What were some of the progressive reforms proposed in the early 20th century?

As you know, we have so far focused upon the western portions of the United States and on coming to an understanding that history is written not simply as fact, but as the product of human biases and creative thinking. Now we are going to switch our focus away from the West and in particular to the eastern and middle portions of the country in a time when perhaps the largest reform and most important reform movement in American history took place. This reform movement is commonly known as the progressive movement.

What Was It?

By the start of the twentieth century it had become apparent to many Americans�particularly Americans in the middle and upper classes�that the nation had undergone a rapid transformation from a largely rural, agricultural society to an increasingly urban, industrial society. With this change came many problems (these changes and the problems they created are discussed in chapter 20 of your textbook). To those who believed the changes had produced problems, the fundamental reality was that American institutions were created to work well in a rural, agricultural society, butAmericahad changed and its institutions remained the same. I use the term �institutions� here very broadly, to mean such things as the legal system (from the Constitution down to local governments), health care establishments, work places, charitable societies, and schools, to name a few. At its core, the progressive movement was an attempt to modernize American institutions so that they worked better in an urban, industrial society.

Who were Progressives?

Those who wanted to bring about reform��progressives� or �reformers��were very optimistic about their chances and were the dominant influence in American culture during the first two decades of the twentieth century. These middle and upper class Americans included both men and women. In fact, women were quite influential in shaping progressive policy, a fact which helped bring about Women�s Suffrage in 1920, at the end of the era.

In terms of their philosophical outlook, most progressives were pragmatists. When they went about looking for ways to fix or reform their society, they looked for solutions that were practical and easy. This in turn led progressive reformers to oversimplify the problems they encountered. Today, we would think of many progressive reforms as na�ve.

As well, Progressives tended to be deeply influenced by science. In fact, I think its fair to say that progressives had a very na�ve trust in science. In retrospect, it�s easy to understand why. The early twentieth century was a time of remarkable progress in many areas of science. Electric lights, telephones, phonographs, automobiles, and even airplanes made their debut either shortly before or during the era. Medical advances such as x-rays, and bone grafting greatly improved the ability of medical science to diagnose and treat illness and injury. Understandably, this brought with it great optimism about the future and great confidence in the ability of science to bring about a better future. Progressive went so far as to apply science to social problems such as poverty, insanity, and political corruption, creating new fields of study that we know today as the social sciences (including sociology, psychology, political science).

Finally, Progressives also tended to be influenced more by behaviorism than social Darwinism. These two, somewhat opposed ways of thinking about human relations were both influential in the early twentieth century. Social Darwinists viewed society as a competition in which the most �fit� humans thrived and became wealthy. The less fortunate people in society tended to die off, thereby creating a human species in which the �fittest� survived and multiplied, thereby strengthening society as a whole. Clearly, social Darwinists had little sympathy for the poor.

Like social Darwinists, behaviorists believed they understood what made some people successful and wealthy, while other people struggled in poverty. While Darwinists believed the answer could be found in one�s genetic makeup (the wealthy were born fit), behaviorists believed that both success and failure was the product of environment. Individuals raised with the privileges of the wealthy, educated in the finest schools, and connected to powerful people naturally thrived�not because of nature, but because of nurture.

Discussion Questions: Nature versus Nurture in the Progressive Era

Like many of the discussion questions upon which you will occasionally write essays, this one requires a small amount of research. On your course syllabus, see the section titled �Researching your answers�.

1.     Discuss some of the strengths and weaknesses of Behaviorism. Who were some of the leading figures in bringing about Behaviorism? Why does it make logical sense that progressive reformers would be behaviorists rather than social Darwinists?

2.     Briefly discuss the origins of social Darwinism and the Eugenics movement. When you research the Eugenics movement, find at least one specific instance in which eugenicists might have crossed an ethical boundary.

The problems that these middle class reformers tackled were most often problems that affected the poor rather than the middle class. In fact, during the early twentieth century the life of the middle class was quite separate from that of the poor. Therefore, it would have been quite easy for the middle class to simply ignore these problems and go on with their lives. In fact, that is more or less what had happened for the previous half-century or so. Obviously, however, this changed with the emergence of Progressive reform. So the question becomes, what motivated this reform movement.

