How did Roosevelt’s Paralysis Affect his Presidency?

Franklin D. Roosevelt was US President from 1933 to 1945 - the years of the Great Depression through to the end of World War 2. What is less well known is that he was paralyzed by illness in 1921 and did not have full use of his legs from that time. Here, Richard Bluttal explores the affect of paralysis on Roosevelt’s presidency.

President Roosevelt in a wheelchair with a girl in February 1941. Source: FDR Presidential Library & Museum photograph by Margaret Suckley, available here.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was US President from 1933 to 1945 - the years of the Great Depression through to the end of World War 2. What is less well known is that he was paralyzed by illness in 1921 and did not have full use of his legs from that time. Here, Richard Bluttal explores the affect of paralysis on Roosevelt’s presidency.

Speaking at a Georgia rally in 1932 Franklin Delano Roosevelt addresses the crowd, as was his practice, from a standing position, holding onto a podium bolted to the floor. By inadvertence, this one, however, was not bolted and midway into his speech podium the presidential candidate pitched forward into the orchestra pit. The audience was spellbound as the candidate and podium were retrieved from the pit and set back upon the stage. Roosevelt finished his speech, taking up from the point at which he had stopped, without giving either comment or acknowledgement to his fall. At the conclusion he received a standing ovation.

When Franklin D. Roosevelt woke up on August 10, 1921, with plans to take his wife and three older children out for a sail in New Brunswick, Canada, he had no idea that it would be the last day he would have full use of his legs. Enjoying some vacation time after running for vice president under James Cox, FDR and his kids sailed the scenic waters near Campobello Island. Afterward, they had a swim in a nearby pond and then he raced the kids back to the cottage. But it was when they returned to the cottage that Roosevelt began to feel odd, feverish and more tired than usual. He decided to skip dinner and go right to bed. “And he never walked without help again,” says Biographer Geoffrey C. Ward. When he woke the next morning, he couldn’t move his left leg, and then his right leg gave way. “I tried to persuade myself that the trouble with my leg was muscular,” Roosevelt wrote later, “that it would disappear as I used it. But presently it refused to work. And then the other.” Two days later, he lost the use of all his muscles from the chest down. He also had a high fever and pain in his neck and back.

Paralysis

The life of Franklin Delano Roosevelt is an astonishment. In 1921, at the age of 39, he was struck by this attack of infantile paralysis which left him paralyzed below the waist for the rest of his life. In a time when the severely handicapped were seldom even seen in public, FDR resumed his political career. He was twice elected governor of New York and in 1932 he was elected president of the United Sates. No one else in the recorded history of mankind has been chosen as the leader of his people even though he could neither stand alone nor walk unassisted.

His leg muscles were graded as "poor" and "trace" -- and thus were unable to function in any useful manner. In order to stand upon his legs FDR had to don long-leg steel braces. The gluteus maximus muscles of his hips were similarly impaired. The muscles of his trunk were weak and as a result, in the early stages of his rehabilitation, he was forced to wear a corset and to struggle with a pelvic band attached to his braces.

Paralysis resulting from an attack of infantile paralysis, or poliomyelitis, is confined to the nerves that control the voluntary muscles. FDR had virtually normal function of his sensory and autonomic nervous system. This meant that his digestive tract, his bowels and bladder functioned normally, as did his sexual organs. The onset of the disease had a shattering impact upon the man and his expectations. Clearly both he and Eleanor, his wife and closest political adviser, believed that public knowledge of the extent of the disease, like family scandal, would endanger FDR's political future. The severity in nature of the attack was kept secret from all but the closest family members and at first the press was told only that Roosevelt had contracted a case of influenza.

As noted by author Hugh Gregory Gallagher, FDR tried everything that had been used in the past. He tried massage, salt-water baths, ultraviolet light, electric current, walking on braces with parallel bars at waist height, walking while hanging from parallel bars mounted above his head. He tried horseback riding strapped to the saddle; he tried an electric tricycle his mother had brought from Europe. He tried exercises in warm water and exercises in cold water. He tried various theories of muscle training: working with gravity, against gravity, with resistance and without. He tried osteopathy. Even the eminent doctor, Emile Coue, ("every day in every way I'm getting better and better,") was consulted on his behalf.

During his 12 years in the White House, Franklin D. Roosevelt was hardly ever photographed in a wheelchair. Not surprisingly, the longest-serving president in American history disliked drawing attention to his polio symptoms, he still led the country from a wheelchair. He was helped -- most often lifted bodily -- into or out of cars, tubs, chairs or beds. Journalist John Gunther reports it was a startling experience to see the president of the United States being carried up and down stairs "like a sack of potatoes," as his son James once described it.

Roosevelt stood up only for ceremonial occasions and only for as long as was absolutely necessary. He was able to stand only with the support of his braces and crutches. His braces caused him pain and he despised them roundly. He was able to "walk" only by the use of "hitching" the muscles on either side of his trunk. Leaning on his crutches, he would hike first one leg, swing it forward, transfer the weight of his body upon it and then, hiking up the other, he would swing it forward. This means of locomotion was a slow, lurching process. It was made worse by a drop foot which forced him to swing his foot around and forward in a wide arc so as to clear the ground.

Running for president

He never learned how to walk again but he learned, instead, how to get on with his life using what muscles he had left. He learned this at Warm Springs, Ga. At Warm Springs, he created what was in many ways the first modern rehabilitation center. Warm Springs was a reflection of Franklin Roosevelt's personality and philosophy, his enthusiasm and motivation. These were the same qualities Roosevelt later brought to the presidency. They were fully as effective in Washington as they had been in Georgia.

Though the public may not have been aware of the extent of his disability, most knew that his battle with polio left him with limited mobility. James Tobin, author of The Man He Became: How FDR Defied Polio to Win the Presidency, believes that Roosevelt’s disability may have helped him to be elected and given him more empathy for the common man. Tobin told NPR’s Dave Davies that FDR had “a kind of passion for people who are suffering that he couldn’t have had if he had not deeply suffered himself.”

Surprisingly, the subject of his inability to walk never became an issue during his campaign for president in 1932. FDR preferred not to speak of it, even to his family, as he did not want sympathy or pity—what he referred to as “sob stuff.” But the fact is FDR’s disability only strengthened his determination and resolve. He was perhaps a better president as a result of his condition, as it taught him perseverance and gave him a sense of compassion and acceptance for those less fortunate. “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people,” he said. “A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.”

Optimism

Roosevelt's fate could have been similar to that of many polio victims, except for his political ambition and his inherent optimism. Roosevelt understood very well the fate of a disabled person, not to speak of a disabled person with political ambitions. Physical disability was an automatic disqualification for public life, let alone for the highest political office. His chances lay in his ability to hide his disability. Yet, these very efforts reflected "a view of the disabled body as stigmatizing, shameful, and as a physical marker of weakness of intellect and character"

Roosevelt realized that when you were crippled — and that was the word that he would use — you have a tendency to make people uncomfortable. People don't know what to say, they don't know where to look, they don't know how to treat you, they don't know whether to feel pity for you, when pity is the last thing that you want. He had to persuade people to feel comfortable in his presence. The therapists and he began to work on his gait, to work on the way he would walk with the canes and crutches and assistance he would use. So his walk, although slow, began to look more and more natural. And he would seat himself, and he would throw up his head, he would begin to talk — he was always talking, actually — to put people at ease. And this whole physical routine that he developed of putting people at ease was enormously effective, and it made people forget that he was disabled.

In a speech in Rochester, N.Y., he was talking about the needs of disabled children in the state of New York and he mentions himself. He says, "I myself have been through this ordeal, and I am a symbol of what can happen when people with disabilities are strongly supported." And nobody had expected him to say this out loud; nobody had expected him to address this issue in this way, to turn the disability on its head and make it into this advantage. And so it had [an] electrifying effect on the audience. ... I think Roosevelt ... realized this was a strong part of his presence as a candidate, and it was something that actually appealed to people.

In the decades after his death, a narrative emerged about the extent of Roosevelt's deceptions to hide his condition from the American people. It's true that Roosevelt made every effort to appear as able-bodied as possible, only appearing in public through carefully orchestrated maneuvers that showed him "walking" a short distance. The press was discouraged from focusing on vulnerable moments, and for the most part, he was photographed either sitting down or speaking at a carefully fastened podium.

But the president's disability was never a secret. Prior to entering the White House, he had been profiled in major publications like Time and Liberty, which displayed his heavy leg braces and detailed the excruciating efforts he underwent to hoist himself around on unresponsive legs. The Liberty article, in particular, addressed the elephant in the room of whether a "cripple" was fit to be president, concluding that FDR was more physically sound than most men half his age. On a personal level, those close to Roosevelt felt that dealing with his disease made him a better leader. The younger FDR had been known to harbor arrogance along with his impressive intellect, but that version was replaced by a more grounded, empathetic person. "There had been a plowing up of his nature," noted his longtime labor secretary, Frances Perkins. "The man emerged completely warm-hearted, with new humility of spirit and a firmer understanding of philosophical concepts.”

Conclusion

Roosevelt embraced his status as a polio survivor and fully leveraged his position to help others who were similarly afflicted. He held the first of his "birthday balls" in 1934 to raise money for polio research, an endeavor that eventually became the March of Dimes and led to the discovery of a cure in the form of a vaccine developed by U.S. researcher Jonas Salk. By meeting his disease head-on, Roosevelt turned it into a non-issue when it came to doing his job while spearheading a way to stamp it out as a public menace.

FDR’s permanent association to a failing body serves as a reminder that in addition to steering America through the Great Depression and World War II, FDR managed to convince a public that his physical disability was no hindrance.

What do you think of the article? Let us know below.

Now read Richard’s piece on the history of slavery in New York here.

Moral Principle and Political Reality in US History

An issue that often arises in a detailed exchange on the American experience is equality of opportunity. In many cases, it strikes a dynamic chord with many observers in our society. The essential tension that is inherent in this issue is one of moral principle v. political reality. Here, David Huff considers this in the US by looking at Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson, and the present day.

Former President Lyndon B. Johnson (on the left) and then Vice President Spiro Agnew (on the right, with sunglasses) view the lift off of Apollo 11 in 1969.

Many societies throughout history have grappled with how to reconcile equality of opportunities with the harsh political of their times. On the whole, societies, particularly in their infancy, have sacrificed equality of opportunity for the sake of political expediency.

In the American experience, the Founding Fathers were more concerned about ensuring the survival of the American Republic than achieving social, political and economic equality in society. The achievement of equality of women, Native Americans and African Americans were left for future generations to undertake.

