James Evetts Haley, a West Texas rancher and historian, balked at the liberalism promoted by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal. Haley grew concerned about increased federal control over states and believed Roosevelt was leading the country toward bankruptcy. In 1936, Haley, a life-long Democrat, led the Jeffersonian Democrats in Texas, who worked to defeat Roosevelt and supported the Republican candidate, Alf Landon. He continued to lead a small faction of anti-New Deal Texans in various movements through the 1960s. Haley espoused and defended certain conservative principles over the course of his life and the development of these ideas created the philosophical base of the modern Republican Party in Texas.

Not available / text

During the Great Depression, for the first time in its history, the federal government provided relief to the unemployed and destitute through myriad New Deal agencies. This dissertation examines how "general relief" (direct or "make-work") from federal programs—primarily the Emergency Relief and Construction Act (ERCA) and Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA)—was acquired and administered by the government of Texas through state administrative agencies. These agencies included the Chambers of Commerce (1932-1933), Unofficial Texas Relief Commission (1933), Texas Rehabilitation and Relief Commission (1933), Official Texas Relief Commission (1933-1934), Texas Relief Commission Division of the State Board of Control (1934), and the Department of Public Welfare (1939). Overall, the effective administration of general relief in the Lone Star State was undermined by a political ideology that persisted from, and was embodied by, the "Redeemer" Constitution of 1876.

The economic disaster known as the Great Depression struck Grayson County, Texas, in 1929, and full economic recovery did not come until the close of World War II. However, the people of Grayson benefited greatly between 1933 and 1946 from the myriad spending programs of the New Deal, the building of the Denison Dam that created Lake Texoma, and the establishment of Perrin Army Air Field. Utilizing statistical data from the United States Census and the Texas Almanac, this thesis analyzes the role of government spending‐federal, state, and local‐in the economic recovery in Grayson County.

The New Deal legislation of the 1930s would threaten Dallas' peaceful industrial appearance. In fact, New Deal programs and legislation did have an effect on the city, albeit an unbalanced mixture of positive and negative outcomes characterized by frustrated workers and industrial intimidation. To summarize, the New Deal did not bring a revolution, but it did continue an evolutionary change for reform. This dissertation investigated several issues pertaining to the development of the textile industry, cement industry, and the Ford automobile factory in Dallas and its labor history before, during, and after the New Deal. New Deal legislation not only created an avenue for industrial workers to achieve better representation but also improved their working conditions. Specifically focusing on the textile, cement, and automobile industries illustrates that the development of union representation is a spectrum, with one end being the passive but successful cement industry experience and the other end being the automobile industry union efforts, which were characterized by violence and intimidation. These case studies illustrate the changing relationship between Dallas labor and the federal government as well as their local management. Challenges to the open shop movement in Dallas occurred before the creation of the New Deal, but it was New Deal legislation that encouraged union developers to recruit workers actively in Dallas. Workers' demands, New Deal industrial regulations, and union activism created a more urban, modern Dallas that would be solidified through the industrial demands for World War II.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Race and politics have played an important part in shaping the history of the United States, from the first arrival of African slaves in the early seventeenth century to the election of an African-American president in 2008. The Great Depression and the New Deal represent a period that was no exception to the influence of race and politics. After Franklin Roosevelt succeeded Herbert Hoover to the American presidency, there was much faith and hope expressed on the editorial pages of the Indianapolis Recorder that African Americans would be treated fairly under the New Deal. Hope began to wane when little political patronage was dispensed, in the form of government jobs, once the Democrats took office in 1933. As the first incarnation of the New Deal progressed, African Americans continued to experience prejudice, segregation, unfair wages, and generally a “raw deal.” But what was more, African-American women and men were not given a fair opportunity to ensure for themselves better political, social, and economic standing in the future. This struggle for full-fledged citizenship was further underscored when Congress failed to pass anti-lynching legislation in 1934 and 1935. The New Dealers, Franklin Roosevelt chief among them, did not seize the opportunity presented by the Great Depression to push for civil rights and social justice for African Americans. Their intent was not necessarily malicious. A more nuanced view of the issues shows that political expedience, and a measure of indifference, led the New Dealers to not treat civil rights as the pressing issue that it was. Roosevelt and the New Dealers believed that they faced the potential for significant resistance to their economic recovery program from Southern Democrats on Capitol Hill if they tried to interfere with race relations in the South. This thesis examines the first years of the Roosevelt Administration, roughly 1933 through 1936. This timeframe was carefully chosen because it was a period when the issues surrounding race and racism were brought to the fore. In the initial period of the New Deal we can see how Roosevelt met and failed to meet the expectations of African Americans. The prevailing view among the African American leadership in 1935, argued Harvard Sitkoff, was that the federal government had “betrayed [African Americans] under the New Deal.” Sitkoff referred to these “denunciations of the New Deal by blacks” as commonplace from 1933 to 1935. But beginning with the Second New Deal in the middle 1930s the criticism turned to applause.