Probably the most important motivations came from muckraking journalists and the emergence of an approach to Christian faith known as the �social gospel.�

Muckrakers

Muckrakers were journalists who focused on exposing the ills of society. Jacob Riis, Sinclair Lewis, and dozens of others gained a degree of notoriety for their sometimes-shocking exposes. In The Jungle (1906), a semi-factual account centering on Chicago, Lewis revealed some rather disgusting aspects of the meatpacking industry. In one passage he wrote:

�There was never the least attention paid to what was cut up for sausage; there would come all the way back from Europe old sausage that had been rejected, and that was mouldy and white�it would be dosed with borax and glycerine, and dumped into the hoppers and made over again for home consumption . . . It was too dark in these storage places to see well, but a man could run his hand over these piles of meat and sweep off handfuls of the dried dung of rats. These rats were nuisances, and the packers would put poisoned bread out for them, they would die, and then rats, bread, and meat would go into the hoppers together.�

Appetizing, eh? Among others, this book (actually, it was first released as a series of articles in a magazine) was read by President Theodore Roosevelt. Quite understandably,Roosevelt, along with many other Americans, found it disturbing. However,Roosevelthad a sharp critical mind and recognized that much of the book was fictionalized. He therefore sent federal investigators toChicagoto have a look. Their report was far from reassuring. They wrote:

�We saw meat shoveled from filthy wooden floors, piled on tables rarely washed, pushed from room to room in rotten box carts, in all of which processes it was in the way of gathering dirt, splinters, floor filth, and the expectoration of tuberculous and other diseased workers.�

Anyone pining for the good ole� days should read this and be thankful for the times we live in!Rooseveltquickly pushed Congress to pass the Meat Inspection Act and shortly thereafter the Pure Food and Drug Act, both in 1906. Congress explained the purpose of the latter act this way:

�For preventing the manufacture, sale, or transportation of adulterated or misbranded or poisonous or deleterious foods, drugs, medicines, and liquors, and for regulating traffic therein, and for other purposes.�

It�s important to understand that while these laws provided an important first step in cleaning up such industries, they were poorly enforced and had only a marginal impact on cleaning up the food and drug industries. Additional acts which provided for better enforcement and regulation would eventually help improve the situation further. In fact, most Progressive reforms were only marginally affective and some did not help at all.

The Social Gospel

The Social Gospel was a second important influence on progressive reform. It was not a religion but rather a way of approaching traditional Christian practice. It was largely a product of increasing skepticism amongst many scientifically minded Americans in the progressive era. The teachings ofDarwinand the overwhelming influence of science led many in the middle class to question the veracity of traditional Christian teachings. In particular, they questioned the inerrancy of the Bible (the belief that the Bible is to be taken literally and that all of the events described happened as they are stated) and the usefulness of focusing upon faith at the expense of action. Those who adopted the social gospel believed that Christianity provided a terrific framework for everyday life, but that traditional Christianity had focused too much on worship and blind faith and not enough on helping one�s neighbor. In short, social gospelers wanted to emulate the social behavior of Jesus by focusing more on helping their fellow man. If you think about it I imagine you can see how such a belief would inspire social reform.

If I were to describe all of the problems progressives attempted to reform in this time period we would not get much beyond this topic before summer. So, I�ll limit it to a few problems that I think capture the range of progressive reform.

Problem 1: Resource Depletion

By the early twentieth century it had become clear to many Americans that the nation was using its natural resources faster than those resources could be replenished. In particular, forests were being cut down at an alarming rate. Starting in 1892 the Sierra Club began providing information that reported the destruction of many ofAmerica�s most scenic areas. As a farming nation,Americahad little fear of using up its natural resources. At the time of theLouisiana Purchasein 1803 President Thomas Jefferson declared the nation had enough land resources for a thousand

However, as cities grew and immigrants were attracted in ever-greater numbers to take on jobs offered by industry, the use of natural resources grew exponentially.Americanot only used its resources domestically (within theUS) but exported both raw natural resources (timber and oil) and manufactured products that were built of natural resources. This meant extra pressure upon natural resources and eventually the recognition by reformers that institutional changes were needed.

