The New Deal: VII
click here for printable version
Meanwhile, the New Deal continued to evolve as administrators learned of unexpected problems with programs or thought of new and possibly more efficient ways to achieve their goals. Generally speaking, the programs of the Second New Deal reflected greater reliance on centralized bureaucracy. Many programs of the First New Deal had operated through the states. This method derived from two realities: first, the need to get programs up and running as fast as possible, which meant using existing state programs to funnel federal money to the needy; second, the political need to bind state politicians to the New Deal by giving them a say in how states distributed federal funds. However, this method had its drawbacks. In some cases, federal money went to reward political friends of state "machines," leaving others out of the New Deal. This "federal" system also created unnecessary duplication and inefficiency in implementing necessary programs. (The PWA was a classic example. It took over a year to draw up bids at the local level and submit them up the ladder to Harold Ickes of the PWA. Then, if Ickes or his subordinates found reason to object, the bid went back to the local level and the process started all over again. )
"Cry From the Cotton": Agricluture and the Evolution of the New Deal
One place where New Dealers discovered unforseen consequences to their program occured with the First AAA. With the retirement of hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland--especially in areas of the South where cotton was "king"--many of the poorest farmers--tenants and sharecroppers--found themselves homeless and unemployed, with few skills needed to get scarce urban jobs. Some administrators within the AAA felt that the federal government, as the source of the problem, should do something to bring relief to these displaced farmers.
Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenancy Act
To further enable sharecroppers and tenants to remain on the land, in 1938 Congress passed the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenancy Act. The act provided low-interest loans for tenants to purchase family farms. In coordination with FSA, this act sustained the vision of sustaining “family farmers” on the land. However, these small farmers found it difficult to compete with the larger “agri-business” ventures born out of AAA.
The relief efforts of RA and FSA proved ineffective at stopping the trend towards greater urbanization throughout the country. In fact, many federal programs—such as the AAA and REA—actually worked to doom the ideal of a small, self-sufficient farmer promoted by RA and FSA. With the government subsidies from crop reduction and the cheap power, farmers mechanized and increased the size of their operations, rendering the efforts of small farmers ineffective. Moreover, the government contribution toward communal efforts through FSA experimental farms alienated the largest farmers, who felt these efforts smacked of socialism and communism.
[New Deal: VI] [New Deal: VIII] [New Deal: Main]