The Revolution of '28: Al Smith, American Progressivism, and the Coming of the New Deal by Robert Chiles (review)

Robert Chiles's examination of Al Smith, progressivism in the presidential election of 1928, and the coming of the New Deal sheds light on a previously neglected area of U.S. electoral history. Smith's campaign in 1928 resonated with millions of urban workers who abandoned their quiet acceptance of status quo (often the Republican Party too) in favor of a progressive Democratic Party, realigning the electorate in the process. Chiles peels back the historical record to expose a myriad of events and players, economics from numerous vantage points, and voting patterns. In tracing Smith's career, Chiles weaves together various stories to explain the growing chorus of advocates, voters, and government officials (Smith being the foremost) seeking progressive government programs nationally, as espoused by Smith in 1928, and finally delivered under the New Deal in the 1930s.

The first two of the book's five chapters outline Smith's growth as a progressive—an education fostered by reformers such as Mary Dreier, Frances Perkins, Lilian Wald, and others—and his program as governor of New York, where he championed a broad reform agenda. The three remaining chapters outline the campaign of 1928, the voters' reaction, and an explanation as to how the 1928 campaign spurred a revolution before the New Deal. The story is strengthened through its plentiful use of archival materials, oral histories, and newspapers, giving flesh and blood to working-class Americans as they turned toward the Democrats because of Smith.

Of course, Chiles also cites—and in some places challenges—the historiography of the period. Paula Eldot, who in carefully delineating Smith's governmental record, interpreted Smith's program "as an important source of the New Deal." Similarly, Matthew and Hannah Josephson, biographers of Smith based on the papers of FDR labor secretary Frances Perkins, claimed the "beginnings of the Welfare State" began with Smith. In contrast, William Leuchtenburg, who extensively researched the New Deal and FDR, found Smith more "conservative" and concluded that "the notion of a planned society" was repugnant to Smith (180-81). Similarly Arthur Schlesinger, famed researcher of the New Deal and the politics that brought it, contends Smith was more interested in "protecting the individual against the hazards of society." (180). Chiles contends it would be too simplistic to say Smith created the New Deal but, he did play a central role within the rising social welfare, progressive movement and served as a central figure in bridging the gap from state to federal stage. What makes this work worth reading is the logical, linear progression outlined by Chiles, who states that while "Smith's progressivism did not constitute the genesis of the New Deal," noted biographer of New Deal Senator Robert Wagner J. Joseph Huthmacher was correct in stating that "many New Deal programs were akin to those [Smith] had espoused in Albany" (italics original) (181–82). Limited to New York, Smith's program did not have a national theater, combat the Great Depression, or expand as liberally as the New Deal. In a sense, Smith was in the middle of the movement chronologically, but he brought a message to the national stage in 1928 that revolutionized an electorate conducive to progressivism as never before. But it was Franklin Roosevelt—four years later—who capitalized on Smith's revolution and established the New Deal.

But how did Smith do it? One key is that, in stark contrast to the other presidential elections of the 1920s, Smith's candidacy in 1928 spurred ethnic minorities, workers, fellow Catholics, "wets," and numerous other peripheral minorities (Jewish, French Canadian, Polish, Portuguese voters, to name a few) to vote Democratic—many for the first time. Smith's program struck a progressive chord in working class and ethnic enclaves. In direct contrast to Herbert Hoover, who claimed the national Republican...