The Place of Huey Long in the 1936 United States Presidential Election - Literature review Example

Huey Long Huey P. Long, the U.S. Senator from Louisiana, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt shared many commonalities. Both were powerful Democratic politicians at the national level during the 1930’s. Each possessed a somewhat liberal ideology and often advocated government entitlement programs along with other measures to alleviate poverty at a time when the people of the nation needed financial help more so than at any other time in its history. Long and Roosevelt could be characterized as two of the most charismatic politicians during the 1930’s and neither lacked for a gregarious personality, self confidence or ego. However, the differences between the two may have outweighed the similarities. Long was raised on a poor rural Louisiana farm, Roosevelt in the upscale Hyde Park sector of New York City. Roosevelt’s New Deal promoted prosperity by, among other things, expanding government and promoting the interests of large corporations. Long promoted taxing ‘big business’ so as to redistribute wealth and abhorred the idea of ‘big government.’ These differences played out on the largest of stages and many believe that Long could have unseated Roosevelt as President in 1936. “Since President Roosevelt’s economic measures had yet to produce clear results, Huey Long was seen as a serious threat to his re-election prospects” (Jackson 2003). This discussion examines the background, political opinions and actions of Long and how his political power and drive became a potential threat to Roosevelt’s presidency. Huey Long’s metamorphosis from a poor farm boy and high school dropout in the early 1900’s to the Governor of Louisiana at age 32 then U.S. Senator just two years later in 1930 was due primarily to his avid support of utopist social reform programs. In addition, once in office, Long built a powerful political machine that controlled most every aspect of government in Louisiana. His taxation of large businesses and the wealthy then reallocation of these funds to public concerns such as schools and the infrastructure ensured his continued popularity from the impoverished constituency. Long was a tenacious adversary of big business, the banking industry, Wall Street and eventually the Roosevelt administration as well because he thought it was overly accommodating to those powerful entities. His ‘Robin Hood’ platform was of course popular in his home state during the height of the Depression and as Long’s national aspirations grew, his message and popularity expanded to a national audience. Long’s Senate seat and growing popularity in combination with the authoritarian control he had over the State of Louisiana provided him with a solid foundation in which to organize a run for the presidency in 1936. “A month before he was shot, he had announced his intention to run for President in 1936, against the incumbent Franklin D. Roosevelt” (Jackson, 2003) Huey Long, a marginal Democrat, could best be described as an extreme populist. Some would call him what he was, a socialist, a political ideology that was gaining in appeal prior to World War II. Long often referred to his point of view as American style socialism. By contrast, no politician today would label themselves as a socialist in any manner. When Governor, Long engineered many types of reforms designed to alleviate the suffering of poor farmers. Always an enthusiastic opponent of business concerns, Long presented himself as a defender of the ‘little man’ against the privileged class. The former poor kid from a rural Louisiana farm nicknamed himself the ‘Kingfish’ because as he said, “Im a small fish here in Washington but I’m the Kingfish to the folks down in Louisiana” (“Huey Long”, 2005). Huey Long was never known to be a modest person. Though he dropped out of high-school, Long re-entered and would graduate with a law degree by age 21. He breezed through three years of law school in just one (“Huey Long”, 2005) Long was so confident that he would be elected President in 1936 that he wrote ‘My First Days in the White House.’ In the book he chose his future cabinet which included the current President Roosevelt and ex-President Herbert Hoover. The book contained lengthy imaginary discussions with Roosevelt and Hoover intended to humble these elitists in front of the former poor farmer. Long thought that the government and businesses should to serve the interest of people. Toward that end, he initiated the ‘Share Our Wealth’ program designed to heavily tax corporations and the rich then allocate the funds back to the underprivileged. This was an increasingly popular ideology during the Depression (“Huey Long”, 2005). Long had been a Roosevelt supporter early on in the presidential campaign of 1932 and enthusiastically gave many speeches endorsing his candidacy including a rousing speech at the Democratic National Convention. However, by late 1933, Long openly parted political ways with Roosevelt after realizing the President didn’t support the redistribution of financial resources in addition to the fact that Long had growing presidential ambitions of his own (Plant, 1995). Long began the Share-Our-Wealth Society as an opposition organization. Through the Society, he promoted his socialist program which was intent on the redistribution of