Explain why Progressive reforms were more successful at state than federal level.
Level
AS LEVEL
Year Examined
2021
Topic
The Gilded Age and Progressive Era, 1870s to 1920
👑Complete Model Essay
Explain why Progressive reforms were more successful at state than federal level.
Why Were Progressive Reforms More Successful at the State than Federal Level?
The Progressive Era (1890-1920) was a period of significant social and political reform in the United States. While the era witnessed the passage of several important amendments to the Constitution, including the 16th (income tax), 17th (direct election of senators), 18th (prohibition), and 19th (women's suffrage), the most radical and far-reaching Progressive reforms often originated at the state and local levels. This essay will argue that Progressive reforms were more successful at the state level due to the ability of governors to implement change more effectively and the comparatively less entrenched opposition from special interest groups.
Wisconsin: A Laboratory of Democracy
Wisconsin, under the leadership of Governor Robert M. La Follette, exemplifies the success of Progressivism at the state level. La Follette, a staunch advocate for good government, believed in empowering ordinary citizens and reducing the influence of special interests. To achieve this, he championed direct primary elections, which allowed voters, rather than party bosses, to choose their candidates for office. This effectively curbed the power of political machines, which often thrived on patronage and backroom deals. Furthermore, La Follette's belief in utilizing expertise in government led him to involve specialists in fields like law and economics in crafting legislation, ensuring well-informed and effective policies. His collaboration with the state university to establish a "laboratory of democracy," fostered innovative solutions to social and economic problems.
While La Follette attempted to translate his success in Wisconsin to the national stage as a Senator, he faced significant challenges. The federal government, with its complex structure and powerful lobbies, proved a more difficult arena for implementing sweeping reforms.
California: Challenging Corporate Power
California, under Governor Hiram Johnson (1911-1917), offers another compelling example of Progressive success at the state level. Johnson's administration directly challenged the dominance of the Southern Pacific Railroad (SP), a powerful corporation that had held significant sway over the state's economy and politics. Through legislation like the Stetson-Eshelman Act, Johnson empowered the state Railroad Commission to regulate passenger and freight rates, effectively breaking the SP's monopolistic grip. The subsequent Public Utilities Act and the creation of the Public Utility Commission (PUC) further expanded the state's regulatory reach over utilities, including railroads.
Johnson's reforms extended beyond corporate regulation. He championed progressive education policies, advocating for teacher pensions, free textbooks, a comprehensive curriculum, and mandatory kindergartens. These measures aimed to improve the lives of ordinary Californians by expanding access to quality education.
Obstacles at the Federal Level
While Progressive reformers achieved notable victories at the federal level, they often encountered significant obstacles. Congress, with its susceptibility to lobbying from powerful interest groups, proved more resistant to radical change. The decentralized nature of the American political system, while allowing for innovation at the state level, often hindered the passage of comprehensive federal legislation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while the Progressive Era saw important reforms at both the state and federal levels, it was at the state level where Progressives achieved their most transformative successes. Governors like La Follette in Wisconsin and Johnson in California demonstrated the ability to enact radical changes that challenged the status quo and improved the lives of their constituents. The examples of Wisconsin and California highlight the dynamism and responsiveness of state governments to the needs of their citizens, making them fertile ground for Progressive ideals. The federal government, while eventually embracing some Progressive reforms, often lagged behind its state counterparts, hindered by entrenched interests and a more cumbersome legislative process.
Source:
- Sanders, Elizabeth. *Roots of Reform: Farmers, Workers, and the American State, 1877-1917*. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.
Note: History Study Pack Required
Score Big with Perfectly Structured History Essays!
Prepare effortlessly for your A/AS/O-Level exams with our comprehensive...
History Study Pack.
✅ 1200+ Model Essays: Master your essay writing with expertly crafted answers to past paper questions.
✅ Exam Boards Covered: Tailored materials for AQA, Cambridge, and OCR exams.
🍃 Free Essay Plan
Essay Outline: Progressive Reforms: State vs. Federal Success
This essay will argue that Progressive reforms were more successful at the state level than the federal level during the Progressive Era. While some federal successes did occur, such as the passage of key amendments, state-level initiatives were often more impactful and radical due to factors such as the decentralized nature of the American political system, the presence of strong and influential state-level leaders, and the ability to overcome federal roadblocks.
I. Introduction - Setting the Stage
Briefly introduce the Progressive Era and its key aims. Highlight the contrasting success rates of Progressive reforms at the state and federal levels.
II. State Level Successes
A. Wisconsin: Robert M. La Follette and the "Laboratory of Democracy"
Detail La Follette's policies and their impact on Wisconsin. Emphasize the use of direct primaries, the role of experts in government, and the "laboratory of democracy" concept.
B. California: Hiram Johnson and the Challenge to Corporate Power
Explain how Governor Johnson tackled the Southern Pacific Railroad's dominance in California. Discuss the Stetson-Eshelman Act and the Public Utilities Commission. Highlight Johnson's focus on education reform.
C. Other State-Level Examples
Briefly mention other examples of successful Progressive reforms at the state level, such as women's suffrage or labor regulations. This section can be a quick overview, as the focus is primarily on Wisconsin and California.
III. Federal Level Challenges
A. The Divided Nature of Federal Government
Explain the limitations of the federal government in enacting Progressive reforms. Focus on the checks and balances system, the influence of special interest groups, and the often slow and complex legislative process.
B. Opposition from Conservative Forces
Discuss the resistance to Progressive reforms from conservative politicians, businesses, and other groups. Highlight specific examples of federal-level failures or setbacks.
IV. Conclusion
Summarize the key reasons for the greater success of Progressive reforms at the state level. Emphasize the role of strong leadership, less political complexity, and the ability to bypass federal obstacles. Conclude by highlighting the enduring legacy of Progressive reforms, despite the challenges faced at the federal level.
Extracts from Mark Schemes
Explain why Progressive reforms were more successful at the state than federal level:
Although there were some federal successes of the Progressive era (i.e. the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th amendments to the Constitution), it was often at the state and local levels where Progressive governors were able to use their power to introduce radical reforms that were often blocked by Congress. There are a number of examples that could be used to discuss why the success of Progressive ideas was greater at a state level:
1. **Wisconsin:**
In his home state of Wisconsin, Robert M La Follette developed the ideas of Progressivism. He believed that good government occurred when voters had control of institutions rather than special interest groups. This meant that he wanted ordinary people to have power rather than big businesses. He believed that specialists in fields such as law and economics should be involved in running the government. He also worked with the state university to establish a 'laboratory of democracy'. In Wisconsin, he supported direct primary elections which meant that voters had the right to choose their own candidates for office. After 1906, when La Follette became a Senator, he tried to take these ideas with him to national politics, but he was not always successful.
2. **California:**
Between 1910 and 1914, under Governor Hiram Johnson's political leadership, the California legislature expanded state government first by breaking the economic and political power of the Southern Pacific Railroad (SP). The reform legislature passed the Stetson-Eshelman Act, which increased the state Railroad Commission's authority and power to fix passenger and freight rates; thus ending Southern Pacific Railroad's (SP) monopolistic practices. With the Public Utilities Act and the creation of the Public Utility Commission (PUC), the agency's commissioners had authority over the railroads as well as all public utilities. Johnson was also interested in education and called for teacher pensions, free textbooks for public school children, the creation of a comprehensive curriculum, and mandatory kindergartens.
In essence, Progressive reforms found more success at the state level due to the ability of governors to push through radical changes that were often blocked or faced difficulties at the federal level.