that spirit. We shall fulfill its pledge to give every reasonable assistance to producers in areas suffering from such temporary afflictions, so that they may again get on a self-supporting basis. Our farm program as a whole will be made to serve a vital national purpose.
The family type of farm has long constituted one of the cherished foundations of our social strength. It represents human values that we must not lose. Widespread ownership of moderate-sized tracts of land was the aim of the Republican Homestead Act. This conception of agriculture is one phase of the general principle that we stand for—preserving freedom of opportunity in all walks of life. The benefits which will be paid under our program will go no higher than the production level of the family type of farm. Another matter of deep concern is the welfare of American labor. The general well being of our country requires that labor shall have the position and rewards of prosperity to which it is entitled. I firmly believe that labor has the right to protect this position and to achieve those rewards by organizing in labor unions. Surely the history of labor in the United States has demonstrated that working conditions, wages and hours have been improved through self-organization. The right of labor to organize means to me the right of employees to join any type of union they prefer, whether it covers their plant, their craft or their industry. It means that, in the absence of a union contract, an employee has an equal right to join a union or to refuse to join a union. Under all circumstances, so states the Republican platform, employees are to be free from interference from any source, which means, as I read it, entire freedom from coercion or intimidation by the employer, any fellow employee or any other person.
The Government must maintain itself in the position of an umpire: First, to protect the public interest, and second, to act as a mediator between conflicting groups. One of the greatest problems of this country is to develop effective methods of conciliation. Taking a dispute, after it gets into a tangle, and rushing it to the doorstep of the President is a bad way to handle a labor situation or any other situation. In international affairs, also, the Republican Party has always worked for the advancement of justice and peace. Following the early tradition of our country, it has consistently urged the adjustment of international disputes in accordance with law, equity, and justice. We have now again declared our continual loyalty to this principle. Republican presidents sent delegates to the Hague conferences and one of them took the leading part in the termination of the Russo-Japanese war. Another Republican President called a conference which, for the first time, produced a reduction and limitation of arms on a wide scale. Still another led in securing the treaty outlawing wars. In purpose and achievement, our party has a record which points the way to further helpful service in creating international understanding, in removing the causes of war, and in reducing and limiting arms. We shall take every opportunity to promote among the nations a peace based upon justice and human rights. We shall join in no plan that would take from us that independence of judgment which has made the United States a power for good in the world. We shall join in no plan that might involve us in a war in the beginning of which we had no part, or that would build a false peace on the foundation of armed camps. I turn now to the basic principles upon which our Nation is founded. America has always stood, and now stands, first of all for human rights, for “the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness” of the great Declaration. The prime needs of men have not changed since that Declaration, though new means from time to time may be necessary to meet those needs. But the great safeguards against tyranny and oppression must not be cast away and lost. They must be saved that men may live free to pursue their happiness, safe from any kind of exploitation. One cannot face this occasion and the prospect flowing from it without a sobering reflection upon the beginnings, growth, and destiny of our nation. Our Government was founded to give life to certain vital principles. The people embodied these basic principles of human rights in the Federal and State Constitutions. Thus, the people themselves, of their own free will, set up this Government. And it is still the Government of the people. Any change which the people want they can have by following the procedure they themselves laid down. But for any official or branch of Government to attempt such a change, without authority from the people, is to do an unwarranted and illegal act. It is a substitution of personal for Constitutional Government. If added power is needed, the people have set out how that authority may be had from them if they wish to give it.
This, in its broad essentials, is the basic structure of our Government. As our economic life has become more complex and specialized some need, real or apparent, has often been urged as an excuse for a further grant of power from the people. They have sometimes given, sometimes withheld, the desired power. There has now appeared in high places, however, a new and dangerous impulse. This is the impulse to take away and lodge in the Chief Executive, without the people’s consent, the powers which they have kept in their state Governments or which they have reserved in themselves. In its ultimate effect upon the welfare of the whole people, this, then, is the most important question now before us: Shall we continue to delegate more and more power to the Chief Executive or do we desire to preserve the American form of government? Shall we continue to recognize that certain rights reside with the people, that certain powers are reserved for the States, and that certain functions are delegated to the Federal Government? Now I know that many of us, at one time or another, have become dissatisfied and impatient with the efforts of our local and State administrations to solve our difficulties. At such times it has seemed to us that only a larger, more powerful unit of Government could meet the need. For those who have followed such a line of reasoning I have the understanding that comes from experience. As a young man I was attracted to the idea of centralizing in the Federal Government full power to correct the abuses growing out of a more complex social order. When the people rejected this alternative, I was as disappointed as anyone. But in spite of this rejection, I have lived to see many of those abuses substantially corrected by the forty-eight state legislatures in their fields and by the Federal Government in its field of interstate commerce. More recently, as a small independent oil producer, I saw my industry ask for Federal regulation because of a selfish exploitation of a natural resource, which, once wasted, cannot be replaced. When Federal regulation failed, the industry made progress in the solution of the problem, by turning to State action, supplemented with interstate compacts as provided by the amazing foresight of the makers of the Constitution. It is not my belief that the Constitution is above change. The people have the right, by the means they have prescribed, to change their form of Government to fit their wishes. If they could not do this, they would not be free. But change must come by and through the people and not by usurpation. Changes should come openly, after full and free discussion, and after full opportunity for the people to express their will. The Republican Party, however, does not believe that the people wish to abandon the American form of Government. We propose to maintain the constitutional balance of power between the States and the Federal Government.
