-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/f9d6b0dc3f444ad5bfa3e66743254be9.pdf
0e048cd255e5ae4adc01b413e46fd62a
PDF Text
Text
FOIA Number:
2006-0469-F (2)
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting
Series/Staff Member:
Michael Waldman
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
14456
FolderlD:
Folder Title:
[Roosevelt Information]: FDR [Franklin D. Roosevelt] [Folder 1]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
92
4
4
2
�Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
To the people of this country I have but one answer on this
subject. Judge me by the enemies I have made. Judge me by the
selfish purposes of these utility leaders who have talked of radicalism while they were selling watered stock, to the people and
using our schools to deceive the coming generation.
My friends, my policy is as radical as American liberty. My
policy is as radical as the Constitution of the United States.
I promise you this: Never shall the Federal Government part
with its sovereignty or with its control over its power resources,
while I am President of the United States.
1
59 C'New Conditions Impose New Requirements upon Government and Those Who Conduct Government." Campaign Address on Progressive Government at the Commonwealth
Club. San Francisco, Calif. September 23,1932
My friends:
I COUNT it a privilege to be invited to address the Commonwealth Club. It has stood in the life of this city and State, and it
is perhaps accurate to add, the Nation, as a group of citizen
leaders interested in fundamental problems of Government, and
chiefly concerned with achievement of progress in Government
through non-partisan means. The privilege of addressing you,
therefore, in the heat of a political campaign, is great. I want to
respond to your courtesy in terms consistent with your policy.
I want to speak not of politics but of Government. I want to
speak not of parties, but of universal principles. They are not
political, except in that larger sense in which a great American
once expressed a definition of politics, that nothing in all of
human life is foreign to the science of politics.
I do want to give you, however, a recollection of a long life
spent for a large part in public office. Some of my conclusions
742
Campt
and observation
weeks. I have t
I have seen ma
when in a sense
glad of the opp
to me.
Sometimes, 1
hand of discou
a rut,fixed,set
very much out
and weary depi
But then we
us that we are
change and dev
and particularl
and of Californi
I would not 1
new community
never have I fel
opment more t!
to be near to 1
commerce of th
cient to cause 1
things, when hi
But more th;
club co 5J>4
#at«present, t
^own-individual
siderwith
I
mem and ecoi»
happiness, our;
The
e of
men and wo
or economics, <
exists to serve
persistently dc
�Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
and observations have been deeply accentuated in these past few
weeks. I have traveled far —from Albany to the Golden Gate.
I have seen many people, and heard many things, and today,
when in a sense my journey has reached the half-way mark, I am
glad of the opportunity to discuss with you what it all means
to me.
Sometimes, my friends, particularly in years such as these, the
hand of discouragement falls upon us. It seems that things are in
a rut, fixed, settled, that the world has grown old and tired and
very much out of joint. This is the mood of depression, of dire
and weary depression.
But then we look around us in America, and everything tells
us that we are wrong. America is new. It is in the process of
change and development. It has the great potentialities of youth,
and particularly is this true of the great West, and of this coast,
and of California.
I would not have you feel that I regard this as in any sense a
new community. I have traveled in many parts of the world, but
never have I felt the arresting thought of the change and development more than here, where the old, mystic East would seem
to be near to us, where the currents of life and thought and
commerce of the whole world meet us. This factor alone is sufficient to cause man to stop and think of the deeper meaning of
things, when he stands in this community.
But more than that, I appreciate that the membership of this
club consists of men who are thinking in terms beyond the immediate present, beyond their own immediate tasks, beyond their
own individual interests. I want to invite you, therefore, to consider with me in the large, some of the relationships of Government and economic life that go deeply into our daily lives, our
happiness, our future and our security.
The issue of Government has always been whether individual
men and women will have to serve some system of Government
or economics, or whether a system of Government and economics
exists to serve individual men and women. This question has
persistently dominated the discussion of Government for many
743
�tf
Car
Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
generations. On questions relating to these things men have differed, and for time immemorial it is probable that honest men
will continue to differ.
The final word belongs to no man; yet we can still believe in
change and in progress. Democracy, as a dear old friend of mine
in Indiana, Meredith Nicholson, has called it, is a quest, a neverending seeking for better things, and in the seeking for these
things and the striving for them, there are many roads to follow.
But, if we map the course of these roads, we find that there are
only two general directions.
