microphone located on the side of the room. now it is my pleasure to introduce the authors for this session, shelia collins and trudy schaffner goldberg. the book "when government helped: learning from the successes and failures of the new deal" provides a rich portrait of policies and programs with a new deal with special attention directed to the impact of the powerful social movements on social

reform. and trudy schaffner goldberg is professor america of social polity and a delphi university where she directed the phd program. she is cochair of the columbia seminar on full employment and social welfare and cofounder and chair of the national jobs for all coalitions which advocate the 21st century vision of the innovative jobs creation programs of the new deal. sheila collins is professor of political science and former director of the graduate program in public policy and international affairs at williams paterson university. the co-author of six books and numerous book chapters and an encyclopedia entry on american politics and public policy, globalization, social movements and religion. she cochairs the seminar on full employment social welfare equity in the seminar on popular

struggle and serves on the board as a national jobs for all coalitions. please join me in welcoming shelia collins and trudy schaffner goldberg to the roosevelt book festival. [applause] >> thank you very much. sheila and i are honored to be here in a place where the new deal is born. and going to begin by quoting from roosevelt who wrote unfortunately a catastrophe seems to have been necessary to focus people's attention on the ideals and government and on its relationship to its citizens. of course it's more unfortunate if that doesn't happen. but the crisis of 2008 seems to us to be a similar kind of opportunity. sheila and i hope that like many

others we will be able to take stock and correct some of the things that maybe had caused the meltdown to reverse the course to increasing economic inequality and to put the bankers and their place and perhaps if the response was the credible one to restore faith in the ability of government to solve people's problems and some talked about the reverse of this reagan banter which that government is in the solution but is the problem. and consequently we decided to take a deeper look at the successes and failures of the new deal and we came away with increased respect for the new deal but not without a great deal of criticism as well and

particularly as failure to serve relationship to their need. the latter is really a big responsibility of a southern segregationist congress. we are happy when one of the people with critical, roosevelt, i think that the success of the new deal should be measured in terms of the magnitude of the crisis that confronted and i'm going to read a little bit from our books just to give you a sense of the crisis. the new deal grapples with one of the most serious crisis ever

faced by the nation. franklin roosevelt assumed the presidency after three years had a severe depression and the resources of the country's local and state governments were spent in these deprivation and the stairs are part of the land. with economic crisis giving birth to dictatorship will swear in the world, american democracy was itself on trial. part of this was the dustbowl that blackened the sky and polluted the air over huge stretches. overproduction in a land of hunger. in struggling against the great depression, the new deal people

dealt with economic and security that had been established earlier in some other countries. it is up to them to create those institutions and underdeveloped state. the roosevelt administration rose above to deal with this crisis providing direct federal relief to people and later, of course, providing it in the form of employment which is only not jobs and dignity but also greatly enhancing resources of the country. so during roosevelt's tenure, the government recovers lost ground in terms of its output. even before the economic stimulus of world war ii happened.

unemployment remained high, but some of our authors show that it really wasn't what would have been low where have you counted employed the people that were actually employed in the work program. and so perhaps it was reflected in that landslide victory in 1936. the official record is where we didn't count the people that were on the program from 23% to 17%. in addition there were important reforms of the administration enacted not only to protect people against the insecurity of old age but banking reform and

so on and so forth. we had collective bargaining rights as well. all of this spelled a new activist role for the federal government in carrying out the constitutional mandate of promoting this general welfare. and it's here rationalizing this new role for the government but things are taking place. i sometimes think that our government has some success in preventing this great recession from becoming a great depression. for the role that government has played.

they explained a the genus were anointing this expanded role with traditional values as well as aspirations. security was concerned with common desires for decent homes productive work and some safeguard against misfortune which cannot be wholly eliminated in this man-made world of ours. the objectives themselves were traditional, but they could no longer achieve this through the interdependence of members of families upon each other as roosevelt put it where of families within a small community upon each other. so it was not just a matter of individual responsibility or self-reliance. this being the case we are compelled to employ the active interest of the nation as a whole through government in order to encourage the greater security for each individual who

composes it. and in his rationale for a second economic bill of rights this has really shown that it was possible to provide a job for everyone and he held that this had proved inadequate to ensure the quality and the pursuit of happiness. the traditional values of liberty and freedom were simply not achievable without economic security or freedom from want. summarizing briefly what current policies have learned from the new successes and failures and sheila is going to speak more about these specific programs. and faced with the deepest

economic dives the great depression policymakers did seem to learn something important but you could not wait a long time to intervene the disastrous way that the government had been an active for three years following the crash of 1929. they learned that they also learned that you have to intervene with a certain degree of force in a big way. and of course, they did a bank they allow it. but the combination of a democratic congress and the republican administration did this bank bailout. and that was a big thing to do in a big hurry. it was one thing, but to leave them relatively unscathed and unpunished. essentially if you compare that

with the roosevelt administration, you will remember that they did this in almost biblical rhetoric and then he politically encouraged the hearings that exposed the banks. and it essentially led to very important thinking reforms among glass-steagall. by contrast there is her little and short hearings following the bank failures here and it really had much to do with us and essentially the bankers continue to engorge themselves while the ordinary people lost their houses and so on. and secretary tim geithner was most interested in the banks having a soft landing.