We propose to use the full power of the Federal Government to break up private monopolies and to eliminate private monopolistic practices. In other words, the Republican Party proposes to restore and to maintain a free competitive system—a system under which, and only under which, can there be independence, equality of opportunity, and work for all. A free competitive system is necessary to a free government. Neither political nor civil liberty long survives the loss of economic liberty. Each and all of these liberties, with the precious human rights which they involve, must be preserved intact and inviolate. If I am elected Chief Executive of this nation I propose to restore our Government to an efficient as well as Constitutional basis. I shall call to my aid those men best qualified to conduct the public business—and I mean just that. I shall stand back of them. I shall hold them responsible for doing their jobs. I shall cooperate wholeheartedly with Congress in an effective reorganization of the numerous Government agencies, to get rid of those that are not necessary, to eliminate duplication, to insure better administration, and to save the taxpayers’ money. I hold that it is the right of our people to have their greatest public service enterprise—their government—well administered. These are some of the aims and proposals of a Republican administration that would enter office under a pledge to conduct the public business with honesty, frugality, courage and common sense. In common with all my countrymen, I look forward to the America that is to be. It should be a nation in which the old wrong things are going out and the new right things are coming in. It should be a country which produces more and more until there is plenty for all, with a fair chance for all to earn their share. It should be a land in which equal opportunity shall prevail and special privilege shall have no place. It should be an America that shall bring to bear the whole of her great spiritual force in a common effort to drive the curse of war from the earth; an America that, for the sake of all mankind as well as ourselves, shall never lose the faith that human freedom is a practical ideal.
It is in these aims and in these works that I vision the manifest destiny of America. Everything we need for their realization we can find, I firmly believe, within the principles under which this nation has grown to greatness. God grant us, one and all, the strength and the wisdom to do our part in bringing these. Results of the Presidential Election of 1936 Franklin D. Roosevelt, Democratic Party – 523 electoral votes Alfred M. Landon, Republican Party – 8 electoral votes (Maine and Vermont) William Lemke, Union Party – 0 electoral votes Roosevelt won this election and the next two. In all he served 12 years as president, and died early in his fourth term in 1945.
Amos Owen on the Indian Reorganization Act (1970) Amos Owen (1916-1990) Herbert T. Hoover1: You were going to talk a little bit about the government. I was curious to know when did this group of Indians here incorporated under the Wheeler-Howard Act. Amos Owen: Well, it was 1934 when Wheeler-Howard Act came into effect—otherwise known as the Indian Reorganization Act. And most of the small reservations in Minnesota, they all accepted and adopted the Wheeler-Howard Act. So, Prairie Island, of course, we were one of the first to go under it. It was, we thought, a good way for the American Indian to be self-supporting and be able to get a little more land and be able to farm the land that they have. That’s where the Wheeler-Howard Act bought up, I think, 300 or 380 acres of land out here. And my brother and I, we were one of the ones that went into farming in 1938. We farmed it until all of us left for World War II. And the other two of my brothers they made a career out of the service though. I came home all shot up and I wasn’t able to run the land. So we just leased it back to the tribal government then. So that’s the way it’s been now the last few years. Everything is refered back to tribal council. Any leasing that we do is all handled by the tribal council now, so there really isn’t anyone doing any farming now on their own. Hoover: Did you get many benefits from the Wheeler-Howard Act, do you think? You said they were pretty limited here. 1 This interview of Mdewakanton Sioux tribal chairman Amos Owen was conducted by historian Herbert T. Hoover (no relation to former President Herbert C. Hoover) on June 24, 1970.
Owen: Yes. It didn’t pan out as we thought it was going to be. Of course, I was pretty young at the time, but I remember when we first organized, the Wheeler-Howard Act was I guess originally the way it was written up, it was really good. If the Indians made a little money or they became more prosperous as a community, they could, in turn, buy up more land. That was the way the Wheeler-Howard Act was written up. And before it went through Congress, I guess, it was revised a bit so that buying back land was struck out of some of the papers it was drawn up on. I don’t know how this came about, but it wasn’t in the charter and the constitution and bylaws when the thing came into effect. So we done it; I can’t just go out and say the Bureau of Indian Affairs done it. But they didn’t believe in colonies like ours, a small community like ours buying back land that originally belonged to us anyway. Hoover: Did you get any help a far as small business loans or anything like that? Owen: Well, there were farming loans, we had farming loans. That was the only benefit we got out of the Wheeler-Howard Act. We bought machinery and livestock and things that are beneficial to the community. In fact, they were all personal loans to families. But it had its good points, too. I didn’t think too badly of the Wheeler-Howard Act. I thought it helped some of the families out here to get started in farming.
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.