Civics Era 10 – The Great Depression and the New Deal (1929-1945)

www.njcss.org

The relationship between the individual and the state is present in every country, society, and civilization. Relevant questions about individual liberty, civic engagement, government authority, equality and justice, and protection are important for every demographic group in the population.  In your teaching of World History, consider the examples and questions provided below that should be familiar to students in the history of the United States with application to the experiences of others around the world.

These civic activities are designed to present civics in a global context as civic education happens in every country.  The design is flexible regarding using one of the activities, allowing students to explore multiple activities in groups, and as a lesson for a substitute teacher. The lessons are free, although a donation to the New Jersey Council for the Social Studies is greatly appreciated. www.njcss.org

The beginning of the 20th century marks the foundation of the transformation of the United States into a world power by the middle of the century. In this era economic prosperity and depression, the ability of our government to provide for the needs of people experiencing economic hardship, and the rise of dictators attacking innocent civilians and threatening the existence of democratic governments leading to a second world war dominate the narrative of this historical period. The development of the new technologies of electricity, transportation, and communication challenged our long-held traditional policies of limited government, neutrality, and laissez-faire capitalism.

In the 1930s, Father Charles Coughlin, a Roman Catholic priest, had a weekly radio program with millions of listeners in the United States. In 1926 he broadcast weekly sermons but as the economy shifted into a recession and depression, his broadcast became more political and economic. They also reflected anti-Semitism with verbal attacks on prominent Jewish citizens. His broadcast following Kristallnacht on November 10, 1938 was particularly divisive. The owner of WMCA, a New York station, refused to broadcast Father Coughlin’s messages

The owner of WMCA, the New York station that carried his program, refused to broadcast Coughlin’s next radio message. The Nazi press reacted to the news with fury: “America is Not Allowed to Hear the Truth” declared one headline. “Jewish organizations camouflaged as American…have conducted such a campaign…that the radio station company has proceeded to muzzle the well-loved Father Coughlin.” A “New York Times” correspondent in Germany noted that Coughlin had become for the moment “the hero of Nazi Germany.” 

In the United States the Federal Communications Act of 1934 and subsequent additions regarding television and quiz shows mostly protects licenses, ensures equal access to all geographic areas, and provides for a rapid communications system regarding emergencies and national defense. It protects First Amendment rights regarding content, with some restrictions regarding profanity or inappropriate sexual content or images. The absence of specific content regulations allowed Orson Welles in 1938 to produce “War of the Worlds” over the radio leading to a panic by many citizens regarding their fear of an alien invasion.  The Fairness Doctrine of 1949 requires broadcasters to allow responses to personal attacks and controversial opinions. In 1969, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission challenged the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine allowing the popularity of political radio and television talk and news programs.

Federal Communications Act of 1934

Broadcast Media Policy in the United Kingdom

The use of public media in the United Kingdom has specific statues to balance the perspectives of opinions and to prevent or limit the public broadcast media as a platform to present the views of the government, propaganda, or to advocate for a particular point of view on a controversial issue. The diversity of opinion in the United Kingdom for the BBC must respect opinions reflecting urban and rural populations, age, income, geography, culture, and political affiliations. There are also reasonable guidelines regarding the editor’s judgment to exclude a particular perspective. Facts and opinions must be defined and clearly stated.   Section 4 Impartiality: 4.3.14     BBC Editorial Policy

In the United States, deposits in most banks are protected up to $250,000 for each investor. This protection restored confidence in American banks during the Great Depression and is an important reason for a sound financial system in the United States. Investments in stocks and bonds fluctuate with market conditions.  Every bank in the United States also has deposits that are not insured. Investments in stocks, mutual funds, and corporate bonds are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

The Federal Reserve Bank establishes a reserve requirement, currently 10%, for banks to maintain to ensure adequate funds for withdrawals. The Federal Reserve Bank also monitors the member banks in the Federal Reserve System. Banks are assessed on all of their deposits quarterly and a formula is used to calculate their insurance payment. The FDIC is self-insured, although backed by Congress in the event of a catastrophic collapse of the banking system.

In Japan, the Deposit Insurance Act was enacted in 1971. The DIA fully insures deposits that do not earn interest.  In the United States amounts in checking, savings, money market accounts, and Certificates of Deposit are insured. Deposits that earn interest in Japan are insured up to 10 million yen, or about $70,000.