When we look about us, we are likely to forget how hard
people have worked to win the privilege of Government. The
growth of the national Governments of Europe was a struggle
for the development of a centralized force in the Nation, strong
enough to impose peace upon ruling barons. In many instances
the victory of the central Government, the creation of a strong
central Government, was a haven of refuge to the individual.
The people preferred the master far away to the exploitation and
cruelty of the smaller master near at hand.
But the creators of national Government were perforce ruthless men. They were often cruel in their methods, but they did
strive steadily toward something that society needed and very
much wanted, a strong central State able to keep the peace, to
stamp out civil war, to put the unruly nobleman in his place, and
to permit the bulk of individuals to live safely. The man of
ruthless force had his place in developing a pioneer cou.,;ry, just
as he did in fixing the power of the central Government in the
development of Nations. Society paid him well for his services
and its development. When the development among the Nations
of Europe, however, had been completed, ambition and ruthlessness, having served their term, tended to overstep their mark.
There came a growing feeling that Government was conducted
for the benefit of a few who thrived unduly at the expense of all.
The people sought a balancing —a limiting force. There came
gradually, through town councils, trade guilds, national parlia744
•'IN
ments, by cod
limitations onl
Another fac
ruled, was the
responsibility
The AmeriJ
ican Revolutul
the struggle a l
country. Therl
sion which attl
surrendered t\
tially dangerol
people, my frij
warranted sor
able exponent
impatient of s
that the safety
its Governmei
Government,
of central ins
public spiritet
But Mr. Je
Declaration o
lem and took
outward form
an end in itsel
and a danger,
fully analyzin
ernment. "W
tion is of labc
manual or pr
of the laborii
have families
to exact fron
them to feec
moderately £
�iif-
Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
ments, by constitution and by popular participation and control,
limitations on arbitrary power.
Another factor that tended to limit the power of those who
ruled, was the rise of the ethical conception that a ruler bore a
responsibility for the welfare of his subjects.
The American colonies were born in this struggle. The American Revolution was a turning point in it. After the Revolution
the struggle continued and shaped itself in the public life of the
country. There were those who because they had seen the confusion which attended the years of war for American independence
surrendered to the belief that popular Government was essentially dangerous and essentially unworkable. They were honest
people, my friends, and we cannot deny that their experience had
warranted some measure of fear. The most brilliant, honest and
able exponent of this point of view was Hamilton. He was too
impatient of slow-moving methods. Fundamentally he believed
that the safety of the republic lay in the autocratic strength of
its Government, that the destiny of individuals was to serve that
Government, and that fundamentally a great and strong group
of central institutions, guided by a small group of able and
public spirited citizens, could best direct all Government.
But Mr. Jefferson, in the summer of 1776, after drafting the
Declaration of Independence turned his mind to the same problem and took a different view. He did not deceive himself with
outward forms. Government to him was a means to an end, not
an end in itself; it might be either a refuge and a help or a threat
and a danger, depending on the circumstances. We find him carefully analyzing the society for which he was to organize a Government. "We have no paupers. The great mass of our population is of laborers, our rich who cannot live without labor, either
manual or professional, being few and of moderate wealth. Most
of the laboring class possess property, cultivate their own lands,
have families and from the demand for their labor, are enabled
to exact from the rich and the competent such prices as enable
them to feed abundantly, clothe above mere decency, to labor
moderately and raise their families."
745
�r
Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
These people, he considered, had two sets of rights, those oi
"personal competency" and those involved in acquiring and possessing property. By "personal competency" he meant the right
of free thinking, freedom of forming and expressing opinions,
and freedom of personal living, each man according to his own
lights. To insure the first set of rights, a Government must so
order its functions as not to interfere with the individual. But
even Jefferson realized that the exercise of the property rights
might so interfere with the rights of the individual that the
Govemment, without whose assistance the property rights could not exist, must intervene, not to destroy individualism, but to
protect it.
You are familiar with the great political duel which followed;
and how Hamilton, and his friends, building toward a dominant
centralized power were at length defeated in the great election of
1800, by Mr. Jefferson's party. Out of that duel came the two
parties, Republican and Democratic, as we know them today.
