Amazon.com: The New Deal and the States: Federalism in Transition (9780313228414): James T. Patterson: Books

Have one to sell? Sell yours here
The New Deal and the States: Federalism in Transition
  
Tell the Publisher!
I'd like to read this book on Kindle

Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.

The New Deal and the States: Federalism in Transition [Hardcover]

James T. Patterson (Author)
3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)


Available from these sellers.


Textbook Student FREE Two-Day Shipping for students on millions of items. Learn more

Formats

Amazon Price New from Used from
Hardcover --  
Hardcover, May 12, 1981 --  
Textbook Binding --  

Book Description

May 12, 1981 0313228418 978-0313228414 New edition
The author traces trends in state affairs and in American federalism between 1920 and 1940 and focuses as much on the states as he does on the federal government.

Product Details

  • Hardcover: 226 pages
  • Publisher: Greenwood Press Reprint; New edition edition (May 12, 1981)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0313228418
  • ISBN-13: 978-0313228414
  • Product Dimensions: 9 x 5.8 x 0.8 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces
  • Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #5,515,754 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

 

Customer Reviews

2 Reviews
5 star:    (0)
4 star:    (0)
3 star:
 (2)
2 star:    (0)
1 star:    (0)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
3.0 out of 5 stars (2 customer reviews)
 
 
 
 
Share your thoughts with other customers:
Most Helpful Customer Reviews

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars Able Historian's Analysis of the New Deal, May 25, 2000
The subtitle of Patterson's book indicates his main theme: federalism in transition. The transition was from the old-style, traditional federalism that existed prior to the 1930s, to the new, "cooperative federalism" that came into being. The New Deal was enacted under the auspices of this cooperation between the federal and state governments. Patterson examines this relationship, how effective it was, and its results.

The implementation of the New Deal was, of course, a very contentious issue. The cooperative federalism that was supposed to be going on often failed to live up to its name. There were constant battles between federal agents and state politicians and administrators. The federal officials criticized the states for their poor administrative systems, while the state representatives complained that the federal government was not contributing enough money, and what money they did contribute was distributed improperly. Roosevelt wanted to leave the states alone as much as possible, allowing them to experiment in their own way whenever it was feasible. Patterson believes, however, that the system would have been better implemented, and the people better served, had the states been given a lesser role. Ultimately, Roosevelt realized that legislation at the national level was the best solution for the problems facing a modern nation.

No two people, according to Patterson, seem to agree on the New Deal's impact on the states. Those friendly to it described it as a blessing. Others argued that it was discriminatory, enriching some states at the expense of others. Conservatives saw it as an autocratic Leviathan, while liberals thought it too timid and conservative. Patterson seems to agree with the liberals. He criticizes some of the New Deal policies (e.g. the use of the formula for federal matching grants for state relief), but he also believes that the federal government did not do nearly all that it could.

Patterson does view cooperative federalism, and the impact it had on the states, positively. It brought about improvements in state government, particularly in the areas of administrative efficiency and the expansion of the merit system in public personnel administration. It also hastened the spread of social legislation (e.g. Social Security, unemployment relief, and labor reform), especially in those states that passed "little New Deals." The New Deal also increased political participation in many states by appealing to previously ignored groups, particularly the underprivileged-blacks, the unemployed, immigrants. Not incidentally, these groups tended to vote Democratic, thus reinforcing the call for more liberal social services.

Perhaps the most important, lasting effect of the New Deal (and cooperative federalism) on the states was the centralization of American life, and, by extension, the centralization of power. During the 1930s, authority passed from the states to the national government and has remained there ever since. The primary reason for this was the states simply lacked the ability to cope with the problems of urban, mid-twentieth century America. The federal government, therefore, was forced to step in and attempt to solve these problems at the national level. They assumed a much larger role in both the economic and social health of the states. Relations between the federal and state governments were never to be the same again.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars Able Historian's Analysis of the New Deal, May 25, 2000
This review is from: The New Deal and the States: Federalism in Transition (Hardcover)
The subtitle of Patterson's book indicates his main theme: federalism in transition. The transition was from the old-style, traditional federalism that existed prior to the 1930s, to the new, "cooperative federalism" that came into being. The New Deal was enacted under the auspices of this cooperation between the federal and state governments. Patterson examines this relationship, how effective it was, and its results.

The implementation of the New Deal was, of course, a very contentious issue. The cooperative federalism that was supposed to be going on often failed to live up to its name. There were constant battles between federal agents and state politicians and administrators. The federal officials criticized the states for their poor administrative systems, while the state representatives complained that the federal government was not contributing enough money, and what money they did contribute was distributed improperly. Roosevelt wanted to leave the states alone as much as possible, allowing them to experiment in their own way whenever it was feasible. Patterson believes, however, that the system would have been better implemented, and the people better served, had the states been given a lesser role. Ultimately, Roosevelt realized that legislation at the national level was the best solution for the problems facing a modern nation.

No two people, according to Patterson, seem to agree on the New Deal's impact on the states. Those friendly to it described it as a blessing. Others argued that it was discriminatory, enriching some states at the expense of others. Conservatives saw it as an autocratic Leviathan, while liberals thought it too timid and conservative. Patterson seems to agree with the liberals. He criticizes some of the New Deal policies (e.g. the use of the formula for federal matching grants for state relief), but he also believes that the federal government did not do nearly all that it could.

Patterson does view cooperative federalism, and the impact it had on the states, positively. It brought about improvements in state government, particularly in the areas of administrative efficiency and the expansion of the merit system in public personnel administration. It also hastened the spread of social legislation (e.g. Social Security, unemployment relief, and labor reform), especially in those states that passed "little New Deals." The New Deal also increased political participation in many states by appealing to previously ignored groups, particularly the underprivileged-blacks, the unemployed, immigrants. Not incidentally, these groups tended to vote Democratic, thus reinforcing the call for more liberal social services.

Perhaps the most important, lasting effect of the New Deal (and cooperative federalism) on the states was the centralization of American life, and, by extension, the centralization of power. During the 1930s, authority passed from the states to the national government and has remained there ever since. The primary reason for this was the states simply lacked the ability to cope with the problems of urban, mid-twentieth century America. The federal government, therefore, was forced to step in and attempt to solve these problems at the national level. They assumed a much larger role in both the economic and social health of the states. Relations between the federal and state governments were never to be the same again.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
 
 
 
Only search this product's reviews



Tag this product

 (What's this?)
Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items.
Your tags: Add your first tag
 

Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store

If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store. Learn more

Customer Discussions

This product's forum
Discussion Replies Latest Post
No discussions yet

Ask questions, Share opinions, Gain insight
Start a new discussion
Topic:
First post:
Prompts for sign-in
 


Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
Search all Amazon discussions
   
Related forums


Listmania!


Create a Listmania! list

So You'd Like to...


Create a guide


Look for Similar Items by Category


Look for Similar Items by Subject