The most recent crisis in Japan is the exposure of the Aozora Bank to bad loans and investments in the United States. In 2024, it posted a net loss of 28 billion Japanese yen or about $191 million in U.S. dollars. A major earthquake in Japan, effects from extreme weather, or a military conflict would likely present major risks to Japan’s banks.

Examples of countries without any defined deposit insurance are China, Egypt, Israel, Pakistan, and South Africa. Perhaps one-third of the countries in the world do not protect deposits in their banks.

Failed Banks in the U.S. by Year (Forbes)

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Video: FDIC (13 minutes)

Japan’s Banking Crisis in the 1990s (Video)

Huey P. Long is a challenging person for historians and educators. His ‘Share the Wealth’ program, use of the media, authoritarian actions, and criticisms of voter manipulation provide for diverse perspectives. However, he improved healthcare in Louisiana by expanding the Charity Hospital System, creating the Louisiana State University Medical School, reforming institutions to care for the disabled and mentally challenged, and providing free health clinics and immunizations. As a result, many lives were saved.

As governor, Long tripled funding for public healthcare. The state’s free health clinics grew from 10 in 1926 to 31 in 1933, providing free immunizations to 67 percent of the rural population. By building bridges and paving new roads, he made it possible for the rural poor to have access to medical and dental health care and hospitals. In the long historical timeline toward universal health care insurance in the United States, Huey P. Long is a pioneer.

Before Huey Long’s reforms, patients at the Central Hospital for the Insane were locked in chairs during their ‘recreation’ time.  from Every Man a King by Huey Long; reproduced by permission.

Long by-passed the negative press by distributing his own newspaper, “The American Progress,” and he spoke directly to a national audience through radio speeches and speaking engagements. In a national radio broadcast on February 23, 1934, Huey Long unveiled his “Share Our Wealth” plan a program designed to provide a decent standard of living to all Americans by spreading the nation’s wealth among the people. Long proposed capping personal fortunes at $50 million each (roughly $600 million in today’s dollars) through a restructured, progressive federal tax code and sharing the resulting revenue with the public through government benefits and public works. In addition, he advocated for a 30 hour work week, four weeks of paid vacation for every worker, free college or vocational educational and limiting annual incomes to $1 million or about $60 million in today’s dollars. He also advocated for pensions and health care provided by businesses and the government.

Long believed that it was morally wrong for the government to allow millions of Americans to suffer in poverty when there existed a surplus of food, clothing, and shelter. By 1934, nearly half of all American families lived in poverty, earning less than $1,250 annually.  He supported a health care system for all people using government funds.  Long’s authoritarian use of power helped him achieve his goals until his assassination in 1935.

There are four basic health care models

The United States has one of the most expensive health care systems in the world. It invests in research,

However, in 2021, 8.6 percent of the U.S. population was uninsured.  The U.S. is the only country where a substantial portion of the population lacks any form of health insurance. The U.S. has the lowest life expectancy at birth, the highest death rates for avoidable or treatable conditions, the highest maternal and infant mortality, and one of the highest suicide rates in the world. It also has the highest rate of people with multiple chronic conditions and an obesity rate nearly twice the average of other developed countries.

The current programs provided by Medicare (for people over age 65), Medicaid (for people with low incomes), and the Affordable Care Act (current program for most people) are each under attack because of the high costs associated with them and government regulation of the prices paid.

In your research and discussion consider the following models of health insurance and the programs Gov. Huey P. Long implemented in Louisiana in the 1930s.

The Beveridge Model

This model is named after William Beveridge, the social reformer who designed Britain’s National Health Service. In this system, health care is provided and financed by the government through tax payments, just like the police force or the public library.

Many, but not all, hospitals and clinics are owned by the government; some doctors are government employees, but there are also private doctors who collect their fees from the government. This system has the lowest costs per person, because the government controls what doctors can do and what they can charge. Great Britain, Spain, most Scandinavian countries, New Zealand, and Cuba are countries using this model or one that is similar.

The Bismarck Model

The Bismarck models uses an insurance system financed jointly by employers and employees through payroll deduction. Every person is covered. Doctors and hospitals are private operators. Although there are many payers to this model, costs tend to be regulated by the government. Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Japan, Switzerland, and some Latin American are countries that use this model.

The National Health Insurance Model

This system has elements of both Beveridge and Bismarck models. It uses private-sector providers, but payment comes from a government-run insurance program that every citizen pays into. Costs are considered low because there are no profits, no advertising, and claims are pre-approved. It is a single payer system and as a monopolist it is in a position to negotiate for the lowest prices. This system also has the ability to limit the medical services it will pay for, such as preventive care or what is considered elective procedures. Canada, Taiwan, and South Korea are countries using this model. For Americans over the age of 65, Medicare is similar to this model.