So began, in American political life, the new day, the day of
the individual against the system, the day in which individualism
was made the great watchword of American life. The happiest
of economic conditions made that day long and splendid. On the
Western frontier, land was substantially free. No one, who did
not shirk the task of earning a living, was entirely without opportunity to do so. Depressions could, and did, come and go; but
they could not alter the fundamental fact that most of the people
lived partly by selling their labor and partly by extracting their
livelihood from the soil, so that starvation and dislocation were
practically impossible. At the very worst there was always the
possibility of climbing into a covered wagon and moving west
where the untilled prairies afforded a haven for men to whom
the East did not provide a place. So great were our natural resources that we could offer this relief not only to our own people,
but to the distressed of all the world; we could invite immigration from Europe, and welcome it with open arms. Traditionally,
when a depression came a new section of land was opened in the
746
was re
called
chiner
plant,
to rais
within
power
drudge
this w
ment
which
�Campaign Address on Progressive Government
)porbut
ople
heir
vere
the
vest
10m
reple,
,rra>lly,
the
West; and even our temporary misfortune served our manifest
destiny.
It was in the middle of the nineteenth century that a new force
was released and a new dream created. The force was what is
called the industrial revolution, the advance of steam and machinery and the rise of the forerunners of the modern industrial
plant. The dream was the dream of an economic machine, able
to raise the standard of living for everyone; to bring luxury
within the reach of the humblest; to annihilate distance by steam
power and later by electricity, and to release everyone from the
drudgery of the heaviest manual toil. It was to be expected that
this would necessarily affect Government. Heretofore, Government had merely been called upon to produce conditions within
which people could live happily, labor peacefully, and rest
secure. Now it was called upon to aid in the consummation of
this new dream. There was, however, a shadow over the dream.
To be made real, it required use of the talents of men of tremendous will and tremendous ambition, since by no other force
could the problems of financing and engineering and new developments be brought to a consummation.
So manifest were the advantages of the machine age, however,
that the United States fearlessly, cheerfully, and, I think, rightly,
accepted the bitter with the sweet. It was thought that no price
was too high to pay for the advantages which we could draw from
a finished industrial system. The history of the last half century
is accordingly in large measure a history of a group of financial
Titans, whose methods were not scrutinized with too much care,
and who were honored in proportion as they produced the results,
irrespective of the means they used. Thefinancierswho pushed
the railroads to the Pacific were always ruthless, often wasteful,
and frequently corrupt; but they did build railroads, and we
have them today. It has been estimated that the American investor paid for the American railway system more than three
times over in the process; but despite this fact the net advantage
was to the United States. As long as we had free land; as long as
population was growing by leaps and bounds; as long as our
747
�Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
J.,'
industrial plants were insufficient to supply our own needs, society chose to give the ambitious man free play and unlimited
reward provided only that he produced the economic plant so
much desired.
During this period of expansion, there was equal opportunity
for all and the business of Government was not to interfere but
to assist in the development of industry. This was done at the
request of business men themselves. The tariff was originally
imposed for the purpose of "fostering our infant industry," a
phrase I think, the older among you will remember as a political
issue not so long ago. The railroads were subsidized, sometimes
by grants of money, oftener by grants of land; some of the most
valuable oil lands in the United States were granted to assist the
financing of the railroad which pushed through the Southwest.
A nascent merchant marine was assisted by grants of money, or by
mail subsidies, so that our steam shipping might ply the seven
seas. Some of my friends tell me that they do not want the
Government in business. With this I agree; but I wonder whether
they realize the implications of the past. For while it has been
American doctrine that the Government must not go into business in competition with private enterprises, still it has been
traditional, particularly in Republican administrations, for business urgently to ask the Government to put at private disposal
all kinds of Government assistance. The same man who tells you
that he does not want to see the Government interfere in business
— and he means it, and has plenty of good reasons for saying so —
is the first to go to Washington and ask the Government for a
prohibitory tariff on his product, When things get just bad
enough, as they did two years ago, he will go with equal speed
to the United States Government and ask for a loan; and the
Reconstruction Finance Corporation is the outcome of it. Each
group has sought protection from the Government for its own
special interests, without realizing that the function of Govemment must be to favor no small group at the expense of its duty
to protect the rights of personal freedom and of private property
of all its citizens.
748
�Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
In retrospect we can now see that the turn of the tide came
with the turn of the century. We were reaching our last frontier;
there was no more free land and our industrial combinations
had become great uncontrolled and irresponsible units of power
within the State. Clear-sighted men saw with fear the danger that
opportunity would no longer be equal; that the growing corporation, like the feudal baron of old, might threaten the economic
freedom of individuals to earn a living. In that hour, our antitrust laws were born. The cry was raised against the great corporations. Theodore Roosevelt, the first great Republican Progressive, fought a Presidential campaign on the issue of "trust busting" and talked freely about malefactors of great wealth. If the
Government had a policy it was rather to turn the clock back,
to destroy the large combinations and to return to the time when
every man owned his individual small business.