also if you contrast the new deal, the new deal also helps people that really lost their homes and who have lost their mortgages. the bottom mortgages and refinance debt. they made it possible for people to be able to keep their homes. one of our authors call that a public auction and it was really not available. and we think that there have been huge losses for homeowners and it could go up as high as 13 million before this is over. but the new deal also broke precedents by employing the unemployed and putting them to work as i mentioned earlier, increasing their dignity and she will talk more about what that

meant in terms of creating this for this country. that did not happen at this time. it did essentially use that by the new deal with the unemployment insurance which was disbanded in one mostly and that had a great deal to do with keeping the recession from becoming the great depression. and in fact it's estimated that unemployment would've gone up to 60% instead of 10%. so the program helped that the government expended them and used them and there was some success against intervening a great depression. where is the new deal employed people. that option was not taken.

putting them to work was not taken and people remain on unemployment insurance which is totally other than nothing. where this country may have used them to do a great deal to improve our infrastructure and that option really wasn't taken. especially if it had been used indirectly creating jobs, it could have reduced the official unemployment and that may have saved 4 million jobs. we think that that's a big auction, learning that the obama administration could have taken us from the new deal.

but they did not. and we have been working with the popular movements at the time. we call it a decade of dissent. it was a very complicated relationship with the roosevelt administration that did not give in completely at all. i will just concentrate a little bit on labor rights, which was expanded during the new deal.

and later that was made more permanent and controlled [inaudible] one of the more important things about the relationship is the administration. the roosevelt administration. is that that they really did not believe in suppression of dissent. we are very against the use of armed force. and he supported the governor for not using force. the result was one of the

greatest victory of the century for labor. but the obama administration they are supporting free choice which would've made it easier and they made it harder for business to suppress that. so i think that that is an important difference. so i wanted to talk a bit about the intercession of the roosevelt administration. even though they spent a lot in

1937, they cut back. the result was almost a depression in the depression. [inaudible] in 2010 at the point of the deficit reduction with people that were totally anti-social security for the welfare state but it's interesting. it's sort of like some other things that are half learned. while there's a talk about deficit and a talk about cutting back, essentially the cutback has been really slow. so you might say that that was half learned a little bit like the intervention.

so for now on she'll is going to talk about some of the programs. >> i was going to talk about the programs and infrastructure that they built for the country which was tremendous. but since that piece of the roosevelt administration has been covered by a great extent by other historians, i am going to concentrate on two programs that have been receiving a little bit less attention. and the first one is the environmental programs of the administration. teddy roosevelt is thought of as the environmental president. in our reading of his contributions we have argued

that franklin roosevelt really belongs to that honor. after all, times of economic disparity existed and there were dire crises during the time of complete economic collapse. by the time fdr had taken office seven eighths of the force of the country had been decimated and one sixth of the nation's top soil was about to blow away in the dust bowl. the country had suffered massive floods in much of our wildlife was facing extinction. the appalachian region experienced conditions close to what we see with third world. we were blessed with the president that not only had an economic understanding but one

whose words felt the scars and exhaustion of the earth. fdr would build on his cousin's legacy and give the environment a new meaning and significance. his approach to the environment is more complex of natural systems and thus closer to aldo leopold and rachel carson and teddy roosevelt. it would take time to recognize human patterns of evolution. franklin was a more modern environmentalist than his predecessor and is still ahead of any of his presidential successors. as an approach approach to the environment he translated traditional values and aspirations into an ethic of conservation and this includes

between humans and the natural world that evolved over time. the result of that relationship had often been destructive. in the land had to be carefully part of this effort was to be able to regenerate itself support human inhabitants. he created a definition of liberty and freedom to the community as a whole. thus viewing time-honored values with new meaning. in a speech as early as 1912 which is very in terms of what we're facing today there are many persons left that can see no reason why if a man owns the land he should not be permitted to do what he likes with it. they care not what happens after they are gone and i will go even further and say that they care not what happens even to their

neighbors and the opponents of conservation will argue that even though they do exhaust all the natural resources the inventiveness of man and the progress of civilization will supply a substitute when the crisis comes. we hear much about geo-engineering today saving us from the climate crisis. i have taken the conservation of natural resources is the first lesson that points to the necessity for seeking community freedom. because i believe it to be the most important of all of our lessons. for roosevelt, the health of the human community with wired not only the piece of land on which a particular community lives be handled sustainably but that americans have a national

responsibility to care for the land whether in hyde park or texas. they also had a responsibility to care for the win so that it could nurture the future generations. thus prevention and recovery and restoration of this land space as well as conservation were placed on the public agenda. this represented a watershed type of shift from a public beat those in which decentralization and short-term decision-making had led to tremendous waste and efficiency and environmental destruction. they also differed from the progressive era in which the wild nature was to preserve as much as possible in its pristine state so that human beings leaving the roman civilization behind could partake of its wonders. this includes changing nature and humanity's role to the