Health insurance is mostly a benefit for industrialized countries. Of the 195 countries on planet Earth, about 40 or 25% have established health care systems. In countries using this model, the poor are neglected.  This is a problem for hundreds of millions of people who have low incomes or are living below the poverty line.

In 2023, the offi­cial pover­ty thresh­old in the United States was $30,900 for a fam­i­ly of two adults and two chil­dren. Fam­i­lies can earn well over this amount and still find they cannot pay all of their bills.

Poverty is relative.  Someone in your class, school, community, etc. will be in the bottom 25% of income earners. An individual earning an hourly wage of $20.00 an hour who works for 35 hours a week earns $700 a week or $36,400 a year. This total is reduced by state and federal taxes and a 7.65% tax on Medicare and Social Security. Although $20 an hour is higher than the minimum wage in every state, it is not considered a living wage.

About one in sev­en (14%) of children under age 16 are in pover­ty in the United States.  This means that about 10 mil­lion kids in 2023 were liv­ing in house­holds that did not have enough resources for basic needs such as food, hous­ing and utilities.  The poverty rate in New Jersey is 10% of the population or about 950,000.  See the SPM child pover­ty rate in your state   The high­est rates of pover­ty gen­er­al­ly occur for the youngest chil­dren — under age 5 — kids in sin­gle-moth­er fam­i­lies, chil­dren of col­or and kids in immi­grant families. The numbers of children and adults living in poverty are increasing and they are a serious problem. The effects of living in poverty are the concern of your discussion as is the most effective way to reduce or eliminate it.

The effects of eco­nom­ic hard­ship dis­rupt the cog­ni­tive devel­op­ment, phys­i­cal and men­tal health, edu­ca­tion­al suc­cess of children. Researchers esti­mate the total U.S. cost of child pover­ty ranges from $500 bil­lion to $1 tril­lion per year based on lost pro­duc­tiv­i­ty and increased health care expenses.

In the United Kingdom, the poverty rate for children is 31% or double the rate in the United States. There is no single, universally accepted definition of poverty for the world.  The United States identifies an income level for family categories and the United Kingdom uses a measure of disposable income (after taxes) below 60% of the median income (income of the largest group in the population) on an annual basis.

For example, the median income in the United States is $40,000. If we used this formula, the poverty level would be $24,000 (after taxes). If we consider a 20% federal tax, 8% FICA and Medicare tax, and a 5% state tax for a person employed in New Jersey making $40,000, their disposable income would be approximately $27,000 or similar to the measure used in the United Kingdom.  If you consider the cost of rent at $2,000 a month, transportation costs at $200 a month, and food at $500 a month for a family or individual in New Jersey, these expenses are $2,700 a month or $32,400 a year. An income threshold of $30,000 a month is not practical.

Dr. Francis Townsend, a medical doctor living in Long Beach, California, introduced a plan in 1933 to provide direct payments to people over the age of 60. The money would be raised through a national sales tax, which in some countries is labeled a Value Added Tax of VAT.

“It is estimated that the population of the age of 60 and above in the United States is somewhere between nine and twelve millions. I suggest that the national government retire all who reach that age on a monthly pension of $200 a month or more, on condition that they spend the money as they get it. This will ensure an even distribution throughout the nation of two or three billions of fresh money each month. Thereby assuring a healthy and brisk state of business, comparable to that we enjoyed during war times.

“Where is the money to come from? More taxes?” Certainly. We have nothing in this world we do not pay taxes to enjoy. But do not overlook the fact that we are already paying a large proportion of the amount required for these pensions in the form of life insurance policies, poor farms, aid societies, insane asylums and prisons. The inmates of the last two mentioned institutions would undoubtedly be greatly lessened when it once became assured that old age meant security from want and care. A sales tax sufficiently high to insure the pensions at a figure adequate to maintain the business of the country in a healthy condition would be the easiest tax in the world to collect, for all would realize that the tax was a provision for their own future, as well as the assurance of good business now.”

Dr. Townsend’s plan became popular with the people and became known as The Townsend Movement.  Although it was criticized by President Franklin Roosevelt, the Social Security Administration is similar to what Dr. Townsend proposed.  He published a newsletter, The Modern Crusader, to promote his plan. The Social Security plan is funded by a tax on incomes because the burden is shared proportionately by different income levels. 