Fortunately, the United States heeded history's call to action. The patrician reforms of former President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the civil rights struggle of the 1960s and the continual call for the creation of an adequate and equitable health-care system are indicative of the potent force that equality of opportunity has played in our society.

The Role of Federal Government v. Private Enterprise

Although I concur that people should not be given a free handout, I believe in offering an individual a hand-up. Furthermore, I think that it is the government's responsibility to ensure that if social inequities get our of hand, constructive remedies should be enacted to ameliorate the situation.

Clearly, the accounting scandals in private enterprise during the past forty years underscore that government ought to play a greater role in preventing the gross pursuit of money and power which results in excessive greed and corruption.

A hallmark of a civilized society is one in which a heightened social consciousness for the welfare of others plays a role in shaping a nation's character.  A government that embraces the political mantra that no social obligation is germane will stagnate and erode, becoming frozen by its own indifference and intolerance. If enterprising and wealthy individuals have the rare privilege of escaping the bonds of everyday existence to see life from an entirely different perspective, why not share some of that resourceful knowledge with others in society?

Abraham Lincoln's Role in Shaping American Society

As a nation, we have been blessed by a number of remarkable individuals who played an influential role in shaping the American consciousness. A central figure during the nineteenth century was Abraham Lincoln, who demonstrated tremendous courage and resilience during the bloody and painful struggle of the American Civil War. Determined, shrewd, and tough, Lincoln not only managed to keep the United States together, but also abolished the long-standing institution of slavery. His accomplishments set into motion profound changes that altered the cultural fabric of the American South.

Above all, Lincoln, by the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 and his memorable Second Inaugural Address in 1865 raised the social and political consciousness of our nation. 

FDR's Impact on American Society

Another figure who played a prominent role in shaping the American consciousness was Franklin D. Roosevelt.  Elected president in 1932, Roosevelt initiated patrician reforms under his New Deal programs, which alleviated some of the human misery caused by the Great Depression. 

Although experimental in nature, his progressive reforms called for the federal government to play an active role in the social welfare of Americans.  The creation of the Civilian Conservation Corps, Works Progress Administration, which generated many job creation programs, the Soil Conservation Service, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Rural Electrification Act, and the Social Security Act, as well as the president's willingness to embrace collective bargaining power for labor, are all indicative of FDR's sweeping reforms that transformed the fabric of American society. 

The Emergence of the Kennedy Family and Lyndon B. Johnson

On January 20, 1961, John F. Kennedy became the nation's 35th President of the United States. Both JFK and his wife, Jacqueline, as well as Lyndon B. Johnson played a profound impact on the transformation of American society. During his tenure, President Kennedy created the Peace Corps, introduced Civil Rights legislation and Medicare and Medicaid reform bills to Congress in order to provide greater health-care coverage and basic human rights to African Americans throughout our nation, and signed the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty in 1963.

In addition, Mrs. Kennedy taught the nation about culture and distinction by combining a unique sense of fashion with a strong sense of scholarship. Furthermore, intertwined with Mrs. Kennedy's interest in fashion was her commitment to the preservation of the arts and humanities, her commitment to the restoration of the White House, her push to host a dinner of the Nobel Laureates in 1962 and her avid interest in hosting youth concerts to encourage young people to study classical music. In my opinion, all of her efforts were indicative of her genuine desire that American civilization should be committed to the idea of developing a rich and diverse cultural identify of its own.

On November 22, 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas. It was a tragedy that shook the nation and the world. However, Lyndon B. Johnson, who became the 36th President of the United States, was determined to continue the progressive reform efforts that the Kennedy Administration had undertaken. Under his able leadership, President Johnson pushed through Congress an impressive legislative package, which included the Civil Rights Bill of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, signed the Medicare and Medicaid packages into law in 1965, and provided aid to education, urban renewal, beautification, conservation, and Head Start.

Unfortunately, Lyndon Johnson chose to enlarge significantly America's commitment to South Vietnam in July 1965. The president's determination that the United States could fight a costly war in Southeast Asia while enlarging the social welfare state at home led to the development of a choiceless society. In his mind, President Johnson thought we could adopt a two-prong strategy: conduct a war in Vietnam while enacting major social and economic reforms at home, which he called The Great Society. As a result, his willingness to engage simultaneously in the Vietnam War and The Great Society raised expectations beyond what the Federal Government could promise the American people. To that end, a powerful conservative movement began to take shape under the re-emergence of Richard M. Nixon and the 1966 election of Ronald Reagan as Governor of California. In sum, Lyndon Johnson was a tragedy in the real sense. He was the central figure in a struggle of moral importance that ended in ruin. 

Contemporary America

Now, at the dawn of 2022, that United States is in search of itself. In the wake of COVID-19, political division, economic uncertainty, social turmoil, and an inadequate healthcare system, many Americans realize that we need to revitalize our political, economic, and social institutions in order to provide greater opportunities for our fellow citizens. Only if Americans demand greater corporate accountability, insist that their elected leaders focus on strengthening America's economic infrastructure, push for the creation of a National Commission on Violence to examine the underlying problems that cause people, particularly youth, to choose self-destruction rather personal development, and demand a reduction in the national debt that is approaching 30 trillion dollars can we ever hope to restore our country to a healthy order.

In particular, in regard to the national debt, if the debt continues to climb, at some point investors will lose confidence in the government's ability to pay back borrowed funds. In essence, the higher the debt-to-Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ratio, the less likely the country will pay back its debt and the higher its risk of default, which could cause a financial panic in the domestic and international markets. At this point, we will not be able to pay off the interest on the debt let alone the principal itself.

To attain positive change requires people, especially young voters, to play an active role in the political process. Perhaps the answer lies not only in parents instilling a sense of self-esteem and personal responsibility in their children, but also society encouraging youth to pursue higher education, community involvement, and state and federal campaign participation.

We must recognize that it is a matter of personal conscience, historical perspective and the inherit belief that equality of opportunity is a struggle of moral importance that as a nation we cannot afford to relinquish. After all, the future of our democracy, our way of life is contingent upon young voter's thoughtful engagement and passionate participation in the American political system. It is their future and their children's future that hang in the balance. 

Conclusion

Finally, the American people need to remember that our country's destiny is a journey, not a destination. It is a journey the American people have learned to savor, cherish and treasure. Our collective journey is filled with roadblocks and amazing achievements that provide the impetus for us to understand fully ourselves and those we love. With the passage of time. our country must learn to embrace faith that looks through adversity and enables us to flourish and thrive.

What do you think of the article? Let us know below.

Now read David’s article on Jackie Kennedy’s influence on the arts here.

The 1943 Trident Conference: A Path to Victory in World War 2

The 1943 Trident Conference involved the two-key World War II allies of the USA and Britain. Prime Minister Winston Churchill traveled to Washington to meet President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Here, William Floyd Jr. looks at what happened during the conference and its impact on the later years of World War II.

Churchill and Roosevelt fishing - when taking a break from the conference. Source: FDR Presidential Library & Museum, available here.

On May 10, 1943, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, identifying himself as “Naval Person”, wrote to President Franklin Roosevelt from on board the ocean liner, “Queen Mary”, “Since yesterday we have been surrounded by U.S. Navy and we all greatly appreciate high value you evidently set upon our continued survival. I look forward to being at White House with you tomorrow afternoon, and also going to Hyde Park with you at weekend. The voyage has been so far most agreeable and Staff have done vast amount of work.”

The ocean liner “Queen Mary” had made her first voyage on May 27, 1936, as a passenger liner, primarily sailing on the North Atlantic until 1967. With the beginning of World War II, it was converted to a military ship transporting Allied soldiers. Her colors of red, white, and black were now gone under a pewter gray to make the ship less visible. She would become known as the “Gray Ghost.” On Tuesday morning, May 11, 1943, she would arrive in New York carrying her very special passengers, the Prime Minister and about one hundred staff. The ship also had 5,000 German prisoners, on board, captured in the North African Campaign and bound for POW camps in the American Southwest.

The Prime Minister and his staff would be meeting with the President and his aides to map out a plan to bring the war to a successful conclusion. Waiting at the dock to greet the Prime Minister was the President’s closest aide, Harry Hopkins, along with a special presidential train for the trip to Washington D.C. As the train came to a stop at Union Station, the limousines pulled onto the platform. The President was lifted from the lead vehicle and placed in a wheelchair. All of Roosevelt’s symptoms of stress and age seemed to go away at the sight of the Prime Minister approaching in his yacht squadron uniform. The two men beamed at each other before driving off to the conference. The President insisted that the Prime Minister stay at the White House.

The Trident Conference would become one of many between the United States and Great Britain including Casablanca, Quebec, Cairo, Tehran, Malta, Yalta, and Potsdam. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin attended the Tehran, Yalta, and Potsdam Conferences.

Objectives

The first meeting of the conference took place at the White House on May 12, 1943 at 2:30 P.M. The President, Prime Minister, and their staffs would be in attendance. The President welcomed Mr. Churchill and the British Chiefs of Staff stating that it was very appropriate that they should meet again just as Operation Torch (North African Campaign) was coming to a satisfactory conclusion. He also said that he thought the keynote should be to employ every resource of men and munitions against the enemy. Nothing that could be brought to bear should be allowed to stand idle.

He then asked the Prime Minister to open the discussion. Churchill would deliver some opening remarks and then proceeded to go through a number of objectives to consider. The first objective was the Mediterranean Theatre. The great prize was to get Italy out of the war by whatever means possible. The second objective should be taking the weight off of the USSR. Stalin had stated that the best way of taking the weight off of the Soviet front, in 1943, would be to knock Italy out of the war forcing the Germans to send a large number of troops, from the Soviet front to hold down the Balkans. The third objective, as mentioned by the President, was to apply the greatest possible numbers of our armed forces for the campaign. The fourth objective was to make it absolutely clear that his majesty’s government earnestly desired to undertake a full-scale invasion of the continent. The fifth and final objective should be aid to China and the hope that the USSR could be brought in for the fight against Japan.

In his closing statement the Prime Minister stated that he hoped his remarks would help to frame an agenda for the Combined Chiefs of Staff and serve as a guide for their discussions. The President expressed his gratitude to the Prime Minister for the open way in which he had presented his views.

The conference in Washington D.C. happened at a time of greater optimism for the Allies. There had been success in North Africa, a number of islands in the Pacific had been retaken, the Soviet Union had withstood the siege of Stalingrad, the battle of the Atlantic was turning in favor of the Allies, and preparations were going forward for Operation Husky (the invasion of Sicily).