environment. and it demonstrates a modern character is the idea of claims, such as disappearing wildlife, flooding, loss of soil, poor health. we are seen not as related issues but those requiring that they be treated together. >> the tennessee valley authority they were restored to life. the national park system became a national system with the addition of hundreds of state and county parks there was improved and a new generation of people who had participated in these programs were prepared to be leaders of the environmental movement. in the second set of programs i

want to talk about other programs undertaken by the new deal. fdr had no particular knowledge or judgment about it but artists were starving and he knew that they needed work. but he also had a feeling that the arts could revitalize its commentated traumatized population. it not only puts the soul of america back to life but they did much more than that as well. they the commodified culture which until then has been part of the urban elite. for the first time people who could never afford to enjoy this could now participate in both the making and the enjoyment of the arts. this includes graphic artists and writers and dancers, circus

performers and photographers and filmmakers hired by the new deal including diversity of the american population in landscape into popular consciousness. >> this includes recording them for posterity. and what is more is that america's real and unmitigated problems including racism and poverty and disease are part of this. ..

public support for the arts began to decline. much of what the new deal had accomplished was either neglected or destroyed. the future of the arts as both a heritage of democracy and a contributor to it does not look very hopeful today. a significant segment of congress views arts programs as a waste of taxpayer money. funding not only for the national endowment for the arts but parts in the schools is being slashed. museums are struggling for funds and tickets to large theater, dance, opera and symphonies are beyond the means of most people. perhaps there is no more telling

symbol of the modification of the arts than it affect the new york state theater for the performing arts is called the koch theater. halley flanagan director of the w p a federal feeder program thought that the arts contributed to the ability of a people to participate in a democracy. new research has shown that the arts provide benefits in many other fields, reading and writing, math spatial temporal reasoning, empathy happiness and well-being but most importantly easy arts remain critical to the spiritual health of a people. they are essentials to the development of a collective imagination that is needed if we are to resolve the enormous challenges facing us in the 21st century. we neglect the lessons the new deal has to teach us to our

peril. [applause] >> could you comment on pope francis's recent cyclical about climate change? >> i think it is wonderful. i hope it can galvanize popular support, and very much needed. and he is putting it in a moral framework. is so necessary. scientists were reluctant to take a moral stand.

>> can you tell us what you think franklin roosevelt's greatest accomplishment was as president and what his greatest failure and there's no question, his greatest failure was what you alluded to he didn't spend enough too obsessed with deficits and he always used to brag that he balanced the budget in terms -- >> to start with. >> he always used to brag that he balanced the budget to the extent of the regular government budget and only the emergency expenditures the drove it into a deficit. >> i don't think i could disagree with you. i haven't really thought about

it. the deficit was -- obsession was something but it was something he shared with other new dealers like wagoner. it was helpless to talk him out of it after the disastrous failure of the cutback, but premature cut back the lead to the depression with in the depression and really halted the new deal reform for all purposes, not essentials purposes with the exception of the wages and ours, 1938. >> i think the social security was a great accomplishment but also his environmental program was perhaps even greater because if he had not done what he did i think this country might have faced climate change and species extinction long before we have.

okay. >> i think his articulation of the responsibility of the federal government, the idea that government can make a better life for people and the whole notion of the way in which he expanded our notion of what government can do and its responsibility the notion that economic security is essentials to freedom. you can't have liberty and freedom without it freedom from want. >> i came in a little late, i don't know if you covered the civil conservation court, because right now we have a terrible hidden crisis with young people who are unemployed

and have no goals and we need that so badly and i wonder if you covered that and it's impact. >> i had to raise through my speech because i had little time. we do have a whole chapter in the book on the ccc and the tennessee valley authority. >> i actually did speak about not really the tremendous impetus to the development of our resources but also our failure to employ people and to not use what they could do to -- for the environment the infrastructure, social services and so on. the failure of the obama administration to do this direct job creation and does so much more in keeping them on unemployment insurance however important that is. >> after reaching fear itself.

in return for their votes. to produce any benefits for african-americans. and home care, talk about that decision please. >> the failure to serve, and the segregationist congress. he quotes the head of the naacp i can't even support this lynching bill because i have to

save america and i will lose them. [inaudible] >> we have time for one more question before the session is over. >> a question, a couple quick comments. i don't think the nazis would never have won the war against the united states fdr or no fdr because once they went to war with britain, the soviet union and the united states the war was over. it was only a question of when. that is number one. number 2, the gentleman just touched on the lassitude by fdr in the face of african-americans and civil rights which is an obvious fact. fdr for all his greatness and i think he was a great president did not live up to what he could have when it came to three groups of people who were helpless and the president of the united states more than

anyone else was in a position to play a role in helping them, number one, african-americans, number 2 jewish refugees from the nazis and number 3, the internment of japanese-americans following pearl harbor. i will leave it at that because we are pressed for time but those are the comments. [applause] >> do you want to address that? >> no question about it. given political realities of the democratic self perhaps he could have used the bully

pulpit. [inaudible] >> one person with the the most ability. >> in arkansas the senate majority leader was from arkansas. >> all the committees were headed by southern democrats. hard to tell whether he could have. >> we are out of time but thanks to the wonderful session and thanks to the authors. [applause]