Welfare, unemployment compensation, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security are payments to United States’ citizens that are currently being discussed and evaluated. The average monthly payment is slightly less than $2,000. These are direct payments to people from the government, which also benefit local communities as the money is spent on food, housing, and basic needs, and provides a safeguard against bankruptcy and financial hardship. They may also increase the federal debt of a country in times of high unemployment or a pandemic.

Policy makers and economists must also consider public policies regarding the poor and senior citizens. The discussion questions below address the question of poverty for the young, disabled, and elderly and how to finance them.

  1. Do governments have a responsibility to provide financial assistance or a guaranteed living wage to individuals or families with inadequate finances for basic needs?
  2. Are direct income payments a burden on a government or do they provide an efficient return on their investment over time?
  3. Is the question of how to reduce or prevent poverty a matter of taxation or a a matter relating to the priorities of the federal budget?
  4. When people with mortgages apply the cost of interest as a deduction on their income tax, should this be considered an income transfer policy of the government providing assistance to people who are able to own property or their own home?
  5. Should income transfers be made in cash or in-kind benefits such as food stamps, vouchers for health care, etc.?
  6. Should the government regulate the consumption expenses of people receiving income transfers?
  7. Should income transfers be financed by income taxes, consumption taxes, or another method?

https://www.ssa.gov/history/towns5.html (The Townsend Plan)

https://www.ssa.gov/history/towns8.html (Francis Townsend’s Autobiography)

https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/eras/great-depression/townsend-dr-francis/ (Social Welfare History Project)

https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/child-poverty-statistics-causes-and-the-uks-policy-response/#heading-2 (House of Lords Library)

New York’s Education Wars a Century Ago Show How Content Restrictions Can Backfire

Bill Greer

 Reprinted with permission from https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/185878

Matthew Hawn, a high school teacher for sixteen years in conservative Sullivan County, Tennessee, opened the 2020-21 year in his Contemporary Issues class with a discussion of police shootings.  White privilege is a fact, he told the students.  He had a history of challenging his classes, which led to lively discussions among those who agreed and disagreed with his views.  But this day’s discussion got back to a parent who objected.  Hawn apologized – but didn’t relent.  Months later, with more parents complaining, school officials reprimanded him for assigning “The First White President,” an essay by Ta-Nehisi Coates, which argues that white supremacy was the basis for Donald Trump’s presidency.  After another incident in April, school officials fired him for insubordination and unprofessional behavior.

Days later, Tennessee outlawed his teaching statewide, placing restrictions on what could be taught about race and sex.  Students should learn “the exceptionalism of our nation,” not “things that inherently divide or pit either Americans against Americans or people groups against people groups,” Governor Bill Lee announced.  The new laws also required advance notice to parents of instruction on sexual orientation, gender identity, and contraception, with an option to withdraw their children.

Over the past three years, at least 18 states have enacted laws governing what is and is not taught in schools. Restricted topics mirror Tennessee’s, focusing on race, gender identity, and sexual orientation.  In some cases, legislation bans the more general category of “divisive concepts,” a term coined in a 2020 executive order issued by the Trump administration and now promoted by conservative advocates.  In recent months, Florida has been at the forefront of extending such laws to cover political ideology, mandating lessons that communism could lead to the overthrow of the US government.  Even the teaching of mathematics has not escaped Florida politics, with 44 books banned for infractions like using race-based examples in word problems.

In a sense the country is stepping back a century to when a similar hysteria invaded New York’s schools during the “Red Scare” at the end of World War I, when fear of socialism and Bolshevism spread throughout the US.  New York City launched its reaction in 1918 when Mayor John Francis Hylan banned public display of the red flag.  He considered the Socialist Party’s banner “an insignia for law hating and anarchy . . .  repulsive to ideals of civilization and the principles upon which our Government is founded.”

In the schools, Benjamin Glassberg, a teacher at Commercial High School in Brooklyn, was cast in Matthew Hawn’s role.  On January 14, 1919, his history class discussed Bolshevism.  The next day, twelve students, about one-third, signed a statement that their teacher had portrayed Bolshevism as a form of political expression not nearly so black as people painted it.  The students cited specifics Glassberg gave them – that the State Department forbade publishing the truth about Bolshevism; that Red Cross staff with first-hand knowledge were prevented from talking about conditions in Russia; that Lenin and Trotsky had undermined rather than supported Germany and helped end the war.  The school’s principal forwarded the statement to Dr. John L. Tildsley, Associate Superintendent of Schools, who suspended Glassberg, pending a trial by the Board of Education.

