Introduction
The Rural Electrification Act (REA) was one of the most significant policies of the New Deal proposed by Franklin D. Roosevelt. The president implemented the REA to increase the coverage of electrical distribution systems in the country, primarily focusing on the rural areas. The three passages, Extract A, Source J, and Source L, illustrate the process of the REA implementation from slightly different perspectives. Extract A states that Roosevelt’s electrification was a great national success that changed America. From the historical perspective, I agree with this statement; however, it is necessary to acknowledge that it took considerable time for the REA to be effective. Source L transparently demonstrates that power companies and some residents were protesting against the REA, primarily due to economic losses of the said companies. On the other hand, Source J reveals that access to electricity has a large number of advantages and significantly increases personal convenience. Ultimately, I agree with the statement concerning the REA’s success from Extract A and will explain my position in this essay.
Arguments for the REA’s Success
Extract A and Source J provide definitive arguments for the overall national success of the REA. The former is an objective statement that presents an overview of the act and the situation in America in the 1930s. At the time, most rural areas had no access to electricity, even though it could be highly beneficial for farms and agriculture. In Extract A, the author mentions, “some 90 per cent of American farms had no electricity, a luxury enjoyed by city folk” (p. 87). As a result, the agricultural industry was growing slowly, and national electrification was necessary to improve the situation. In Extract A, the author also mentions, “probably no other single measure of the New Deal was as responsible for transforming life in the American South” (p. 87). Naturally, the implementation of the act took considerable time and extensive funding; however, the results of the REA significantly exceeded the costs. Consequently, Source J provides a more subjective and personal perspective on the advantages of the REA. A member of a Rural Electrical Co-operative depicts the improved convenience of daily life after gaining access to electricity. They state, “now with the vacuum cleaner, I can even dust the furniture <…>, and I stay in a good humor” (p. 86). This passage transparently demonstrates the member’s satisfaction with the benefits of electricity, implying the significant advantages of the REA. Ultimately, Extract A and Source J provide both objective and subjective statements to support the interpretation that the REA was a great success for America.
Arguments against the REA’s Success
Consequently, Source L presents arguments against the interpretation concerning the REA’s success. According to the source, the primary disadvantages of the act were the economic burden on the power companies, resistance from residents, and inconvenience caused by the cooperative operation groups. The following passage explains the former reason: “power company lines were suddenly extended into territory never before serviced and where there were no contracted customers” (p. 87). In other words, the companies had no experience in providing electricity to such distant areas, which, in turn, caused additional economic damage. Moreover, they had to establish “irregular lengths of wire” associated with the further inconvenience for power companies (p. 87). One of the statements in Extract A also underlines an REA’s disadvantage. Namely, the implementation of the act significantly changed the conventional farming traditions and customs, disturbing the daily lives of farmers. The passage is as follows, “this potent form of energy was carried into the countryside, consigning to the past many of the wearisome and centuries-old routines of rural life” (p. 87). In other words, many American farmers were used to their traditional agricultural methods, and changing them was troublesome. Even though the farming productivity could have been improved significantly by gaining access to electricity, people were hesitant about the new technologies. As a result, Source L provides an objective overview of the REA disadvantages, while the passage from Extract A underlines the reluctance of farmers to accept innovative technologies.
Conclusion
After conducting a thorough analysis of Extract A, Source J, and Source L, I believe that the interpretation concerning the REA’s great success is correct. Extract A and Source J provide both objective and subjective data to support this claim while demonstrating the increased effectiveness of American farms due to access to electricity. They also emphasize the improvement of convenience in daily tasks, such as cleaning and other routines. Source J is a subjective statement by a member of a Rural Electrical Co-operative and, therefore, could be perceived as a part of a marketing campaign. Nevertheless, analyzing the source from the historical perspective, it is evident that electricity is indeed helpful in the daily routine of American farms. Consequently, Source L revealed several of the REA’s disadvantages, such as the increased financial burden on power companies and people’s reluctance to accept new technologies. However, in my opinion, the advantages of the REA significantly exceed its disadvantages, implying that the interpretation of Extract A is correct.