Discussions

One of the main topics was that, if the British were interested in further operations in the Mediterranean Theatre while the Americans were insistent that these actions be limited so they would not interfere with a cross-Channel invasion in 1944. If the British would not commit themselves to the European invasion of Western Europe in 1944, then all bets were off and the United States would focus on Japan. There was much disagreement, even among those on the same side as to what the next step should be. However, Churchill and his generals were thus far right in that it was imperative to attack the Italian mainland, which was the only battlefield where Anglo-American ground forces could engage the Germans in 1943. Other topics of discussion included an increase in air attacks on Axis targets with an emphasis on the bombing of oil fields, recapturing Burma from the Japanese and reopening the supply line to China. There was also discussion of refugees leaving Europe, but no final decision was arrived at.

The President and Prime Minister had spent ample time together when they met for the 1943 conference, so they were used to each other’s moods for better or worse. They were each comfortable through the long hours of conversation. When the subject of the 1944 presidential election came up, Churchill told Roosevelt, “I simply can’t go on without you.” Churchill would write to Clementine from Washington, “Although after 12 arduous years he would gladly be quit of it. It would be painful to leave with the war unfinished and break the theme of his action. To me this would be a disaster of the first magnitude.” The United States and Britain, Churchill said in Washington, “could pull out of any mess together.” In Roosevelt’s mind, however, Churchill had become less of a force to contend with and was now a permanent part of Roosevelt’s universe, one in which he was in charge. 

During his time in Washington, Churchill would give another full -scale address to Congress. It was again a success. According to his typing secretary, Churchill spent nine and a half hours dictating it to her and it commanded the approval of the President.

After opening remarks on May 12, the first meeting would take place in Roosevelt’s oval study, a small hideaway above the Blue Room. As would be expected nautical paintings and etchings decorated the walls. The President would sit in his armless wheelchair greeting the Prime Minister and ten other men mostly from the Combined Chiefs. At this conference, the Americans were much better prepared than they had been at Casablanca where they felt they had been outfoxed by the British.

The President’s advisers worked hard to overcome what many thought was the biggest obstacle to American strategic leadership: Roosevelt himself, and his willingness to be swayed by Churchill’s oratory. The U.S. Joint Chiefs had met with Roosevelt three days before and had gotten from him a promise to press the British for a commitment to a cross-Channel invasion of Europe. They also reminded the President that a large segment of the American public considered the Japanese the real enemy. 

The President and Prime Minister would meet six times with the Combined Chiefs of Staff at the White House over the course of the conference. The Combined Chiefs, themselves, would meet almost every day in the Board of Governor’s Room at the Federal Reserve Building. On May 15 the two staffs had been able to take a rest-and-relaxation break at nearby Williamsburg, Virginia, the restored capital of 18th century Virginia. They would tour the town and feast on traditional foods of that era. Everyone from both sides seemed to enjoy themselves.

Final outcomes

Back in Washington, the meetings would continue until May 25. However, many major decisions would be reached on Wednesday, the nineteenth. On May 21, the Combined Chiefs presented their results to the President and the Prime Minister. In his diary Sir Alan Brooke, Chief of the Imperial General Staff, wrote, “We spent about one and a half hours listening to PM and President and holding forth on strategy and shivering lest either of them should suddenly put their foot right into it and reopen some of the differences which we had reconciled with some difficulty! ... Thank heaven we got through safely!” Brook spoke too soon. Three days after writing this, he again stated in his diary that Churchill, “wished to repudiate half” of the agreement, “which would have crashed the whole” agreement. Fortunately, Roosevelt’s adviser, Harry Hopkins, was able to get the Prime Minister to withdraw his revisions and only do minor rewording of some text.

The result of the Trident Conference, as that of Casablanca, for the near future pointed to the continuation of both the Mediterranean and Pacific offensives. However, barriers had been set at the Washington meetings to contain or limit the Mediterranean advance and these plans had mostly shifted to operations, which would set the stage for the planned cross-Channel invasion. There had also been progress in putting together the Pacific and European operations into tentative long-range planning in the war against both Japan and Germany. As welcome as these signs were to military planners, events would soon indicate that all the pieces in the worldwide strategic puzzle had not yet fallen into place and that the Mediterranean issue was still far from finished.

Ending the conference

At 4:00 P.M. on May 25, exactly two weeks after his arrival in Washington, Churchill walked down the corridor to the oval office. He would be leaving by flying boat from the Potomac River the next morning. After much debate, the code name for this departure would be “Neptune.” Roosevelt sat in his armless wheelchair, with Churchill now at his side, and gave a nod to let a large number of reporters in. “We are awfully glad to have Mr. Churchill back here,” the President told the gathering. “Considering the size of our problems, these discussions have been done in practically record time.” When asked about our plans for the future, Churchill replied, “Our plans for the future are to wage this war until unconditional surrender is procured from all those who have molested us, and this applies equally to Asia and Europe.”

     At the final Trident meeting with the Combined Chiefs and the President, Churchill proposed that Marshall accompany him to Algeria where they would meet with General Eisenhower. Churchill hoped to get from Ike irreversible promises to launch a campaign on the Italian mainland soon after “Husky.” Churchill also intended to try and get Marshall to accept some of his further plans in the eastern Mediterranean. However, Marshall remained skeptical as to the wisdom of invading mainland Italy. He would forcefully remind Churchill and the others that they had set a definite date for the cross-Channel attack in France for May 1, 1944.

     Eisenhower stated that the invasion of the Italian mainland would be an easy operation. Marshall disagreed. In fact, the invasion of Italy would be a bloody twenty-four month long struggle up the Italian boot that would cost the Allies more than three hundred thousand casualties, including 23,500 American deaths, and would turn most of the country into a wasteland.

What do you think of the Trident Conference? Let us know below.

Now read William’s article on three great early influences on Thomas Jefferson here.

Sources

1.     Rick Atkinson, The Day of Battle: The War in Sicily and Italy, 1943-1944 (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2007).

2.     Chapter VI-The Trident Conference-New Patterns: 1943, history.army.mil.

3.     Debi and Irwin Unger, General Marshall (New York: Harper Collins, 2014).

4.     The Trident Conference: May 1943, U.S. Government Bookstore, https://bookstore.gpo.gov.

5.     Trident Conference Home, Eisenhower Presidential Papers and Minutes of Meetings, https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov.

6.     Gerhard L. Weinberg, A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994).

7.     Max Hastings, The World at War: 1939-1945 (New York: Random House, 2011).

8.     The Trident Conference-May 1943 by Joint History Office (U.S.)

9.     Jon Meacham. Franklin and Winston: An Intimate Portrait of an Epic Friendship (New York: Random House, 2003).

10.  Andrew Roberts, Churchill: Walking with Destiny (New York: Penguin Random House, 2018).

11.  Roy Jenkins, Churchill: A Biography (New York: Penguin Group, 2002).

12.  The Trident Conference, Defense Media Network.

Do Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Handling of Issues of Race show he is not the ‘Ideal Democrat’?

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was president of the USA from 1933 to 1945. He led the country out of the Great Depression and into World War Two. But, was he the ideal Democrat? Here, Donna Catapano argues that while his economic policies suggest he is, his social policies suggest otherwise - notably on issues of race.

Franklin D. Roosevelt meeting a Japanese delegation in the White House in 1933. During World War Two, Japanese Americans would be interned under Roosevelt’s presidency. Picture source: Harris & Ewing, available here.

Franklin Roosevelt is often looked at today by people as the “ideal Democrat”; the person who shaped the present-day Democratic Party. Many of those people, including educators, discuss this turning point in history when Roosevelt “made” what the Democrat is today.  When Roosevelt won the Presidential Election in 1932 by a landslide against Republican Herbert Hoover, the Democratic Party was introduced to a new level of government involvement. Even though his economic ideologies would still be considered relevant to Democrats today, his social ideologies would not.  His dismissal of the social issues of the 1930s and 1940s caused a ripple effect that we are still feeling in 2020. Roosevelt’s social principles, including those regarding lynching, racial profiling and discrimination within his New Deal programs, contradicts his status as the “ideal Democrat.”

As the years went on, the “Democrat” as we know it today, who is one who typically is in favor of federal government spending for public programs, associated those beginnings with FDR. Therefore, people typically describe Roosevelt as the “ideal Democrat”. However, one can argue that in 2020, Roosevelt would not be deemed that way. In his 12 years as president, he took many actions that today might fall elsewhere on the political spectrum.  Although he took several actions (and inactions) that might raise further questioning, three stand out.

1.     His refusal to sign a federal anti-lynching bill 

Between the years 1882 and 1968, more than 3,500 African Americans were murdered by white mobs. At the time, almost none of them were arrested and/or convicted for their brutal crimes. What emerged was an anti-lynching movement, whose participants demanded government action to stop these hate crimes. The extent to which Roosevelt spoke out against lynching was a fireside chat on December 6, 1933, when he briefly discussed the “vile form of collective murder -- lynch law-- which has broken out in our midst anew”. He went on to very briefly condemn the issue, stating: “We know that it is murder, and a deliberate and definite disobedience of the Commandment, ‘Thou shalt not kill’. We do not excuse those in high places or in low who condone lynch law.”  Twenty-eight African Americans were lynched the same year he gave this 1933 fireside chat.  However, First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt spoke out against lynching on several occasions, joining the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in Roosevelt’s first term in 1934 and having a close professional relationship with its president at the time, Walter White. She even went so far as to set up a meeting with White and her husband to encourage Franklin to publicly support the Costigan-Wagner bill, which he refused. Roosevelt stated to White at their meeting: 

“If I come out for the anti-lynching bill now, they will block every bill I ask Congress to pass to keep America from collapsing. I just can’t take the risk.”

Roosevelt stood his ground, fearful that the Southern Democrats in Congress, representatives he relied on to get his New Deal programs passed, would turn their back on him and  the New Deal. One can ponder: If FDR was president today, would he back the #blacklivesmatter movement, or would he spend more time worrying about his own Congressional agenda?

2. Japanese Internment during World War II 

During the Second World War, the federal government saw Japanese American citizens as a threat.  However, when President Roosevelt passed Executive Order #9066 in 1942, it made it acceptable for the Secretary of War and any designated Military Commanders to:

“Whom he may from time to time designate, whenever he or any designated Commander deems such action necessary or desirable, to prescribe military areas in such places and of such extent as he or the appropriate Military Commander may determine, from which any or all persons may be excluded, and with respect to which, the right of any person to enter, remain in, or leave shall be subject to whatever restrictions the Secretary of War or the appropriate Military Commander may impose in his discretion”.

