Reading the American Past: Printed Page 181
DOCUMENT 24–5
Conservatives Criticize the New Deal
New Deal programs and goals outraged many conservative Americans. Herbert Hoover, often blamed for neglecting the suffering of poor Americans during his presidency, bitterly accused the New Deal of violating fundamental American ideals of liberty. Hoover's speech during the presidential campaign of 1936, excerpted here, expressed the deeply held beliefs of many conservatives that the New Deal undermined rather than exemplified the promise of America. The following Letter to Eleanor Roosevelt from Minnie A. Hardin, a taxpayer from Columbus, Indiana, detailed conservatives' objections to the consequences of New Deal programs for struggling taxpayers and for those who received federal help. Both Hoover and Hardin disclosed assumptions about individuals and government common among the New Deal's conservative critics.
Herbert Hoover
Anti–New Deal Campaign Speech, 1936
Through four years of experience this New Deal attack upon free institutions has emerged as the transcendent issue in America.
All the men who are seeking for mastery in the world today are using the same weapons. They sing the same songs. They all promise the joys of Elysium without effort.
But their philosophy is founded on the coercion and compulsory organization of men. True liberal government is founded on the emancipation of men. This is the issue upon which men are imprisoned and dying in Europe right now. ...
Freedom does not die from frontal attack. It dies because men in power no longer believe in a system based upon liberty. ...
I gave the warning against this philosophy of government four years ago from a heart heavy with anxiety for the future of our country. It was born from many years' experience of the forces moving in the world which would weaken the vitality of American freedom. It grew in four years of battle as President to uphold the banner of free men.
And that warning was based on sure ground from my knowledge of the ideas that Mr. Roosevelt and his bosom colleagues had covertly embraced despite the Democratic platform.
Those ideas were not new. Most of them had been urged upon me.
During my four years powerful groups thundered at the White House with these same ideas. Some were honest, some promising votes, most of them threatening reprisals, and all of them yelling “reactionary” at us.
I rejected the notion of great trade monopolies and price-fixing through codes. That could only stifle the little business man by regimenting him under the big brother. That idea was born of certain American Big Business and grew up to be the NRA.
I rejected the schemes of “economic planning” to regiment and coerce the farmer. That was born of a Roman despot 1,400 years ago and grew up into the AAA.
I refused national plans to put the government into business in competition with its citizens. That was born of Karl Marx.
I vetoed the idea of recovery through stupendous spending to prime the pump. That was born of a British professor [John Maynard Keynes].
I threw out attempts to centralize relief in Washington for politics and social experimentation. I defeated other plans to invade States' rights, to centralize power in Washington. Those ideas were born of American radicals.
I stopped attempts at currency inflation and repudiation of government obligation. That was robbery of insurance policy holders, savings bank depositors and wage-earners. That was born of the early Brain Trusters.
I rejected all these things because they would not only delay recovery but because I knew that in the end they would shackle free men.
Rejecting these ideas we Republicans had erected agencies of government which did start our country to prosperity without the loss of a single atom of American freedom. ...
Our people did not recognize the gravity of the issue when I stated it four years ago. That is no wonder, for the day Mr. Roosevelt was elected recovery was in progress, the Constitution was untrampled, the integrity of the government and the institutions of freedom were intact.
It was not until after the election that the people began to awake. Then the realization of intended tinkering with the currency drove bank depositors into the panic that greeted Mr. Roosevelt's inauguration.
Recovery was set back for two years, and hysteria was used as the bridge to reach the goal of personal government.
I am proud to have carried the banner of free men to the last hour of the term my countrymen entrusted it to me. It matters nothing in the history of a race what happens to those who in their time have carried the banner of free men. What matters is that the battle shall go on.
The people know now the aims of this New Deal philosophy of government.
We propose instead leadership and authority in government within the moral and economic framework of the American System.
We propose to hold to the Constitutional safeguards of free men.
We propose to relieve men from fear, coercion and spite that are inevitable in personal government.
We propose to demobilize and decentralize all this spending upon which vast personal power is being built.
We propose to amend the tax laws so as not to defeat free men and free enterprise.
We propose to turn the whole direction of this country toward liberty, not away from it.
The New Dealers say that all this that we propose is a worn-out system; that this machine age requires new measures for which we must sacrifice some part of the freedom of men. Men have lost their way with a confused idea that governments should run machines.
Man-made machines cannot be of more worth than men themselves. Free men made these machines. Only free spirits can master them to their proper use.
The relation of our government with all these questions is complicated and difficult. They rise into the very highest ranges of economics, statesmanship and morals.
And do not mistake. Free government is the most difficult of all government. But it is everlastingly true that the plain people will make fewer mistakes than any group of men no matter how powerful. But free government implies vigilant thinking and courageous living and self-reliance in a people.
Let me say to you that any measure which breaks our dikes of freedom will flood the land with misery.
