LBJ and Grassroots Federalism: Congressman Bob Poage, Race, and Change in Texas by Robert H. Duke (review)

Perhaps the most important theme in the historiography of twentieth-century Texas is its relationship with the federal government. Recent scholarship addresses this while at the same time exploring modern conservatism. There is much about the modernization of Texas that justifies such an approach, but Texas political culture is more complicated, including healthy doses of what historian Robert Dallek called “liberal nationalism” in the first volume of his biography of Lyndon B. Johnson (Oxford University Press, 1991). Robert Harold Duke adds to this important literature with his explication of what he calls grassroots federalism, showing the contributions of two Texans to the growth of the New Deal state and to conservative critiques of it.

Duke uses Johnson and W. R. “Bob” Poage to analyze grassroots federalism, but he does not limit himself to Washington elites. He illustrates how and why local leaders—from both the business community and citizen activist groups—negotiated the advancement of federalism from the New Deal era through the 1960s. Johnson and Poage worked with these individuals to forge networks that facilitated reform. Duke begins with a description of the state, especially Poage’s Brazos River Valley region of Central Texas and Johnson’s Hill Country prior to the 1930s. He does so to demonstrate just how significant the later changes were for a region accustomed to very little federal intervention in daily life. His most important contribution is his revelation of how local business leaders advocated for a more activist federal government. This finding runs counter to recent scholarship about businessmen and modern conservatism, suggesting more research is needed on the political heterogeneity among mid-century businessmen.

Duke contends that there are some lacunae in the Johnson literature, specifically the absence of any consideration of how his policies shaped a particular place. He is right on that score, but Duke does not do a satisfactory job of explaining why Central Texas and not some other region of the state best showcases these dynamics. Similarly, Duke never adequately explains why he singled out Poage and not another member of the Texas delegation. Given that the majority of the book focuses on years before the Great Society, Duke overemphasizes LBJ as the more significant politician in the relationship.

Duke uses three case studies—the National Youth Administration in the 1930s, disaster relief in the 1950s, and Mexican American usage of Great Society programs for urban renewal and education reform—to show how grassroots federalism changed one region in Texas. Issues of race also play a central role in his narrative. It is impossible to understand Texans’ changing attitudes toward federalism without looking at the role of race and desegregation. Texans embraced an activist federal government when it provided relief from the Great Depression and when it helped with disaster recovery but were circumspect when it involved advancing rights for people of color. Despite its flaws, LBJ and Grassroots Federalism contributes new insights and new methods to the historiography of modern Texas.