FDR the New Deal

¶ … primary sources on the New Deal Programs. It has 6 sources in Chicago format.

Frank D. Roosevelt attempted to turn around the declining economy of the U.S. during the 1930s by introducing the New Deal. This comprised of various programs which aimed at restructuring and rectification of the economy and yet, when the New Deal was launched it failed miserably due to poor administration, and lost objectives. The failure was so dramatic after the words of hype to sell a failing economy that the programs are still criticized with fervor today by critics and economists alike.

Jim F. Couch and William F. Shughart (1999) in their book "The Political Economy of the New Deal" objectively project the political scenario and the administrators Harold Ickes and Harry Hopkins as having the major role for its failure. The basis of the authors' premise is that when the New Deal was introduced, the U.S. GDP had been staggering. The promise of the New Deal programs to meet this goal had been sufficient for the distribution of the funds to the various States. However, Couch and Shughart argue that the New Deal failed because of the leakage of the funds due to corruption within the administration, the discovery of which disillusioned the public. The authors review several economists and experts in the field of econometrics including Lee Alston, Joseph Ferrie, Gavin Wright, Donald Reading and John Wallis etc. And add credibility to their research. These researches include the presidential politics, funds distribution, Congress structure and loan programs. It is evident from their objective approach to the analysis of the New Deal programs that the authors address expert political and economic issues in a professional manner not comprehensible by the ordinary readers.

The selfishness of self-interest groups' is also evident in the work of Deborah C. Malamud (2003). "Who they are - or were" discusses the emergence of the middle class in the American society. According to her, although America boasts of equality and openness, its political entities develop programs that serve the interest of particular groups only. Writing from the people's perspective, clearly Malamud reprimands self-interest groups at the political level who develop, shape and promote middle class so as to serve their purpose. The concept of wage rates, white/blue collar jobs and whiteness of the American society is inherent in the wage and hour legislation, federal welfare relief and the new federal law of unionization developed during the New Deal. Malamud thus attempts to divulge the fact that it is not always clear whether Federal programs are meant for the public or the interest groups who generate them. Her study focuses on the Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA); New York Temporary Emergency Relief Administration (TERA); Civil Works Administration (CWA); and Public Works Administration (PWA) etc. programs which trace the methods with which the funds were allocated. The author's work is sufficiently credible as she effectively provides arguments of her thesis from researched documents of the various institutions named above and dialogues recorded.

Jennifer Long (1999) in her analysis of the three programs of the New Deal, namely the Knoxville program, Nuclear Project, and the Tennessee Valley Authority program, project the thesis that during the Great Depression, the American public became a puppet of the flood of self-interest groups from the private sectors. Although the purpose of the New Deal programs had been to increase employment when they were launched it became clear that each program merely served the particular sector promoted by Congress. Long does not refer to many external sources but rather relies on her primary resources to address her readers: mainly employees and those readers who are currently under the impression that the government programs would benefit them. Her article serves the purpose of providing insight to the working of the government and illustrates how the workers have been subjected to Federal manipulation for the past 6 or more decades.

Jeff Manza's (2000) thesis is that historical evidence of the New Deal indicates that it raised issues of class, race, gender, region, social movements and institutional constraint. Manza differentiates from the other authors in that he also looks at the reforms the New Deal introduced in the context of globalization and America's attempt to combat it with other nations of the world. For example he brings in the Wagner Act and Social Security Act to oversee the linkage between the labor movement and the Communist threat that was prevalent at that time. Evidently Manza took an all encompassing view of the New Deal instead of focusing on particular issue or program. His work is directed towards the general elite readers who have some knowledge of the New Deal and its various programs in particular the reforms that were introduced that changed the American perception of its government.

James T. Young (1993) too, focuses on the development of the New Deal programs even though he chooses to focus on only two programs the Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA) and the Farm Security Administration (FSA). The nature of his article however is not particular to economics or the sociological aspects but rather on the agricultural industry and why these two agencies played a great role in shaping the American agricultural scenario. Instead of extensive research with emphasis on credibility or authenticity, Young present arguments from various authors thereby effectively provide his views on the issue. What makes this a good source for the study of the New Deal program is the fact that it offers pointers to the researcher to establish argument for the other programs introduced by the New Deal. Of course the arguments are limited as they only address the agricultural sector.