Moreover, it made it legal for said Commanders to prescribe what they called “military areas”, or relocation camps, for any and every person they deemed necessary: in this case, Japanese Americans. This executive order essentially allowed Japanese American citizens to be removed from their homes and relocated to internment camps where they were not allowed to leave, for not committing any crime but being of Japanese descent. This was perhaps one of the largest government-run racial profiling events in American history, and Roosevelt labeled it “A-OK”. One may ponder: how does this make Roosevelt different from the present-day with the current level of racial profiling that takes place for minorities such as African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Muslim Americans?

3. A New Deal for Some of the American People 

When you learn about FDR in school, you most likely associate him with the New Deal and how it helped the American people recover from the Great Depression.  As mentioned above, these federally funded programs were set out to create and give jobs to suffering citizens. However, it did not include all Americans.  For example, the National Recovery Administration (NRA) of 1933 “not only offered whites the first crack at jobs, but authorized separate and lower pay scales for blacks”.  Furthermore, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) of 1934 “refused to guarantee mortgages for blacks who tried to buy in white neighborhoods,” and the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) of 1933 created to employ young men on environmental projects, maintained segregated camps.  According to author Eric Rauchway, “Roosevelt never said anything outwardly about the fact that minorities were the last to get hired for New Deal jobs”. Once again, Roosevelt appealed to the conservative southern Democrats who were influential in Congress and oversaw many committee chairmanships, in fear of them blocking his pieces of legislation if he got involved with the “race question”. One may ponder: How might Roosevelt have handled job discrimination in 2020? 

Conclusion

The aforementioned reasons why President Roosevelt may not be seen as the “ideal Democrat” of 2020 are a few of a number of examples we can consider. Segregation in the military existed and he did not speak out against it. Regarding the Nazi persecution of Jews, he did not actively intervene or welcome Jewish refugees to the United States.

Franklin Roosevelt did much for the United States as a country economically. He revolutionized certain aspects of the Democratic Party, while staying silent on the pivotal social issues of the time. The birth of the present-day Democrat can be accredited to Roosevelt when it comes to the involvement of the federal government in citizen’s livelihoods, but not the social issues of the 1930s and 1940s.

So, in 2020, would FDR be considered the ideal Democrat? Let us know what you think below.

Franklin D. Roosevelt and the 1928 New York Gubernatorial Campaign – Part 4 – Victory

Nearly exhaustive research has been done on Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s (FDR’s) four national campaigns, his controversial Presidency, and his leadership in WWII. Surprisingly little, however, has focused on his New York State gubernatorial campaign in 1928. This was the campaign and position in which FDR would prove his fitness for the presidency of the Unites States, a position he held from 1933 to 1945.

In part 4, K.R.T. Quirion explains how Roosevelt closed his campaign with a focus on the justice system, the close election results, and the longer-term consequences of Roosevelt’s victory.

You can read part 1 on how Roosevelt overcame a serious illness, polio, to be able to take part in the 1928 campaign here, part 2 on how Roosevelt accepted the nominarion here, and part 3 on Roosevelt’s opponent and how Roosevelt performed on the campaign trail here.

Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1930, while Governor of New York.

Back to New York City

After completing his up-State tour, FDR returned to the Democratic bastion in New York City and its boroughs for the final week of the campaign. There, he continued to develop and expand his platform of populist programs aimed at winning the support of the common man. In Queens, he addressed the problem of urban congestion. According to Roosevelt, a major contributor to overcrowding was the abandonment of farmland by rural populations. To combat this, he promised to actively pursue ways of retaining rural populations.[1] It was in the interest of urban and rural citizens alike that farms be adequately maintained. 

However, as rural populations moved to town, city people moved out. Roosevelt believed that two factors were contributing to suburbanization, the growth of popular sports and the democratization of the automobile.[2] New York’s highway program had aided the latter. As to the former, Roosevelt told the audience of Governor Smith’s long legal struggle to acquire for the “great rank file” of New York’s citizenry, adequate parks facilities.[3] He explained how entrenched interests attempted to subject the former Governor to “political embarrassment,” but that Smith fought for what “was approved by the people of the State” and won.[4] In closing, Roosevelt assured the assembled voters that the Democratic Party “will keep on winning as long as it goes ahead with a program of progress.”[5]

The justice system

During the campaign, FDR developed three of the four issues he had outlined in his acceptance speech. On October 30th in the Bronx, he finally addressed the fourth; a Roosevelt administration would be committed to the reforming of New York’s justice system. He considered the administration of justice to be foundational to effective governance.[6] On that account, New Yorkers had much to be proud of in their jurisprudential tradition. However, he believed that reform was necessary to ensure that the State could “keep pace with the fundamental changes in…social conditions.”[7] He warned that a number of factors—such as an increase in population, the growth of cities, and the growth of business—were coalescing resulting in dramatic consequences to the justice system. Specifically, he stated that “these increased complexities of our social relations have added to the difficulties of assuring fundamental justice to the individual man and women.”[8]

First and foremost, Roosevelt advocated for the use of targeted efforts to provide “more modern, more American methods” to address the causes of crime.[9] He hoped to reduce not only the slowness and costliness of litigation but also the volume. Regarding the recent proliferation of civil suits, Roosevelt retorted, “You know, we Americans just love to go to court.”[10]Affirmative steps were needed to reigning in the number of cases being brought to trial. As governor he intended to launch a fact-finding mission to determine “what cases cause the delay and the expense; what kinds of cases take up the time of the courts; what courts are most crowded; and, finally, what cases ought never have come to court at all.”[11]

He discussed other reforms that he would pursue if elected as well. On the civil side, he promised to work for a reduction in the number of jury trials, eliminate perjury, hold members of the bar to a stricter ethical standard, eliminate ambulance chasing and dilatory motions, and finally, to devise new administrative tribunals tasked with freeing the court system of certain kinds of cases. 

According to Roosevelt, the criminal justice system needed reform as well. If elected, he proposed twelve steps for study in the coming years. These included a complete overhaul of New York’s prison labor system, the establishment of state detectives to assist District Attorney’s and a revision of the Penal Code.[12] He also suggested the creation of a court system focused on minor crimes. Finally, he declared his intention to revise the firearms law. 

Roosevelt lamented that there was often “talk of one law for the rich and another law for the poor.”[13] Looking at the States justice system as a whole, he believed that reform was necessary, and that the people of New York did as well. In closing, he told the voters that “what we need is action, and I propose to do all in my power to see that it is brought about.”[14]

Roosevelt’s whirlwind campaign ended on the 5th of November in Poughkeepsie. There he was greeted by tens of thousands of supporters parading in his honor. Over the course of nineteen days, he had traveled 1,300 miles and had given almost 50 separate speeches. The next morning, he cast his vote at the Hyde Park Town Hall and then retired to his campaign headquarters in the Biltmore Hotel to await the returns.      

VICTORY

Up-State Republican leaders had early on declared that they were “nevermore confident in victory” and prophesied a “big increase in the vote” from their districts.[15] At first, the election returns seemed to verify their confidence. Nationally, Hoover had defeated Smith in a landslide that seemed to be taking Roosevelt down with it. By midnight Election Day, votes for Ottinger coming in from up-State had more than offset the Democratic powerhouse of NYC. The papers began calling the race for Ottinger on the morning of the 7th. For Roosevelt, however, it was still too close to concede. 

Late night on the 7th, Roosevelt, Flynn, and others in the campaign took notice of the “slowness of the returns from certain upstate counties” where they were confident that Roosevelt had strong support.[16] They suspected that entrenched officials in those districts were up to something. Flynn then issued a statement indicating that key figures of the Democratic State Committee—accompanied by a staff of 100 lawyers—would be heading up-State to investigate suspected voter fraud. Soon thereafter, “many thousands of normally Republican votes” that Roosevelt won began trickling out of the up-State precincts.[17]

As the race began to shift in Roosevelt’s favor, Ottinger released a statement saying that he was ready to “concede nothing.”[18] Republicans were holding out for a few favorable up-State districts as well as about 20,000 absentee ballots. By this time, Roosevelt had returned to his beloved Warm Springs where he was recuperating from the campaign and awaiting its final verdict. On the 18th of November, Ottinger telegrammed Roosevelt his concession stating that “Undoubtedly the final count…will declare your election…You have my heartiest good wishes for a successful administration.”[19]

The election ended with 2,142,975 votes going to Roosevelt and 2,117,411 to Ottinger. Roosevelt was victorious by a razor-thin margin of a mere 25,564 votes. [20] New York State Democrat’s had paid dearly for these votes with campaign funds listed at $5,028,706.02 and expenses of $4,845,774.78. The Republicans, on the other hand, reported astonishingly small receipts of $867,874.25 and expenditures of $832,225.62.[21] Each vote cost the Democratic State Committee $2.26. This was astoundingly expensive when compared to the $0.39 per vote spent by Republicans. [22] In economic terms, the Roosevelt campaign was a disaster. Even in the overall vote, Roosevelt was not very successful, winning only by a plurality of 0.6 percent.[23] Nor had he delivered New York to Smith in the national election as originally hoped. Nonetheless, Roosevelt had fought hard and won.

A personal success

Despite his bitter-sweet victory, the gubernatorial campaign was a fantastic personal success for Roosevelt on several fronts. Given that his previous eight years had been spent living on the periphery of New York politics, his ability to carry the state despite only three weeks of campaigning was a testament to his continued political renown. It was a testament to Howe and Eleanor’s feverish work behind the scenes over those eight years as Roosevelt’s eyes and ears. And, it was a testament to the lasting impact of his “Happy Warrior” speech in 1924. 

This combination of factors boosted Roosevelt’s campaign on to an equal footing with Ottinger’s from the start. If he had dropped out of the public eye after contracting polio in 1921, he would have been unlikely to have been considered for the Governorship at all. Assuming he was considered, he would have been at a great disadvantage compared to his highly prominent and active political opponent. 

Even though challenges to his health would re-surface, the 1928 gubernatorial race presented Roosevelt with an opportunity to implement strategies to deal with this critical issue. He presented himself as a physically strong candidate that appeared in excellent condition. By appearing indefatigable, despite the breakneck speed of his campaign, voter concerns about his health were assuaged. In face-to-face meetings, New Yorkers were continually surprised “by his vigor.”[24] In the eyes of the electorate, Roosevelt appeared more than capable of handling matters of State despite his physical ailment. In future campaigns, he would repeat these strategies with great success. 