Solution: Conservation and Preservation

Conservationists believed in maintaining a balance between the need to ensure that natural resources such as timber would be available in the future and the desire to benefit from the use of such resources in the present.� In other words, the believed in conserving resources for the benefit of society.

In the end, both approaches had some successes, particularly during the Presidency of Theodore Roosevelt.Rooseveltwas the consummate Progressive. Like other progressives, he was pragmatic. However, he was also an avid outdoorsman and a lover of nature.

Discussion Questions: Conservation and Preservation in the Progressive Era

Like many of the discussion questions upon which you will occasionally write essays, this one requires a small amount of research. On your course syllabus, see the section titled �Researching your answers� before proceeding.

1.     Do a bit of research into the life of Theodore Roosevelt, focusing your search terms on such things as �preservation� and �national parks.� In what ways didRooseveltchampion conservation? In what ways did he advocate preservation?

Problem 2: Child Labor

Across theUnited Stateschildren could be found working in a variety of occupations. To Progressives and to us today this seems problematic. We tend to agree that children belong in schools or at play�not in the work place. Earlier Americans,

Once again, however, the switch from a rural and agricultural society to an urban and industrial one turned an accepted cultural norm (children working) into a social problem needing reform. Children in cities tended to work in locations that were thought by most to be detrimental to the health and moral well being of the child. Among other things, they worked on dirty, crime ridden public streets as newsboys, in polluted textile factories as mill girls, and in suffocating coal mines as breaker boys. Obviously, each of these jobs posed the risk of serious physical harm. Many reformers also pointed out that this type of work was morally unhealthy as children were exposed to the adult work world with its ruthless pursuit of wealth and harsh daily grind.

Solution: Child Labor Laws

For a long while solutions were slow in coming. In part, the problem stemmed from the power of big business and the nature of labor laws in theUnited States. Many businesses found child labor quite valuable. Children were paid a fraction of that paid to adults. As well, children presented fewer problems for employers, particularly in terms of labor organization (unions and such). Most corporations operated exclusively within one state. According to early twentieth century

Two factors were particularly important in bringing about a degree of change. One of these was the creation of the National Child Labor Commission in 1904. The federal government created the NCLC to pressure state governments into passing child labor laws. They did so in a variety of ways, including the publication of photographs and articles that exposed the reality of child labor to middle class reformers. Lewis Hine took many of these photos, including those you see on this page. In a sense, NCLC investigators acted as muckrakers exposing the problems of child labor.

Problem 3: Political Corruption

A third problem that progressives addressed was that of political corruption. As the country became increasingly industrial and large amounts of wealth were produced, the incentive to control politicians increased. In particular, large monopolies and trusts that dominated a single industry (such as railroads, steel, or banking) sought to control politicians in order to maintain their control over a given industry. The political process was further corrupted through emergence of political machines. Machines were political organizations that generally controlled one party or another in a given city or state. To cite one prominent example, inNew Yorkthe infamous Tammany Hall (a political machine) controlled the Democratic party. In particular Boss Tweed�the head of Tammany Hall�hand picked politicians to run for office inNew York City. He gained votes for these politicians by providing poor, mostly immigrant communities with a variety of favors such as jobs, street lighting, Thanksgiving turkeys and many others. Poor immigrants found themselves suffering tremendously inAmerica, and therefore were quite grateful to Tammany Hall and regularly voted in large numbers for Tammany candidates. The money to pay for such favors came from political donors�mostly, business owners who profited from having influence over politicians. In turn,Tweedexpected the politicians he helped get elected to provide opportunities for the businesses that provided him money. For example,Tweedand his supporters were paid as much $7,500 for providing a single thermometer to the city and as much as $41,900 for a broom! ANew York Citycourthouse built during Tweed�s reign cost more than twice as much as theUnited Statespaid forAlaskaat about the same time!

Solution: Increasing Democracy

Nowhere was political corruption greater than inCalifornia. By the turn of the twentieth century it was accepted by most Californians that the Southern Pacific Railroad controlled politics inCalifornia. After an investigation aided by the federal government provided evidence of some of this corruption, the idea of directing Progressive reforms atCaliforniapolitics took hold.