This was impossible; Theodore Roosevelt, abandoning the idea
of "trust busting," was forced to work out a difference between
"good" trusts and "bad" trusts. The Supreme Court set forth
the famous "rule of reason" by which it seems to have meant that
a concentration of industrial power was permissible if the method
by which it got its power, and the use it made of that power,
were reasonable.
Woodrow Wilson, elected in 1912, saw the situation more
clearly. Where Jefferson had feared the encroachment of political power on the lives of individuals, Wilson knew that the new
power was financial. He saw, in the highly centralized economic
system, the despot of the twentieth century, on whom great
masses of individuals relied for their safety and their livelihood,
and whose irresponsibility and greed (if they were not controlled)
would reduce them to starvation and penury. The concentration
of financial power had not proceeded so far in 1912 as it has
today; but it had grown far enough for Mr. Wilson to realize
fully its implications. It is interesting, now, to read his speeches.
What is called "radical" today (and I have reason to know
whereof I speak) is mild compared to the campaign of Mr. Wilson.
"No man can deny," he said, "that the lines of endeavor have
749
�Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
'1
• u
• -1.
j . •
more and more narrowed and stiffened; no man who knows anything about the development of industry in this country can
have failed to observe that the larger kinds of credit are more
and more difficult to obtain unless you obtain them upon terms
of uniting your efforts with those who already control the industry of the country, and nobody can fail to observe that every man
who trie's to set himself up in competition with any process of
manufacture which has taken place under the control of large
combinations of capital will presently find himself either squeezed
out or obliged to sell and allow himself to be absorbed." Had
there been no World War — had Mr. Wilson been able to devote
eight years to domestic instead of to international affairs —we
might have had a wholly different situation at the present time.
However, the then distant roar of European cannon, growing
ever louder, forced him to abandon the study of this issue". The
problem he saw so clearly is left with us as a legacy; and no one
of us on either side of the political controversy can deny that
it is a matter of grave concern to the Government.
A glance at the situation today only too clearly indicates that
equality of opportunity as we have known it no longer exists.
Our industrial plant is built; the problem just now is whether
under existing conditions it is not overbuilL/Our last frontier
has long since been reached, and there is practically no more
free land. More than half of our people do not live on the farms
or on lands and cannot derive a living by cultivating their own
property. There is no safety valve in the form of a Western
prairie to which those thrown out of work by the Eastern economic machines can go for a new start. We are not able to invite
the immigration from Europe to share our endless plenty. We
are now providing a drab living for our own people.
Our system of constantly rising tariffs has at last reacted
against us to the point of closing our Canadian frontier on the
north, our European markets on the east, many of our LatinAmerican markets to the south, and a goodly proportion of our
Pacific markets on the west, through the retaliatory tariffs of
those countries. It has forced many of our great industrial insti750
�Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
tutions which exported their surplus production to such countries, to establish plants in such countries, within the tariff walls.
This has resulted in the reduction of the operation of their American plants, and opportunity for employment.
Just as freedom to farm has ceased, so also the oppomrfiity
in business has narrowed. It still is true that men can st^rt small
enterprises, trusting to native shrewdness and ability to keep
abreast of competitors; but area after area has been preempted
altogether by the great corporations, and even in thefieldswhich
still have no great concerns, the small man starts under a handicap. The unfeeling statistics of the past three decades show that
the independent business man is running a losing race. Perhaps
he is forced to the wall; perhaps he cannot command credit; perhaps he is "squeezed out," in Mr. Wilson's words, by highly organized corporate competitors, as your corner grocery man can
tell you. Recently a careful study was made of the concentration
of business in the United States. It showed that our economic
life was dominated by some six hundred odd corporations who
controlled two-thirds of American industry. Ten million small
business men divided the other third. More striking still, it appeared that.if the process of concentration goes on at the same
rate, at the end of another century we shall have all American
industry controlled by a dozen corporations, and run by perhaps
a hundred men. Put plainly, we are steering a steady course toward economic oligarchy, if we are not there already.
Clearly, all this calls for a re-appraisal of values. A mere
builder of more industrial plants, a creator of more railroad systems, an organizer of more corporations, is as likely to be a
danger as a help. The day of the great promoter or the financial
Titan, to whom we granted anything if only he would build,
or develop, is over. Our task now is not discovery or exploita- /
tion of natural resources, or necessarily producing more goods. ^
It is the soberer, less dramatic business of administering resources and plants already in hand, of seeking to reestablish
foreign markets for our surplus production, of meeting the problem of underconsumption, of adjusting production to consump75i
�ii.