The gubernatorial campaign also affirmed Roosevelt’s new Democratic coalition strategy. The pattern of Democratic voter distribution in the 1928 result among cities, towns, and villages as well as between industrial and agricultural areas “indicated a trend” that confirmed the validity of forging a new coalition between labor, agriculture, minority, and urban voters.[25]During the next four years he would cultivate and mold this coalition into the base of the new Democratic Party. He accomplished this in part by working to establish a “permanent national organization, which would ‘extend its…help to…campaigns in between elections and…serve to constantly educate the public.”[26]    

Finally, the 1928 campaign elevated Roosevelt as the “heir apparent to the leadership of the Democratic Party.”[27] Following the election, he commissioned a national survey of the Democratic leadership designed to look at several important party matters. Out of the 979 responses from forty-five states “approximately 40% said that they were for Roosevelt or were leaning in his direction…” and “…15 percent specifically declared that he should be the party's next presidential nominee.”[28] From his position as the de facto leader of the Party, Roosevelt was able to further strengthen his new Democratic coalition. 

The leadership Roosevelt displayed during the campaign and his first term in office not only secured him a second term as governor but also secured his place at the helm of the Democratic Party. Over the next four years as governor, he developed the policies and strategies that he would later employ as the nation’s chief executive. His response to the stock market crash of 1929 and the following years of economic depression highlighted his ability to cope with a crisis. By 1932, he was once again poised to rendezvous with destiny.

Now, you can read K.R.T Quirion’s recently published series on telegraphy in the US Civil War here, or the secret US Cold War facility in Greenland here.

[1] Roosevelt, “Campaign Address (Excerpts), Queens, N.Y. October 29, 1928,” 55.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid., 56.

[4] Ibid. 

[5] Ibid., 59.

[6] Roosevelt, “Campaign Address (Excerpts), Bronx, N.Y. October 30, 1928,” 62

[7] Ibid., 63.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid., 63-4.

[10] Ibid,64.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid., 66.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Ibid.

[15] From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times, (Oct 18, 1928), “Roosevelt Assails Campaign Bigotry,” New York Times (1923-Current file), 1.

[16] Davis, FDR: The New York Years 1928-1932, 45.

[17] Ibid.

[18] “Ottinger Refuses to Concede Defeat,” (Nov 08, 1928), New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[19] “Ottinger Concedes Roosevelt Victory,” 1.

[20] Davis, FDR: The New York Years 1938-1932, 47.

[21] Special to The New York Times, (Nov 27, 1928), “Democrats List Funds at Albany,” New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[22] See Table 1. 

[23] Davis, FDR: The New York Years 1938-1932, 47.

[24] From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times, (Oct 22, 1928), “Roosevelt Stands Campaigning Well,” New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[25] Davis, FDR: The New York Years 1928-1932, 47.

[26] Earland I. Carlson, “Franklin D. Roosevelt's Post-Mortem of the 1928 Election,” Midwest Journal of Political Science, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Aug., 1964), 300.

[27] From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times, (Nov 11, 1928), “Roosevelt Hailed by South as Hope of Party in 1932,” New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[28] Carlson, “Franklin D. Roosevelt's Post-Mortem of the 1928 Election,” 307.

 Bibliography

Primary Sources

“Big Ottinger Vote Predicted Up-State.” (Oct 12, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104441542?accountid=12085.

“F.D. Roosevelt Back; Sees Leaders Today.” (Oct 08, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104448848?accountid=12085.

F.D. Roosevelt Drive Will Start at Once; To Centre Up-State. (Oct 04, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104470038?accountid=12085.

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 03, 1928). “Choice of Roosevelt Elates Gov. Smith.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104308830?accountid=12085.

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 3, 1928). “Ottinger Advances Queens Sewer Issue in Opening Campaign.” New York Times (1923-Current file). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104425583?accountid=12085

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 18, 1928). “Roosevelt Assails Campaign Bigotry.” New York Times (1923-Current file). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104438214?accountid=12085

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Nov 20, 1928). “Roosevelt Begins Work on Message.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104443997?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Nov 24, 1928). “Roosevelt Confers on Labor Program.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104398916?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Nov 11, 1928). “Roosevelt Hailed by South as Hope of Party in 1932.”New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104416279?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 19, 1928). “Roosevelt Scouts Tariff Prosperity” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104437219?accountid=12085.

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 22, 1928). “Roosevelt Stands Campaigning Well.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104310663?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times, (Oct 3, 1928), “Roosevelt Yields to Smith and Heads State Ticket; Choice Cheers Democrats,” New York Times (1923-Current file). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104308778?accountid=12085.

“Ottinger Accepts Power as Big Issue.” (Oct 16, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File).  Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104430730?accountid=12085.

“Ottinger Concedes Roosevelt Victory.” (Nov 19, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104439338?accountid=12085. 

“Ottinger Refuses to Concede Defeat.” (Nov 08, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104415539?accountid=12085.

“Ottinger to Visit 14 Up-State Cites.” (Oct 13, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104460248?accountid=12085.

Roosevelt, Franklin D. “Acceptance Speech for the Renomination for the Presidency, Philadelphia, Pa.” June 27, 1936. The American Presidency Project. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=15314.

“Roosevelt Attacks Theories of Hoover.” (Nov 02, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104414619?accountid=12085.

“Roosevelt Confers with Smith to Map Campaign in State.” (Oct 10, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104321497?accountid=12085. 

“Roosevelt Demands State Keep Power.” (Oct 17, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104423627?accountid=12085. 

“Roosevelt Opposes Any Move to Revive New York Dry Law.” (Oct 09, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104367563?accountid=12085. 

Roosevelt, Franklin D. The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Vol. 1, The Genesis of the New Deal 1928-1932. New York, NY: Random House. 1938.

“Roosevelt to Make Wide Tour of State.” (Oct 13, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104433007?accountid=12085.

Special to The New York Times. (1928, Oct 07). “Bigotry is Receding, Says F.D. Roosevelt.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/104469322?accountid=12085.

Special to The New York Times. (Nov 27, 1928). “Democrats List Funds at Albany.” New York Times (1923-Current File).Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104304172?accountid=12085.

Special to The New York Times. (Oct 03, 1928). “Roosevelt Held Out to the Last Minute.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104326803?accountid=12085. 

Special to The New York Times. (Oct 03, 1928). “Roosevelt Lauded by Mayor Walker.” New York Times (1923-Current File).Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104326338?accountid=12085. 

Woolf., S.J. (1928, Oct 07). “The Two Candidates for the Governorship.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/104433929?accountid=12085.

Secondary Sources

Davis, Kenneth S. FDR: The Beckoning of Destiny 1882-1928. New York, NY: Random House. 1972.

__________. FDR: The New York Years 1928-1933. New York, NY: Random House. 1985.

Goldberg, Richard Thayer. The Making of Franklin D. Roosevelt: Triumph Over Disability. Cambridge, MA: Abt Books. 1971.

Gunther, John. Roosevelt in Retrospect, A Profile in History. New York, NY: Harper. 1950.

Troy, Gil, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., and Fred L. Israel. History of American Presidential Elections: 1789-2008, Vol. II, 1872-1940. New York, NY: Facts on File, 2012.

Journal Articles           

Carlson, Earland I. “Franklin D. Roosevelt's Post-Mortem of the 1928 Election.” Midwest Journal of Political Science, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Aug., 1964): pp. 298-308.

Goldman, Armond S., Elisabeth J. Schmalstieg, Daniel H. Freeman, Jr, Daniel A. Goldman and Frank C. Schmalstieg, Jr. “What was the cause of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s paralytic illness?” Journal of Medical Biography. (11, 2003): pp. 232–240.

 Kiewe, Amos. “A Dress Rehearsal for a Presidential Campaign: FDR's Embodied "Run" for the 1928 Governorship.” The Southern Communication Journal. (Winter, 1999): pp. 154-167.

Franklin D. Roosevelt and the 1928 New York Gubernatorial Campaign – Part 3 – The Campaign

Nearly exhaustive research has been done on Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s (FDR’s) four national campaigns, his controversial Presidency, and his leadership in WWII. Surprisingly little, however, has focused on his New York State gubernatorial campaign in 1928. This was the campaign and position in which FDR would prove his fitness for the presidency of the Unites States, a position he held from 1933 to 1945.

In part 3, K.R.T. Quirion tells us about Roosevelt’s opponent, Albert Ottinger, and then how Roosevelt performed on the campaign trail.

You can read part 1 on how Roosevelt overcame a serious illness, polio, to be able to take part in the 1928 campaign here, and part 2 on how Roosevelt accepted the nominarion here.

Franklin D. Roosevelt in Hyde Park, New York in 1928.

THE OPPOSITION

Like Roosevelt, Albert Ottinger had an impressive resume. A graduate of New York University School of Law, Ottinger was elected to the State Senate of New York in 1917 and 1918. In 1921 he was appointed Assistant Attorney General of the United States. Three years later he resigned from this position and was elected Attorney General of New York. He was re-elected in 1926 as the sole survivor of a Democratic landslide. That year every other member of the Republican ticket went down in defeat.[1] Roosevelt knew that Ottinger was a “very promising gentleman” as well as a serious political opponent.[2]

In an early interview with S.J. Woolf of the New York Times, Ottinger said that, “[t]he inhibitions, ‘thou shalt not lie’ and ‘thou shalt not steal,’ would perfectly describe the work upon which I have been employed throughout my term of office as Attorney General, and I shall continue to employ them in my future work.”[3] He also took the opportunity to tout his record of fighting for the common man. Ottinger recalled how, when a statute requiring voting machines to be installed throughout New York City was being debated, he had fought for the enforcement and protection of each citizen’s right to vote, and for that vote to “be honestly counted.”[4]

He claimed that he was for the honest enforcement of all State laws, including those deemed harsh, archaic or repressive. Tempering these remarks, he said that there is a humane manner to accomplish the execution of a law. Where a law is humane it must be “humanely interpreted and applied.”[5] As an example, he pointed to his work with the Workmen’s Compensation act.[6] By clearing out backlogged cases as Attorney General, Ottinger claimed to have granted quick relief to the maimed. Furthermore, his fight against loan sharks, grafters, and other types of criminal fraud enabled him to campaign as a “champion of ‘little people.’”[7]

Besides accepting Roosevelt’s challenge to make the water-power policy a primary issue of the race, Ottinger used his nomination speech to reveal other parts of his platform. He focused on minimizing the “extravagant expenditures of Smith’s administration. In its place, he pledged to focus on the economy, revise the taxation system and “abolish the State income tax.”[8] He also announced his intent to establish a state bureau of investigation to “detect crime and discover the criminal.”[9]Finally, he vowed to stamp out corruption in state and local governments.[10] On the prohibition question Ottinger—unlike Roosevelt—decided to stay silent.