Political reformers inCaliforniahelped pioneer attempts to reform politics by increasing democracy�what is also known as participatory democracy. The simple idea behind this reform effort was that the best way to fight corruption was to give more power to your average voter. Reformers did this by amending the state constitution to allow, among other things, for the Direct Primary, the Initiative, the Recall, and the Referendum.

Direct Primary

Prior to the passage of an amendment allowing for the direct primary in 1908 voters often had little or no choice in who the candidates would be for any given office. Before the direct primary the average voter did not get to chose who the candidates for office would be. Thus, they were often left with two, equally crooked candidates. The idea of the direct primary was that voters would get to chose who the candidates for each party would be in an election known as a primary. After the primary election determined the candidates, voters would once again vote to decide who gained the office. By giving voters this extra power participation in democracy (in theory at least) was increased.�

Initiative, Referendum, & Recall

Once instituted, the direct primary helped gain election for the Republican Progressive reform candidate Hiram Johnson. At Johnson�s urging, the state legislature soon passed the initiative, referendum, and recall in 1911. The initiative was intended to give voters power by allowing them to propose and pass laws. Many reformers felt that politicians would not pass needed laws due to the influence of big business. The initiative was seen as a way to bypass the normal process of lawmaking that inCaliforniawas done through the legislature�the state Assembly and the state Senate. The process begins when voters create a �proposition.� If you have ever paid the slightest bit of attention toCaliforniapolitics you have heard of these propositions. In order for a proposition to become a law voters must pass it by a simple majority (51%) in a general election. However, before it goes to an election petition in support of the law must be signed by a number of registered voters equal to 8% of those who voted in the previous election. In today�sCaliforniathis means hundreds of thousands of signatures must be attained. Once the signatures are gathered they are certified by a state elections officer and then the proposition goes on the ballot and voters decide its fate.

The referendum is a similar law that provides voters with the opportunity to eliminate laws the legislature has created. Once again, a petition must be signed for a referendum to end up on the ballot, though the number of signatures needed is somewhat lower (5% of the previous election voter total).� As any of you who aware of how the �Governator� got into office are know, the recall allows for the removal of elected state officials from office. Once again, signatures must be gathered before the matter comes to a vote of the general population. If enough signatures are gathered, then a simple majority (51%) of voters can remove the governor from office. Quite obviously, the intention of these two laws was to allow for the removal of corrupt laws or corrupt officials from office.

Discussion Question: The Limits of Progressive Reform

Depending upon your knowledge ofCaliforniapolitics, the following question may or may not require research. If you do research it, be sure to consult the syllabus first.

1.     Choose either the initiative or the recall and discuss the problems with it. In what ways is this law limited in its effectiveness? How can it be abused or corrupted? How much of this failure had to do with its original design? Provide at least one example of a recent law (you�ll need to do some research here) to demonstrate the failings of the law. Provide specific information for your example (such as dates, voting patterns, names and affiliations of supporters and opponents, and money spent).

2.     Take a look at the primary source documents listed below relating to the invention of the Craftsman home. Based upon these sources (and any additional research� you would like to conduct), in what ways was the Craftsman home a uniquely Progressive reform? What conclusions can you draw about the values Progressives held most dear? Be sure to cite the specific sources you are referring to in building your argument (including any additional sources).

Primary Sources for Question 2:

Images of Craftsman Furniture

������������������� Antique Dealer

������������������������ Craftsman Chairs

������������������ Images of Craftsman Homes

������������������� Exterior Views of Craftsman Homes

������������������� Craftsman Floorplans

������������� Images of Victorian Homes

������������������� Powerpoint Views of Victorian Homes

Gustav Stickley

������ Catalogue Article

������ Stickley Philosophy

For Help Understanding and Using Primary Sources, You May Wish to Consult This Site: �Making Sense of History�

What were 3 reforms of the Progressive Era?

What are 5 progressive reforms?

What were some of the reform ideas at the turn of the 20th century?

What was the progressive movement in the early 20th century?