8
1
Campaign Address on Progressive Government
tion, of distributing wealth and products more equitably, of
adapting existing economic organizations to the service of the
people. The day of enlightened administration has come.
Just as in older times the central Government was first a haven
of refuge, and then a threat, so now in a closer economic system
the central and ambitious financial unit is no longer a servant
of national desire, but a danger. I would draw the parallel one
step farther. We did not think because national Government
had become a threat in the 18th century that therefore we
should abandon the principle of national Government. Nor
today should we abandon the principle of strong economic units
called corporations, merely because their power is susceptible
of easy abuse. In other times we dealt with the problem of an
unduly ambitious central Government by modifying it gradually
into a constitutional democratic Government. So today we are
modifying and controlling our economic units.
As I see it, the task of Government in its relation to business
is to assist the development of an economic declaration of rights,
an economic constitutional order. This is the common task of
statesman and business man. It is the minimum requirement of
a more permanently safe order of things.
Happily, the times indicate that to create such an order not
only is the proper policy of Government, but it is the only line
of safety for our economic structures as well. We know, now,
that these economic units cannot exist unless prosperity is uniform, that is, unless purchasing power is well distributed
throughout every group in the Nation. That is why even the
most selfish of corporations for its own interest would be glad
to see wages restored and unemployment ended and to bring
the Western farmer back to his accustomed level of prosperity
and to assure a permanent safety to both groups. That is why
some enlightened industries themselves endeavor to limit the
freedom of action of each man and business group within the
industry in the common interest of all; why business men everywhere are asking a form of organization which will bring the
scheme of things into balance, even though it may in some meas752
if
v.;-
�not
line
iow,
uniited
the
jlad
ing
rity
diy
the
the
•rythe
•as-
Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
ure qualify the freedom of action of individual units within the
business.
The exposition need not further be elaborated. It is brief and
incomplete, but you will be able to expand it in terms of your
own business or occupation without difficulty. I think everyone
who has actually entered the economic struggle — which means
everyone who was not born to safe wealth —knows in his own
experience and his own life that we have now to apply the
earlier concepts of American Government to the conditions of
today.
The Declaration of Independence discusses the problem of
Government in terms of a contract. Government is a relation
of give and take, a contract, perforce, if we would follow the
thinking out-of which it grew. Under such a contract rulers
were accorded power, and the people consented to that power
on consideration that they be accorded certain rights. The task
of statesmanship has always been the re-definition of these rights
in terms of a changing and growing social order. New conditions
impose new requirements upon Government and those who conduct Govemment.
I held, for example, in proceedings before me as Governor,
the purpose of which was the removal of the Sheriff of New
York, that under modern conditions it was not enough for a
public official merely to evade the legal terms of official wrongdoing. He owed a positive duty as well. I said in substance that
if he had acquired large sums of money, he was when accused
required to explain the sources of such wealth. To that extent
this wealth was colored with a public interest. I said that in
financial matters, public servants should, even beyond private
citizens, be held to a stern and uncompromising rectitude.
I feel that we are coming to a view through the drift of our
legislation and our public thinking in the past quarter century
that private economic power is, to enlarge an old phrase, a
public trust as well. I hold that continued enjoyment of that
power by any individual or group must depend upon the fulfillment of that trust. The men who have reached the summit
753
�fc;
Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
of American business life know this best; happily, many of these
urge the binding quality of this greater social contract.
The terms of that contract are as old as the Republic, and as
new as the new economic order.
Every man has a right to life; and this means that he has also
a right to make a comfortable living. He may by sloth or crime
decline to exercise that right; but it may not be denied him.
We have no actual famine or dearth; our industrial and agricultural mechanism can produce enough and to spare. Our Government formal and informal, political and economic, owes to
everyone an avenue to possess himself of a portion of that plenty
sufficient for his needs, through his own work.
Every man has a right to his own property; which means a
right to be assured, to the fullest extent attainable, in the safety
of his savings. By no other means can men carry the burdens of
those parts of life which, in the nature of things, afford no chance
of labor; childhood, sickness, old age. In all thought of property,
this right is paramount; all other property rights must yield
to it. If, in accord with this principle, we must restrict the operations of the .speculator, the manipulator, even the financier, 1
believe we must accept the restriction as needful, not to hamper
individualism but to protect it.