Minnie Hardin
Letter to Eleanor Roosevelt, December 14, 1937
Mrs. Roosevelt:
I suppose from your point of view the work relief, old age pensions, slum clearance and all the rest seems like a perfect remedy for all the ills of this country, but I would like for you to see the results, as the other half see them.
We have always had a shiftless, never-do-well class of people whose one and only aim in life is to live without work. I have been rubbing elbows with this class for nearly sixty years and have tried to help some of the most promising and have seen others try to help them, but it can't be done. We cannot help those who will not try to help themselves and if they do try, a square deal is all they need, and by the way that is all this country needs or ever has needed: a square deal for all and then, let each paddle their own canoe, or sink.
There has never been any necessity for any one who is able to work, being on relief in this locality, but there have been many eating the bread of charity and they have lived better than ever before. I have had taxpayers tell me that their children came from school and asked why they couldn't have nice lunches like the children on relief. The women and children around here have had to work at the fields to help save the crops and several women fainted while at work and at the same time we couldn't go up or down the road without stumbling over some of the reliefers, moping around carrying dirt from one side of the road to the other and back again, or else asleep. I live alone on a farm and have not raised any crops for the last two years as there was no help to be had. I am feeding the stock and have been cutting the wood to keep my home fires burning. There are several reliefers around here now who have been kicked off relief but they refuse to work unless they can get relief hours and wages, but they are so worthless no one can afford to hire them.
As for the clearance of the real slums, it can't be done as long as their inhabitants are allowed to reproduce their kind. I would like for you to see what a family of that class can do to a decent house in a short time. Such a family moved into an almost new, neat, four-room house near here last winter. They even cut down some of the shade trees for fuel, after they had burned everything they could pry loose. There were two big idle boys in the family and they could get all the fuel they wanted, just for the cutting, but the shade trees were closer and it was taking a great amount of fuel, for they had broken out several windows and they had but very little bedding. There were two women there all the time and three part of the time and there was enough good clothing tramped in the mud around the yard to have made all the bedclothes they needed. It was clothing that had been given them and they had worn it until it was too filthy to wear any longer without washing, so they threw it out and begged more. I will not try to describe their filth for you would not believe me. They paid no rent while there and left between two suns owing everyone from whom they could get a nickels worth of anything. They are just a fair sample of the class of people on whom so much of our hard earned tax money is being squandered and on whom so much sympathy is being wasted.
As for the old people on beggars' allowances: the taxpayers have provided homes for all the old people who never liked to work, where they will be neither cold nor hungry: much better homes than most of them have ever tried to provide for themselves. They have lived many years through the most prosperous times of our country and had an opportunity to prepare for old age, but they spent their lives in idleness or worse and now they expect those who have worked like slaves, to provide a living for them and all their worthless descendants. Some of them are asking for from thirty to sixty dollars a month when I have known them to live on a dollar a week rather than go to work. There is many a little child doing without butter on its bread, so that some old sot can have his booze and tobacco: some old sot who spent his working years loafing around pool rooms and saloons, boasting that the world owed him a living.
Even the child welfare has become a racket. The parents of large families are getting divorces, so that the mothers and children can qualify for aid. The children have to join the ranks of the “unemployed” as they grow up, for no child that has been raised on charity in this community has ever amounted to anything.
You people who have plenty of this worlds goods and whose money comes easy, have no idea of the heart-breaking toil and self-denial which is the lot of the working people who are trying to make an honest living, and then to have to shoulder all these unjust burdens seems like the last straw. During the worst of the depression many of the farmers had to deny their families butter, eggs, meat, etc. and sell it to pay their taxes and then had to stand by and see the dead-beats carry it home to their families by the arm load, and they knew their tax money was helping pay for it. One woman saw a man carry out eight pounds of butter at one time. The crookedness, selfishness, greed and graft of the crooked politicians is making one gigantic racket out of the new deal, and it is making this a nation of dead-beats and beggars and if it continues the people who will work will soon be nothing but slaves for the pampered poverty rats and I am afraid these human parasites are going to become a menace to the country unless they are disfranchised. No one should have the right to vote theirself a living at the expense of the taxpayers. They learned their strength at the last election and also learned that they can get just about what they want by “voting right.” They have had a taste of their coveted life of idleness, and at the rate they are increasing, they will soon control the country. The twentieth child arrived in the home of one chronic reliefer near here some time ago.
Is it any wonder the taxpayers are discouraged by all this penalizing of thrift and industry to reward shiftlessness, or that the whole country is on the brink of chaos?
From “This Challenge to Liberty,” speech delivered in Denver, Colorado, October 30, 1936; published in Herbert Hoover, Addresses upon the American Road, 1933–1938 (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1938), pp. 216–27. Eleanor Roosevelt Papers, Series 190, Miscellaneous, 1937, Franklin D. Roosevelt Library.
Questions for Reading and Discussion