State vs. Federal Success of Progressive Reforms
TITLE
Explain why Progressive reforms were more successful at state than federal level.
ESSAY
Progressive reforms were often more successful at the state level than the federal level during the Progressive era for a variety of reasons.
1. **Experimental Nature of States**: States like Wisconsin and California were seen as "laboratories of democracy" where Progressive governors like Robert La Follette and Hiram Johnson could implement innovative policies and test out new ideas before they were introduced at the federal level. This experimental approach allowed for quicker implementation of reforms without the bureaucratic hurdles often faced at the federal level.
2. **Greater Influence of Special Interest Groups at the Federal Level**: The federal government was often beholden to powerful special interest groups, including big businesses and entrenched political interests, which made it challenging for Progressive reforms to gain traction. States, on the other hand, were sometimes more insulated from these pressures and were able to enact reforms that directly benefited the common people.
3. **Flexibility in State Constitutions**: State constitutions provided more flexibility for Progressive governors to introduce and implement reforms tailored to the specific needs and priorities of their constituents. This flexibility allowed for a more rapid response to societal issues and a greater ability to address local challenges effectively.
4. **Direct Democracy Mechanisms**: Some states had mechanisms such as the initiative, referendum, and recall that empowered voters to directly influence legislation and hold politicians accountable. These mechanisms gave citizens a greater voice in the political process and enabled the passage of Progressive reforms that might have been blocked by entrenched interests at the federal level.
5. **Historical Context**: The Progressive movement gained momentum at the state level before it gained traction at the federal level. States like Wisconsin and California were early adopters of Progressive ideas and served as models for other states and the federal government. This historical context helped pave the way for successful implementation of Progressive reforms at the state level.
In conclusion, the success of Progressive reforms at the state level can be attributed to the experimental nature of states, the influence of special interest groups at the federal level, the flexibility in state constitutions, direct democracy mechanisms, and the historical context of the Progressive movement. These factors collectively created an environment where Progressive governors were often able to enact radical reforms that aimed to improve the lives of ordinary citizens.
SUBJECT
HISTORY
PAPER
AS LEVEL
NOTES
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.