President Roosevelt came to power at challenging times: America was struggling from the consequences of the Great Depression, including high unemployment rates and poverty. Although Roosevelt took measures to address the major economic issues with the New Deal, this set of programs was criticized for not doing enough for the most disadvantaged groups of the population (Corbett et al., 2022). In particular, the New Deal failed to address the inequitable income distribution and the unemployment of the poor. Three famous critics of Roosevelt’s programs were Dr. Francis E. Townsend, Huey Long, and Upton Sinclair. All of them made proposals on how the US government should meet the needs of the most vulnerable individuals. Their ideas were attractive to Americans because Townsend advocated for pensions for the retired, Long supported the redistribution of wealth, and Sinclair suggested combating unemployment by establishing a cooperative economy.
Townsend was one of those who believed that Roosevelt did not adequately address the needs of vulnerable groups. His proposal contained an extensive pension plan for the retired elderly. According to this plan, “every citizen of the United States, sixty years of age and over… shall be entitled to receive … a pension in the sum of $200 per month” (Townsend, 1935, p. 678). It was attractive for Americans because it promised relatively high income for retired individuals in the situation where many people earned low wages. Moreover, the qualifications for attaining this pension were achievable for the majority of Americans. To qualify for a pension, individuals should be US citizens aged at least 60 years, “refrain from all gainful competitive pursuits or salaried positions,” and spend the monthly pension “within thirty days of receipt” (Townsend, 1935, p. 679). In addition, their criminal history should be clear from felonies. Finally, pensions were supposed to be funded by “a tax of 2 per centum” on national sales transactions (Townsend, 1935, p. 679). Such low tax rates were attractive because Americans would get generous pensions for a low cost.
Another critic of the New Deal was Long, whose proposal was focused on the redistribution of wealth. Long’s ideas were popular among over four million Americans, and Roosevelt considered him his biggest threat (Corbett et al., 2022). One of the key points of Long’s proposal was to establish the minimum and maximum income that one family could possess. He stated that “no family should earn less than one-third the average, and no family should earn more than 300 times the average” (“Proceedings and debates,” 1935, p. 7050). The suggested income range should be achieved by wealth redistribution: “our Government should call in this surplus wealth … and then distribute it out to those who have the need of the same” (“Proceedings and debates,” 1935, p. 7050). This idea resonated with disadvantaged Americans, many of whom lived in poverty and had no chance to get even slightly closer to the wealth level of the Morgan and Rockefeller families. Long’s proposal was also attractive because it promised to provide pensions to the elderly, payments to veterans, and the right to school and university education to children.
One more political activist who criticized Roosevelt’s policy was Sinclair, who proposed the End Poverty In California (EPIC) plan. Like his colleagues, Sinclair advocated for pensions for the elderly, but he also proposed a progressive income tax (Corbett et al., 2022). These two suggestions were appealing to Americans because they implied an improvement of people’s economic situation. Pensions would improve the financial security of the elderly, while progressive income taxes would reduce the tax burden on the poor and mitigate income inequalities. However, the key idea of the EPIC plan was the establishment of a cooperative economic system. Under this system, the “unemployed shall be put at productive labor, producing everything which they themselves consume and exchanging these goods among themselves by a method of barter” (Sinclair, 1934, p. 38). Americans were attracted to this proposal because it promised to create jobs for the unemployed and help them produce and obtain all living essentials. The EPIC project was also expected to redistribute some of the wealth because corporations would have to pay taxes in goods and services to provide raw materials for the cooperative system.
Although the proposals were not accepted in full and were considered by some as unrealizable, Roosevelt and Congress seemed to pay heed to the ideas expressed in them. For example, the Social Security Act was passed in 1936 to grant pensions to the elderly and provide financial assistance to the unemployed and disabled (Corbett et al., 2022). Townsend’s plan, which was entirely focused on pensions, might have contributed to the adoption of this law. The redistribution of wealth advocated by Long can partly be seen in the Banking Act of 1935, which changed the system of banking control and oversight to reduce the influence of several particular banks (Corbett et al., 2022). Although Sinclair’s cooperative system was not realized, the Roosevelt administration paid attention to unemployment and created the Works Progress Administration, which provided jobs for many Americans (Corbett et al., 2022). Hence, since Townsend’s, Long’s, and Sinclair’s proposals became popular among Americans and offered solutions to pressing economic issues, they might have helped the Roosevelt administration to shape the Second New Deal.
In conclusion, all three reviewed proposals were attractive to Americans because they promised to improve their financial security and living standards. Townsend’s pension plan appealed to Americans because it proposed high pensions, for which most Americans would qualify. Long’s proposal was attractive because it advocated the redistribution of wealth and the establishment of minimum income, meaning that the living standards of the poor would increase. Sinclair’s EPIC project was appealing because it promised to provide jobs and living necessities to the unemployed.
References
Corbett, P. S., Janssen, V., Lund, J. M., Pfannestiel, T., Waskiewicz, S., & Vickery, P. (2022). U.S. history. OpenStax.
Proceedings and debates of the first session of the seventy-fourth congress of the United States of America (1935). Congressional Record, 79(7), 7049-7050.
Sinclair, U. (1934). Reforms urged by two outstanding political figures. The Literary Digest, 8-38.
Townsend, F. E. (1935). Statement of Dr. F. E. Townsend, Long Beach, Calif. In U.S. Congress, House Committee on Ways and Means, Economic Security Act: Hearings on H.R. 4120, 74th Cong., 1st sess. (pp. 677-679). Government Printing Office.