Ottinger waged an active campaign throughout the State. Beginning with his acceptance speech in NYC on October 16, Ottinger spoke sixteen times in fourteen up-state cities before returning to Manhattan on the 24th.[11] Early on he associated himself with Herbert Hoover and the wider national election. At his first stop in Elmira, NY, Ottinger told the crowd that he believed the people of New York would “Hooverize [the] election…and…draft the brains of that gigantic genius of organization for…the benefit of all the American people.”[12] Political leaders up-State had assured  him that “all those supporting Hoover would support [him].”[13] According to Oliver James, the Chairman of Ottinger’s campaign committee, the plurality of 600,000 up-State votes would decide the election.[14]

FROM BINGHAMTON TO POUGHKEEPSIE

Ottinger’s campaign men could make predictions of a massive up-State vote for their candidate because it was a historically Republican voting bloc. For that very reason, FDR chose to run a hard campaign in the up-State counties; whereas his Democratic predecessors had chosen to rely on their traditional bastions in the major cities. Instead, he had a theory for a new Democratic coalition of labor, agriculture, minorities, and urban voters. Seeking to forge this coalition, Roosevelt carefully crafted his platform with their interests in mind.

In Jamestown—a minor New York city but the heart of one of the States' most prominent agricultural centers, Chautauqua County—Roosevelt delivered his first message to the agricultural interests of the up-Staters’. After affirming the Democratic platform on agriculture, Roosevelt declared that he “aimed to go even further.”[15] He said that he wanted to see “the farmer and his family…put on the same level of earning capacity as their fellow Americans.”[16] Acutely aware that he was speaking in a primarily Republican district, he told the assembled crowd that his fight was “not with the Republican rank and file” but with the leadership.[17] Roosevelt had given a similar speech in Elmira—“the heart of dairy country”—the day before and was greeted by an audience that showed enthusiastically that they “appreciated his effort to deal constructively with their specific problems.”[18]

Roosevelt decided to roll out his labor plank in Buffalo on the 20th. He had originally planned to speak on a different subject but changed his plans when Ottinger “had the nerve to talk about what the Republican Party has done for labor.”[19] In Buffalo, Roosevelt delivered one of his most memorable lines from the campaign. “Somewhere in a pigeon-hole in a desk of the Republican leaders of New York State is a large envelope, soiled, worn, bearing a date that goes back twenty-five or thirty years.”[20] This envelope, he continued, has “Promises to labor” written on the front and is filled with identical sheets of paper dated two years apart.[21] “But nowhere is a single page bearing the title ‘Promises kept.’”[22] He closed by indicting “half-way measure[s]” proposed by a Republican “smoke-screen commission,” and challenged the crowd to compare the two party’s programs.[23]

Roosevelt then listed the Democrats’ promises to labor. First, he pledged to “complete Governor Smith’s labor and welfare program.”[24] Second, he promised to give old-age pensions a fair consideration.[25] He also guaranteed to establish an advisory board on minimum wage for women and children, extend the Workmen’s Compensation Act and liberalize “laws relating to the welfare of mothers and children.” [26] The Roosevelt administration would be committed to the principle that the “labor of human beings is not a commodity.” [27]

Social Programs

The next evening in Rochester, Roosevelt addressed the social programs that were central to the liberal platform of the New York Democratic Party. He began his discussion of these “human function[s]” of government by reminding voters of the great strides in education achieved by Governor Smith.[28] Despite the progress already made, FDR admitted that additional State aid would be needed to continue raising the minimum educational standards throughout the State. 

Drawing a parallel between education and healthcare, he said that an expansion of medical service was needed statewide.[29]He lauded the Democratic Senate for passing bills increasing social welfare and government assistance but denouncing the Republican House for ignoring these “pleas” which they had “strangled to death in committee.”[30] If elected, he planned to accelerate the momentum already gained and ask for the money to expand healthcare assistance throughout the State.[31]

Finally, he addressed the issue of old-age pensions. New York’s great need for an old-age pension law was nowhere more apparent than when examining the State’s Poor Laws. In Rochester, he exclaimed that “[I]t just tears my heart to see those old men and women,” going into the County Poorhouse. [32] He concluded that if an adequate old-age law was passed there would be no need to reform the Poor Laws. Instead, they would be repealed “forever and ever.”[33] Roosevelt summarized all that he was trying to accomplish with his campaign by the motto, “Look outward and not in; look forward and not back; look upward and not down, and lend a hand.”[34]

From Water-power to Prohibition

The water-power issue was front and center in Syracuse. On the 23rd, he regaled the audience with the twenty-one-year long struggle between public and private power interests in the use and administration of water resources throughout the State. He weaved a complex narrative which portrayed the Republican Legislature as putting special interests above the good of the public, while the Democrats—and particularly Governor Smith—fought for the people of New York. He claimed that Ottinger’s election would mean the abandonment of the policy supported by the electorate.”[35] Worse still, it would mean the immediate abdication of power resources to “development by private corporations.”[36]

Syracuse turned out to be the most effective speech of the campaign.[37] This intense barrage forced Ottinger to address the issue on a battlefield of Roosevelt’s choosing. Ottinger explained his actions in terms designed to convince the electorate of his “profound devotion to the public interest.”[38] Even while Ottinger scrambled to cover his tracks on the power issue, FDR declared that the people had already made up their minds.     

Later that same day in Utica, Roosevelt reiterated his stance against the re-enactment of State Prohibition Laws. Citing his tenure on the National Crime Commission, Roosevelt explained that all across the nation there was an “undoubted increase in crime.”[39] One factor contributing to this drastic crime surge was the bootlegging of liquor.[40] He expressed concern that Prohibition had caused a proliferation of criminal activity and was leading to a general disrespect for the law. In light of this, he appealed to the voters, urging them to fight the enactment of additional prohibition laws at the state level. He believed that state dry laws added to the confusion rather than streamlining enforcement. Instead, he believed that the Federal Volstead Act was sufficient—when properly enforced—to fulfill the needs of New York.

By the 26th, the campaign was seeing massive support from the up-State counties. Recounting his travels to a gathering in Troy, Roosevelt told how his motorcade was “kidnapped” in Fonda by a group of people in forty or fifty cars.[41] His abductors directed the campaign to the town of Gloversville. In past elections, “two Democrats, and sometimes three” went to the Gloversville polls on Election Day.[42] When Roosevelt arrived in the town, he was greeted by some two thousand people who had gathered to hear him speak. Later that same day the campaign made another impromptu stop in Amsterdam to speak before a group of sixteen hundred. “Too bad about this unfortunate sick man isn’t it,” he quipped.[43]

With the up-State tour complete, FDR returned to New York City with one week left of this fateful election.

Now, read the final part in the series, ‘Victory’, here.

What do you think of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s activity on the campaign trail? Let us know below. 

[1] S.J Woolf, (1928, Oct 07), “The Two Candidates for the Governorship,” New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[2] “Roosevelt Demands State Keep Power,” 2.

[3] Woolf, “The Two Candidates for the Governorship,” 1.

[4] Ibid., 1.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ottinger explained that the Workmen’s Compensation act was a “beneficial statute passed in the interest of the injured workman.” Ibid. 

[7] Davis, FDR: The New York Years 1928-1932, 31.

[8] “Ottinger Accepts Power as Big Issue,” (Oct 16, 1928), New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[9] Ibid, 2.

[10] Ibid.

[11] “Ottinger to Visit 14 Up-State Cites,” (Oct 13, 1928), New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[12] From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times, (Oct 3, 1928), “Ottinger Advances Queens Sewer Issue in Opening Campaign,” New York Times (1923-Current file), 1.

[13] “Big Ottinger Vote Predicted Up-State,” (Oct 12, 1928), New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[14] “Ottinger to Visit 14 Up-State Cites,” 1.

[15] The platform included a “pledge for a careful study” of the farming economy and a pledge for an investigation into the “farm tax situation.” Roosevelt, “Extemporaneous Campaign Address (Excerpts), Jamestown, N.Y., October 19, 1928,” 27.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid., 29.

[18] From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times, (Oct 19 1928), “Roosevelt Scouts Tariff Prosperity” New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[19] Roosevelt, “Campaign Address (Excerpts), Buffalo, N.Y. October 20, 1928,” 30.

[20] Ibid.

[21] Ibid., 30-31

[22] Ibid., 31.

[23] Ibid., 32.

[24] Ibid., 34-35.

[25] Ibid., 35.

[26] Ibid., 36.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Roosevelt, “Campaign Address (Excerpts), Rochester, N.Y. October 22, 1928,” 38.

[29] Ibid., 41.

[30] Ibid., 42.

[31] Ibid., 41.

[32] Ibid., 43.

[33] Ibid.

[34] Ibid., 44.

[35] Ibid., 50.

[36] Ibid.

[37] Davis, FDR: The New York Years, 42.

[38] Ibid.

[39] Roosevelt, “Campaign Address (Excerpts), Utica, N.Y. October 25, 1928,” 51.

[40] Ibid.

[41] Roosevelt, “Campaign Address (Excerpts), Troy, N.Y. October 26, 1928,” 54.

[42] Ibid.

[43] Ibid.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

“Big Ottinger Vote Predicted Up-State.” (Oct 12, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104441542?accountid=12085.

“F.D. Roosevelt Back; Sees Leaders Today.” (Oct 08, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104448848?accountid=12085.

F.D. Roosevelt Drive Will Start at Once; To Centre Up-State. (Oct 04, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104470038?accountid=12085.

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 03, 1928). “Choice of Roosevelt Elates Gov. Smith.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104308830?accountid=12085.

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 3, 1928). “Ottinger Advances Queens Sewer Issue in Opening Campaign.” New York Times (1923-Current file). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104425583?accountid=12085

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 18, 1928). “Roosevelt Assails Campaign Bigotry.” New York Times (1923-Current file). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104438214?accountid=12085

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Nov 20, 1928). “Roosevelt Begins Work on Message.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104443997?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Nov 24, 1928). “Roosevelt Confers on Labor Program.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104398916?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Nov 11, 1928). “Roosevelt Hailed by South as Hope of Party in 1932.”New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104416279?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 19, 1928). “Roosevelt Scouts Tariff Prosperity” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104437219?accountid=12085.