Glassberg’s trial played out through May.  Several students repeated the charges in their statement, while others testified their teacher had said nothing disrespectful to the US government.  Over that period, the sentiments of school officials became clear.  Dr. Tildsley proclaimed that no person adhering to the Marxian program should become a teacher in the public schools, and if discovered should be forced to resign.  He would be sending to everyone in the school system a circular making clear that “Americanism is to be put above everything else in classroom study.”  He directed teachers to correct students’ opinions contrary to fundamental American ideas. The Board of Education empowered City Superintendent William Ettinger to undertake an “exhaustive examination into the life, affiliations, opinions, and loyalty of every member” of the teachers union.  Organizations like the National Security League and the American Defense Society pushed the fight against Bolshevism across the country.

After the Board declared Glassberg guilty, the pace picked up.  In June, the city’s high school students took a test entitled  Examination For High Schools on the Great War.  The title was misleading.  The first question was designed to assess students’ knowledge of and attitude toward Bolshevism.  The instructions to principals said this question was of greatest interest and teachers should highlight any students who displayed an especially intimate knowledge of that subject.  The results pleased school officials when only 1 in 300 students showed any significant knowledge of or leaning toward Bolshevism.  The “self-confessed radicals” would be given a six-month course on the “economic and social system recognized in America.”  Only if they failed that course would their diplomas be denied.

In September, the state got involved.  New York Attorney General Charles D. Newton called for “Americanization,” describing it as “intensive instruction in our schools in the ideals and traditions of America.”  Also serving as counsel to the New York State Legislative Committee to Investigate Bolshevism, commonly known as the Lusk Committee after its chairman, Newton was in a position to make it happen.  In January 1920, Lusk began hearings on education.  Tildsly, Ettinger, and Board of Education President Anning S. Prawl all testified in favor of an Americanization plan.

In April, the New York Senate and Assembly passed three anti-Socialist “Lusk bills.”  The “Teachers’ Loyalty” bill required public school teachers to obtain from the Board of Regents a Certificate of Loyalty to the State and Federal Constitutions and the country’s laws and institutions.  “Sorely needed,” praised the New York Times, a long-time advocate for Americanization in the schools.  But any celebration was premature.  Governor Alfred E. Smith had his objections.  Stating that the Teacher Loyalty Bill “permits one man to place upon any teacher the stigma of disloyalty, and this even without hearing or trial,” he vetoed it along with the others.  Lusk and his backers would have to wait until the governor’s election in November when Nathan L. Miller beat Smith in a squeaker.  After Miller’s inauguration, the Legislature passed the bills again.  Miller signed them in May despite substantial opposition from prominent New Yorkers.

Over the next two years, the opposition grew.  Even the New York Times backed off its unrelenting anti-Socialist stance.  With the governor’s term lasting only two years, opponents got another chance in November, 1922, in a Smith-Miller rematch.  Making the Lusk laws a major issue, Smith won in a landslide.  He announced his intention to repeal the laws days after his inauguration.  Lusk and his backers fought viciously but the Legislature finally passed repeal in April.  Calling the teacher loyalty law (and a second Lusk law on private school licensing) “repugnant to the fundamentals of American democracy,” Smith signed their repeal.

More than any other factor, the experience of the teachers fueled the growing opposition to the Teachers’ Loyalty bill.  After its enactment, state authorities administered two oaths to teachers statewide.  That effort didn’t satisfy Dr. Frank P. Graves, State Commissioner of Education.  In April 1922, he established the Advisory Council on Qualifications of Teachers of the State of New York to hear cases of teachers charged with disloyalty.  He appointed Archibald Stevenson, counsel to the Lusk committee and arch-proponent of rooting out disloyalty in the schools, as one member.  By summer the Council had earned a reputation as a witch hunt.  Its activities drew headlines such as Teachers Secretly Quizzed on Loyalty and Teachers Defy Loyalty Court.  Teachers and principals called before it refused to attend.  Its reputation grew so bad that New York’s Board of Education asked for its abolishment and the President of the Board told teachers that they need not appear if summoned.

A lesson perhaps lies in that experience for proponents of restrictions on what can be taught today.  Already teachers, principals, and superintendents risk fines and termination from violating laws ambiguous on what is and is not allowed.  The result has been a chilling environment where educators simply avoid controversial issues altogether.  Punishing long-time and respected teachers – like Matthew Hawn, whom dozens of his former students defend – will put faces on the fallout from the laws being passed.  How long before a backlash rears up, as it did in New York over Teachers’ Loyalty?