funds on a large scale. The program would mandate that the federal government guarantee each family in the country a $5,000 yearly income in order that they would possess at least the bare necessities of living such as a job, house, car and radio. In addition, the program proposed a $50 million limit to personal fortunes, a $5 million inheritance and $1 million annual income limit. All those in excess of 60 years of age would collect a government sponsored pension (“Huey Long”, 2005). The program also guaranteed that every citizen own a home worth at least $5,000. Long devotees formed more than 25,000 Share-Our-Wealth Societies that totaled nearly eight million people (Clark, 2000). “The Share Our Wealth societies claimed to have 7,682,769 members all over the country, with many more allegedly unaccountable members” (Brinkley, 1982: 239). Of course Long was never elected so this social experiment that carried the slogan ‘Every Man a King’ never had the chance to materialize. He was assassinated in September 1935. The New York Times newspaper was, not surprisingly, generally viewed as pro-Roosevelt and criticized Long at every opportunity because Long was frequently at-odds politically with President Roosevelt who had previously been the Governor of New York State. Long made The Times’ front page on September 8, 1934. The story read, in part, “By order of the twenty-seven laws passed by the legislature in special session last month, Senator Huey P. Long became the de facto dictator of this state at noon today and immediately began acting the part” (Boulard, 1998). The New York Times, though, which had written slanted articles against Long in the past, correctly assessed the situation in Louisiana. The laws that were passed during that special session allowed Long to abuse his powers. That same month, Roosevelt contemplated deploying federal troops to Louisiana so its government could be restored but chose not to take over the state by force fearing the negative political repercussions of an invasion (Brinkley, 1982: 79). Long, a master manipulator of the political process, took total control of the government in Louisiana with almost all state offices being held by Long appointees. Huey Long was the most vocal and powerful critic of the New Deal and presented the largest political opposition to Roosevelt during the first years of his administration. The First New Deal (1933 to1934) decidedly orientated governmental policies toward big business. Later in this stage of reform, the government increased its focus on antitrust enforcement and stronger regulations on business regulation but ultimately, big business maintained influence over essential decisions concerning investment, pricing and production. In addition, the government assisted industry by limiting competition. Rather than attempt to regulate businesses, New Deal advocates wanted to greatly increase the size and control of the government so that it could act as a counterbalance to private sector industries (Yantek, n.d.). Long was for neither allowing businesses to control government actions or for a more expansive federal government. “He attacked his own party’s leadership in the Senate, denouncing them as corporation attorneys in the pockets of big business, and producing lists of the clients of their law firms” (Plant, 1995). Early on, Long realized the effectiveness of mass communication using the radio to garner widespread support. When campaigning in Louisiana, he often utilized the radio waves to introduce and advocate his ideas. He conducted lengthy radio broadcasts from a radio station in New Orleans that was a combination of his rhetoric and a selection of recorded music. Long was the first national politician to buy air-time on the radio to lobby the public for a piece of legislation when he introduced three bills in 1933 all of which embodied his philosophy on the economic hindrance of concentrated affluence. “As [Long’s] national recognition and ambitions grew, he spoke with increasing frequency to national radio audiences. No politician in this era, except Roosevelt himself, used radio as frequently and as effectively as Long” (Clark, 2000). Long’s radio address remarks usually included a list of accusations speaking out in opposition to Roosevelt and his New Deal. Amongst other topics, he spoke on the administration’s refusal to disperse vast fortunes, the continuing unemployment problem and the increasing national debt while extolling the populist, socialist plan to ‘share the wealth,’ provide everyone with a home and an income while ensuring retirement pensions (Clark, 2000). The following excerpt from a 1935 speech is typical of Long’s anti-Roosevelt rhetoric: “We find not only the people going further into debt, but that the United States is going further into debt. The states are going further into debt, and the cities and towns are even going into bankruptcy. The condition has become deplorable. Instead of his promises, the only remedy that Mr. Roosevelt has prescribed is to borrow more money if he can and to go further into debt” (Lanset, n.d.). Long was adept at using shrewd political strategies. This along with his tremendous popularity allowed him to dominate his political adversaries.  Long was well known for using any means possible to attain ever higher levels of political capital. One of these strategies was engaging in highly public filibusters while in congress.  