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 22, 1928). “Roosevelt Stands Campaigning Well.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104310663?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times, (Oct 3, 1928), “Roosevelt Yields to Smith and Heads State Ticket; Choice Cheers Democrats,” New York Times (1923-Current file). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104308778?accountid=12085.

“Ottinger Accepts Power as Big Issue.” (Oct 16, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File).  Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104430730?accountid=12085.

“Ottinger Concedes Roosevelt Victory.” (Nov 19, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104439338?accountid=12085. 

“Ottinger Refuses to Concede Defeat.” (Nov 08, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104415539?accountid=12085.

“Ottinger to Visit 14 Up-State Cites.” (Oct 13, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104460248?accountid=12085.

Roosevelt, Franklin D. “Acceptance Speech for the Renomination for the Presidency, Philadelphia, Pa.” June 27, 1936. The American Presidency Project. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=15314.

“Roosevelt Attacks Theories of Hoover.” (Nov 02, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104414619?accountid=12085.

“Roosevelt Confers with Smith to Map Campaign in State.” (Oct 10, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104321497?accountid=12085. 

“Roosevelt Demands State Keep Power.” (Oct 17, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104423627?accountid=12085.

“Roosevelt Opposes Any Move to Revive New York Dry Law.” (Oct 09, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104367563?accountid=12085. 

Roosevelt, Franklin D. The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Vol. 1, The Genesis of the New Deal 1928-1932. New York, NY: Random House. 1938.

“Roosevelt to Make Wide Tour of State.” (Oct 13, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104433007?accountid=12085.

Special to The New York Times. (1928, Oct 07). “Bigotry is Receding, Says F.D. Roosevelt.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/104469322?accountid=12085.

Special to The New York Times. (Nov 27, 1928). “Democrats List Funds at Albany.” New York Times (1923-Current File).Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104304172?accountid=12085.

Special to The New York Times. (Oct 03, 1928). “Roosevelt Held Out to the Last Minute.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104326803?accountid=12085. 

Special to The New York Times. (Oct 03, 1928). “Roosevelt Lauded by Mayor Walker.” New York Times (1923-Current File).Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104326338?accountid=12085. 

Woolf., S.J. (1928, Oct 07). “The Two Candidates for the Governorship.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/104433929?accountid=12085.

Secondary Sources

Davis, Kenneth S. FDR: The Beckoning of Destiny 1882-1928. New York, NY: Random House. 1972.

__________. FDR: The New York Years 1928-1933. New York, NY: Random House. 1985.

Goldberg, Richard Thayer. The Making of Franklin D. Roosevelt: Triumph Over Disability. Cambridge, MA: Abt Books. 1971.

Gunther, John. Roosevelt in Retrospect, A Profile in History. New York, NY: Harper. 1950.

Troy, Gil, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., and Fred L. Israel. History of American Presidential Elections: 1789-2008, Vol. II, 1872-1940. New York, NY: Facts on File, 2012.

Journal Articles           

Carlson, Earland I. “Franklin D. Roosevelt's Post-Mortem of the 1928 Election.” Midwest Journal of Political Science, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Aug., 1964): pp. 298-308.

Goldman, Armond S., Elisabeth J. Schmalstieg, Daniel H. Freeman, Jr, Daniel A. Goldman and Frank C. Schmalstieg, Jr. “What was the cause of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s paralytic illness?” Journal of Medical Biography. (11, 2003): pp. 232–240.

Kiewe, Amos. “A Dress Rehearsal for a Presidential Campaign: FDR's Embodied "Run" for the 1928 Governorship.” The Southern Communication Journal. (Winter, 1999): pp. 154-167.

Franklin D. Roosevelt and the 1928 New York Gubernatorial Campaign – Part 1 – Overcoming Illness

Nearly exhaustive research has been done on Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s (FDR’s) four national campaigns, his controversial Presidency, and his leadership in WWII. Surprisingly little, however, has focused on his New York State gubernatorial campaign in 1928. This was the campaign and position in which FDR would prove his fitness for the presidency of the Unites States, a position he held from 1933 to 1945.

In part 1, K.R.T. Quirion explains the background to the campaign, the struggles that FDR had after he contracted Polio, and an amazing comeback appearance in 1924.

Franklin D. Roosevelt on crutches in August 1924, several years after his illness. Here with Lieutenant Governor George Lunn, FDR, John W. Davis, and Al Smith at Roosevelt's family home in Hyde Park, New York. Source: FDR Presidential Library & Museum, available here.

INTRODUCTION

While there has been little focus on Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s campaign for governor of New York State in 1928, it is known that prior to the campaign he had taken “steps in the presidential direction.”[1] Amos Kiewe outlines FDR’s climb up the political ladder starting his election to the New York State Senate, his appointment to Assistant Secretary of the Navy, and finally, his nomination as Vice-President on the 1920 Democratic ticket. Ultimately, however, New York was the crucible in which FDR demonstrated his fitness for a shot at the nation’s highest office.

Unfortunately, Roosevelt’s vision of political grandeur was cut abruptly short when he contracted poliomyelitis—commonly known as polio—during a vacation to Campobello Island in the summer of 1921.[2] Despite his affliction, FDR would return to the public arena within three years and re-enter political office in seven. In hindsight, this short withdrawal from public life was a relatively small detour in FDR’s long political career. During the “nearly fatal initial phase of the [polio] attack” he might well have abandoned his political aspirations and retired to Hyde Park for good.[3] Instead, thanks to the support of his wife Eleanor and his life-long friend Louis Howe, Roosevelt overcame his affliction and began the long road of recovery.  

Over the next seven years, FDR strengthened his body, his mind, and his belief that there was a providential plan for his life. Davis explains how, in retrospect, FDR “knew absolutely that what had happened to him…was integral to God’s design.”[4] His wife Eleanor believed that her husband’s trial by fire was preparing him for the “great historic tasks he must ultimately undertake.”[5] Despite the great personal difficulty of this period, Eleanor and Howe were successful in keeping Roosevelt plugged into the political arena.

The 1928 chance

His moment came in 1928. New York governor and presidential hopeful, Al Smith, indicated his desire to have FDR continue his legacy in the Empire State. More importantly, Smith knew that the “margin between victory and defeat…in the national race might well be provided by a victorious Democratic gubernatorial candidate in New York, and it was a margin that Roosevelt and Roosevelt alone could assure.”[6] At first, FDR was staunchly opposed to entering the race. He refused Smith’s initial invocation to run, citing concerns about his health.[7] Privately, Roosevelt believed that 1928 would be a bad year for Democrats and preferred to wait until the 1932 election. He finally yielded to Smith on October 2, on the condition that the delegates chose to nominate him with “full knowledge of his personal situation and wishes.”[8] The very next day, the Democratic convention in Rochester, NY nominated Roosevelt by acclamation. 

Over the next month, Roosevelt crisscrossed New York State, stumping in every city where he could make time for a speech. This important race attracted individuals, like Judge Samuel Rosenman, that would become intertwined in FDR’s political career for the next 17 years. The race was so invigorating that he once exclaimed if “I could keep on campaigning twelve months longer, I’d throw away my canes.”[9] As the New York polls closed on November 7, 1928, the votes appeared to favor the Republican candidate, Albert Ottinger. But, by the 19th, Roosevelt had won by a razor-thin margin of less than half of 1% of the total vote.[10]

What allowed a candidate who had spent the last eight years living on the periphery of New York politics, to win a heavily contested race with a mere three weeks of active campaigning? This article examines the challenges that FDR faced in convincing the New York electorate that he was fit for the Governor’s Mansion. The article explores how he overcame concerns about his physical health by presenting himself as an active campaigner. It also looks at Roosevelt’s experimental coalition of labor, agriculture, minority, and urban voters and the platform he used to convince these widely differing constituencies to give him their vote. Finally, this article argues that the 1928 campaign boosted FDR to the forefront of national politics and laid the groundwork for convincing the national electorate that he was ready for the White House in 1932. 

Though initially reluctant to his candidacy, once nominated, FDR boldly met the challenges of the race. His 1928 platform and his tenure as Governor of New York laid the foundation for his national policies in the White House. Eight years after his gubernatorial race, President Roosevelt would tell supporters at the 1936 Democratic National Convention (DNC) that their generation of Americans had a “rendezvous with destiny.”[11] For Roosevelt, when destiny came knocking, he confidently answered. 

POLITICS, POLIO, POLITICS AGAIN

Despite his nearly miraculous victory in the gubernatorial campaign, the 1928 race was not run in a vacuum. Roosevelt had been on a political trajectory long before contracting polio. After his outstanding record as assistant secretary of the Navy, FDR sought to establish himself as the “heir to Wilsonian Progressivism.”[12] A platform to project that image presented itself in 1920 when the DNC named Roosevelt the running mate of their Presidential nominee, James M. Cox. Though the election did not favor the Democratic ticket, it did allow FDR to build a national network within the Party.[13] Another important side-effect of the election was that FDR was able to build up his permanent secretariat.[14] He would rely heavily on his so-called “Cuff-Links Club” in future campaigns and in office.

Following the landslide loss of 1920, Roosevelt and his family retired to Campobello Island for some much-needed respite. However, the fatigue that he was hoping to recuperate from “did not go away.”[15] Instead, disaster struck a few days into the vacation. The young political maverick had his aspirations of future office dashed when he contracted polio which left him permanently disabled. As Amos explains, “the disease was a devastating shock to the energetic Roosevelt.” Not only did he have to re-learn basic skills and face the “mental anguish of a life-long disability”, but he also had to cope with the stigma of polio.[16] In the early 1900s, polio was viewed as the “disease of the unclean and unhygienic” and the “poor and low class.”[17] This aura clung even to Roosevelt. Despite his upper-class upbringing, even he struggled to shake this humiliating stigma.

The physical and psychological struggle that FDR endured during the initial stages of his recovery was then multiplied by the fear that his political aspirations had been dashed in one cruel blow. The disease engulfed his body and swallowed all hope of political grandeur in its wake. Instead of sinking into the depths of history as the tragic shadow of his cousin Theodore, FDR was carried through the storm by his wife Eleanor and the political acumen of his close friend and advisor Louis Howe. Roosevelt managed to stay politically active from the sidelines.  He never dropped out of public life. With the help of Eleanor and Howe, he continued his extensive political correspondence “virtually without interruption.”[18]  

Politics after Polio

Roosevelt’s first major political action following his disability was his endorsement of Al Smith for Governor of New York in 1922. This wise investment would pay dividends for FDR within the decade. Following a successful term as Governor, Smith was impeccably positioned for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1924. Early that year, Roosevelt formally endorsed Smith’s candidacy. Though harboring doubts about the election, Roosevelt “calculated that the Smith campaign would keep his name before the public.”[19]

His strategy paid off amidst the chaos of the 1924 Democratic Convention. When he took the lectern to deliver Smith’s nominating speech at Madison Square Gardens in New York City, onlookers waited with bated breath as he moved slowly and carefully to the podium. He proceeded across the stage alone “swinging his weight from his hips.”[20] Even this physical stunt was a calculated political decision. In June of 1922, Roosevelt had begun training himself to exercise some amount of independent movement.[21] He believed that the appearance of health and independent movement was a necessity if he ever wished to hold political office again. This had been the reason for his physical training. Roosevelt knew that no modern leader had reached the highest rungs of political office without the public perception of good health and physical command. His performance at the Convention went a long way in proving that he was ready to return to politics.

In addition to demonstrating his physical recovery, the remarks at the DNC earned him even greater political points. His “Happy Warrior” speech resounded with millions of people from all across the nation who listened over the radio.[22] Davis writes that Roosevelt “was the central figure of the only scene that would brightly shine…out of the Garden’s prolonged and gloomy turmoil.”[23] The publicity that Roosevelt reaped from this speech was as significant for his political future as it was proliferous.[24] Following the Convention, a columnist for the Herald Tribune wrote that, “[f]rom the time Roosevelt made his speech…he has been easily the foremost figure on the floor or platform…” and “...has done for himself what he could not do for his candidate.”[25]

The momentum Roosevelt created at the Convention translated into an invitation to run for Governor of New York that very year. He declined, however, explaining that he would “not run for public office until he could walk without crutches.”[26]Despite this commitment, which he would cite again in 1928, FDR would soon concede to the pressure of politics. 

Now, read part 2 on how Roosevelt accepted the nomination here.

What do you think of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s response to getting Polio? Let us know below. 

[1] Amos Kiewe, “A Dress Rehearsal for a Presidential Campaign: FDR's Embodied "Run" for the 1928 Governorship,” The Southern Communication Journal, (Winter, 1999), 154.

[2] A 2003 study published in the Journal of Medical Biography has placed the actual nature of FDR’s disease in question. The accepted diagnoses has been polio. However, a team of medical research led by Dr. Armond S. Goldman, Emeritus Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, Texas has shed new light on this once solidly held fact. Their research suggests that FDR actually suffered from Guillain–Barre´ syndrome, a disorder in which the body's immune system attacks part of the peripheral nervous system. Despite the probability of this assertion, for the purposes of my research, I will maintain the widely accepted diagnosis as it neither adds nor detracts from the content of this article, whereas “rocking the boat” so to speak, by replacing the commonly accepted diagnosis with a rare and difficult to pronounce disorder is distracting at best and confusing at worst. Armond S. Goldman, Elisabeth J. Schmalstieg, Daniel H. Freeman, Jr, Daniel A. Goldman and Frank C. Schmalstieg, Jr, “What was the cause of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s paralytic illness?,” Journal of Medical Biography, (11, 2003): 1. 

[3] Kenneth S. Davis, FDR: The Beckoning of Destiny 1882-1928, (New York, NY: Random House, 1972), 10-11.

[4] Ibid., 11.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Davis, FDR: The Beckoning of Destiny 1882-1928, (New York, NY: Random House, 1972), 851.

[7] Special to The New York Times. (Oct 03, 1928). “Roosevelt Held Out to the Last Minute.” New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[8] Davis, FDR: The Beckoning of Destiny 1882-1928, 852.

[9] “Roosevelt Attacks Theories of Hoover,” (Nov 02, 1928), New York Times (1923-Current File), 1.

[10] “Ottinger Concedes Roosevelt Victory,” (Nov 19, 1928), New York Times (1923-Current File), 6.

[11] Franklin D. Roosevelt, “Acceptance Speech for the Renomination for the Presidency, Philadelphia, Pa.,” June 27, 1936, The American Presidency Project, online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley.

[12] Gil Troy, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., and Fred L. Israel, History of American Presidential Elections: 1789-2008, Vol. II, 1872-1940, (New York, NY: Facts on File, 2012), 1037.

[13] Ibid.

[14] John Gunther, Roosevelt in Retrospect, A Profile in History, (New York, NY: Harper, 1950), 217.

[15] Richard T. Goldberg, The Making of Franklin D. Roosevelt: Triumph Over Disability, (Cambridge, MA: Abt Books, 1971), 28.

[16] Kiewe, 155.  

[17] Ibid.

[18] Davis, FDR: The Beckoning of Destiny 1882-1928, 673.

[19] Goldberg, The Making of Franklin D. Roosevelt: Triumph Over Disability, 70. 

[20] Ibid., 71.

[21] Roosevelt in fact could not walk. Instead, he used the muscles in his upper body and torso and swung his legs—which were re-enforced with heavy steel braces—so that he could give the appearance of walking. 

[22] Davis, FDR: The Beckoning of Destiny 1882-1928, 756.

[23] Ibid., 755.

[24] “[T]he New York World proclaimed that ‘Franklin D. Roosevelt stands out as the real hero of the Democratic Convention of 1924.’ Said the World: ‘Adversity has lifted him above the bickering, the religious bigotry, conflicting personal ambitions and petty sectional prejudices…It has made him the one leader commanding the respect and admiration of delegates from all sections of the land.’” Ibid., 757.

[25] Ibid.

[26] Gunther, Roosevelt in Retrospect, 247.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

“Big Ottinger Vote Predicted Up-State.” (Oct 12, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104441542?accountid=12085.

“F.D. Roosevelt Back; Sees Leaders Today.” (Oct 08, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104448848?accountid=12085.

F.D. Roosevelt Drive Will Start at Once; To Centre Up-State. (Oct 04, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104470038?accountid=12085.

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 03, 1928). “Choice of Roosevelt Elates Gov. Smith.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104308830?accountid=12085.

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 3, 1928). “Ottinger Advances Queens Sewer Issue in Opening Campaign.” New York Times (1923-Current file). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104425583?accountid=12085

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 18, 1928). “Roosevelt Assails Campaign Bigotry.” New York Times (1923-Current file). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104438214?accountid=12085

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Nov 20, 1928). “Roosevelt Begins Work on Message.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104443997?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Nov 24, 1928). “Roosevelt Confers on Labor Program.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104398916?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Nov 11, 1928). “Roosevelt Hailed by South as Hope of Party in 1932.”New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104416279?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 19, 1928). “Roosevelt Scouts Tariff Prosperity” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104437219?accountid=12085.

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times. (Oct 22, 1928). “Roosevelt Stands Campaigning Well.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104310663?accountid=12085. 

From a Staff Correspondent of The New York Times, (Oct 3, 1928), “Roosevelt Yields to Smith and Heads State Ticket; Choice Cheers Democrats,” New York Times (1923-Current file). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104308778?accountid=12085.

“Ottinger Accepts Power as Big Issue.” (Oct 16, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File).  Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104430730?accountid=12085.

“Ottinger Concedes Roosevelt Victory.” (Nov 19, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104439338?accountid=12085. 

“Ottinger Refuses to Concede Defeat.” (Nov 08, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104415539?accountid=12085.

“Ottinger to Visit 14 Up-State Cites.” (Oct 13, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104460248?accountid=12085.

Roosevelt, Franklin D. “Acceptance Speech for the Renomination for the Presidency, Philadelphia, Pa.” June 27, 1936. The American Presidency Project. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=15314.

“Roosevelt Attacks Theories of Hoover.” (Nov 02, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104414619?accountid=12085.

“Roosevelt Confers with Smith to Map Campaign in State.” (Oct 10, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104321497?accountid=12085. 

“Roosevelt Demands State Keep Power.” (Oct 17, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104423627?accountid=12085. 

“Roosevelt Opposes Any Move to Revive New York Dry Law.” (Oct 09, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104367563?accountid=12085. 

Roosevelt, Franklin D. The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Vol. 1, The Genesis of the New Deal 1928-1932. New York, NY: Random House. 1938.

“Roosevelt to Make Wide Tour of State.” (Oct 13, 1928). New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104433007?accountid=12085.

Special to The New York Times. (1928, Oct 07). “Bigotry is Receding, Says F.D. Roosevelt.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/104469322?accountid=12085.

Special to The New York Times. (Nov 27, 1928). “Democrats List Funds at Albany.” New York Times (1923-Current File).Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104304172?accountid=12085.

Special to The New York Times. (Oct 03, 1928). “Roosevelt Held Out to the Last Minute.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104326803?accountid=12085. 

Special to The New York Times. (Oct 03, 1928). “Roosevelt Lauded by Mayor Walker.” New York Times (1923-Current File).Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/104326338?accountid=12085. 

Woolf., S.J. (1928, Oct 07). “The Two Candidates for the Governorship.” New York Times (1923-Current File). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/104433929?accountid=12085.

Secondary Sources

Davis, Kenneth S. FDR: The Beckoning of Destiny 1882-1928. New York, NY: Random House. 1972.

__________. FDR: The New York Years 1928-1933. New York, NY: Random House. 1985.

Goldberg, Richard Thayer. The Making of Franklin D. Roosevelt: Triumph Over Disability. Cambridge, MA: Abt Books. 1971.

Gunther, John. Roosevelt in Retrospect, A Profile in History. New York, NY: Harper. 1950.

Troy, Gil, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., and Fred L. Israel. History of American Presidential Elections: 1789-2008, Vol. II, 1872-1940. New York, NY: Facts on File, 2012.

Journal Articles           

Carlson, Earland I. “Franklin D. Roosevelt's Post-Mortem of the 1928 Election.” Midwest Journal of Political Science, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Aug., 1964): pp. 298-308.

Goldman, Armond S., Elisabeth J. Schmalstieg, Daniel H. Freeman, Jr, Daniel A. Goldman and Frank C. Schmalstieg, Jr. “What was the cause of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s paralytic illness?” Journal of Medical Biography. (11, 2003): pp. 232–240.

 Kiewe, Amos. “A Dress Rehearsal for a Presidential Campaign: FDR's Embodied "Run" for the 1928 Governorship.” The Southern Communication Journal. (Winter, 1999): pp. 154-167.