His actions gave him national notice while preventing many bills he did not agree with from being passed.  Long’s influence in Louisiana was total and his national power was nothing short of remarkable. When Governor, a longtime supporter, Sam Irby, who incidentally was Long’s mistress’s uncle, had defected to the opponent’s camp and was called to testify in a highway funds scandal involving Long. The newly formed Louisiana Bureau of Investigation took Irby into custody and he was never seen again. As a freshman Senator, Long wielded enough power to single-handedly force Roosevelt to re-issue a more liberal version of the New Deal. His absolute political control in Louisiana and immense national popularity insured that when he spoke, people listened (Boulard, 1998). Roosevelt fully understood the political threat Long posed regarding the 1936 election. Roosevelt attempted to take preventative actions thereby preventing Long from exploiting his somewhat moderate political positions.  However, when Roosevelt steered his position to the left when crafting the second version of the New Deal in 1935, this effort still did not quell Long’s relentless public attacks on the President’s policies. “Long wanted a fundamental change in the distribution of wealth that the Second New Deal failed to provide” (Williams, 1981: 795). The extent of political damage Roosevelt sustained as a result of Long’s public campaign opposing the President’s policies is the subject of long-standing analysis and debate among political historians and analysts. Perhaps the answer could emanate from Roosevelt himself. He regarded Long as “one of the two most dangerous men in America” (Clark, 2000). Douglas MacArthur is the other person to which Roosevelt was referring. The Democratic National Committee shared Roosevelt’s concerns about Long, so much so that it commissioned a confidential poll to determine the extent of his public appeal nationally. The poll determined that, prior to his announcement as a candidate, he could receive more than 10 percent of the total vote if he decided to run as an independent candidate (Clark, 2000). This 1935 poll was one of if not the first of its kind. However, soon afterwards polls were conducted on a regular basis. A top advisor to Roosevelt, Jim Farley, commissioned another poll following the results of the Democratic Committees poll. Those results confirmed the earlier poll which sent shockwaves through the Roosevelt administration and the Democratic party as a whole. These numbers indicated that if Long ran as he had promised, it could easily hand the power of the White House over to the Republicans (Williams, 1981: 845). Long was elected Governor of Louisiana but ruled over it as would a dictator. He did, however, initiate extensive public works projects, enhanced public health and established restrictions on some of the state’s corporate powers. He also increased taxes on major oil companies, most notably Standard Oil, Louisiana’s largest. Long did support fellow Democrat Roosevelt in the 1932 Presidential election but by late 1933 that alliance had shattered due to Long’s dissatisfaction with the pro-business stance and expansive government began under the New Deal in addition to Long’s growing aspirations in seeking the Presidency for himself. By 1934 Long had established the Share-Our-Wealth Society, an political organization that advocated his socialist agenda. Had Long lived past 1935, there may today exist a Share-Our-Wealth political party. Roosevelt would probably have been defeated in the 1936 election and the pivotal events that occurred during what would become the remainder of his Presidency could have been dramatically altered thus changing what we now accept as history. Of course, since Long was such a high profile adversary of the most powerful man in the world, conspiracy theories abound surrounding the facts of Long’s death. If Long were alive today, he would certainly be disappointed by how Roosevelt’s legacy affected the direction of the nation outside of possibly the entitlement programs started by the New Deal. He would argue that the size of the government and its expansive influences and intrusiveness in people’s lives was not as the Founding Fathers intended and how if he had been President, more Americans would be employed and fewer would be living in poverty and would blame Roosevelt. Works Cited Boulard, Garry. Huey Long Invades New Orleans: The Siege of a City, 1934-36. Gretna, LA: Pelican Publishing Co., 1998. Brinkley, Alan. Voices of Protest: Huey Long, Father Coughlin, and the Great Depression. New York, NY: Knopf, 1982. Clark, Christopher. Who Built America? Volume Two: From 1877 to Present. First Holtzbrinck Publishers, August 1, 2000. “Huey Long.” Brief History. (November 26, 2005). Social Security Online. March 15, 2007 < http://www.ssa.gov/history/hlong1.html> Jackson, Harold. “Russell Long Senator from Louisiana’s Political Dynasty.” The Guardian Unlimited. (May 13, 2003). March 15, 2007 Lanset, Andy. “’Share the Wealth’: Huey Long Talks to the Nation.” History Matters. (n.d.). March 15, 2007 Plant, Darrel. “Back by Populist Demand.” Extent. (1997). March 15, 2007 Williams, T. Harry. Huey Long. New York: Knopf Publishing Group, 1981. Yantek, Tom. “The New Deal: Capitalism Loses its Hat.” Kent State University. n.d. Read More