These two requirements must be satisfied, in the main, by
the individuals who claim and hold control of the great industrial and financial combinations which dominate so large a part
of our industrial life. They have undertaken to be, not business
men, but princes of property. I am not prepared to say that the
system which produces them is wrong. I am very clear that they
must fearlessly and competently assume the responsibility which
goes with the power. So many enlightened business men know
this that the statement would be little more than a platitude, were
it not for an added implication.
This implication is, briefly, that the responsible heads of finance and industry instead of acting each for himself, must work
together to achieve the common end. They must, where necessary, sacrifice this or that private advantage; and in reciprocal
754
t9f
o•
�Campaign Address on Progressive Govemment
•is a
iety
sof
i nee
rty,
ield
^rar, I
per
by
lus»art
iess
:he
iey
ich
ow
re
fi-rk
esal
fJ
:
self-denial must seek a general advantage. It is here that formal
Government —political Government, if you chose —comes in.
Whenever in the pursuit of this objective the lone wolf, the unethical competitor, the reckless promoter, the Ishmael or Insull
whose hand is against every man's, declines to join in achieving
an end recognized as being for the public welfare, and threatens
to drag the industry back to a state of anarchy, the Government
may properly be asked to apply restraint. Likewise, should the
group ever use its collective power contrary to the public welfare, the Government must be swift to enter and protect the
public interest.
The Government should assume the function of economic
regulation only as a last resort, to be tried only when private
initiative, inspired by high responsibility, with such assistance
and balance as Government can give, has finally failed. As yet
there has been no final failure, because there has been no attempt; and I decline to assume that this Nation is unable to
meet the situation.
The final term of the high contract was for liberty and the
pursuit of happiness. We have learned a great deal of both in the
past century. We know that individual liberty and individual
happiness mean nothing unless both are ordered in the sense
that one man's meat is not another man's poison. We know that
the old "rights of personal competency," the right to read, to
think, to speak, to choose and live a mode of life, must be respected at all hazards. We know that liberty to do anything
which deprives others of those elemental rights is outside the
protection of any compact; and that Government in this regard
is the maintenance of a balance, within which every individual
may have a place if he will take it; in which every individual
may find safety if he wishes it; in which every individual may
attain such power as his ability permits, consistent with his assuming the accompanying responsibility.
All this is a long, slow talk. Nothing is more striking than
the simple innocence of the men who insist, whenever an objective is present, on the prompt production of a patent scheme
755
�Campaign Address on Agriculture and Tariffs
i: 2
guaranteed to produce a result. Human endeavor is not
simple as that. Government includes the art of formulating ^
policy, and using the political technique to attain so much
that policy as will receive general support; persuading, leadins
sacrificing, teaching always, because the greatest duty of a state
man is to educate. But in the matters of which I have spoke
we are learning rapidly, in a severe school. The lessons so learne
must not be forgotten, even in the mental lethargy of a sf
lative upturn. We must build toward the time when a majc
depression cannot occur again; and if this means sacrificing tl
easy profits of inflationist booms, then let them go; and gc
riddance.
Faith in America, faith in our tradition of personal responsi|i
bility, faith in our institutions, faith in ourselves demand that!
we recognize the new terms of the old social contract. We shali|
fulfill them, as we fulfilled the obligation of the apparent Utopial
which Jefferson imagined for us in 1776, and which Jefferson^
Roosevelt and Wilson sought to bring to realization. We mustl
do so, lest a rising tide of misery, engendered by our common!
failure, engulf us all. But failure is not an American habit; and j
in the strength of great hope we must all shoulder our common !
load.
140 tl Campaign Address on Agriculture and
Tariffs at Sioux City, Iowa. September 29,1932
M R . CHAIRMAN, my friends in Sioux City, my friends in this
great State, and, indeed, all of you through the country who
are listening on the radio tonight, let me tell you first of all that
I appreciate this remarkable welcome that you have given me,
and I appreciate, too, the performance put on by the mounted
patrol of my fellow Shriners.
Two weeks ago, when I was heading toward the Coast, I presented before an audience in the City of Topeka, what I conceived to be the problem of agriculture in these United States,
756
�r
LT
ieiit of health and of
larger groups, the
tion discriminations,
j«rs.
ntiicfieldis important
at for the total effect
jpon that most valutional unity,
resent crisis does not
of worfd-wide forces
0 of all the moral,
id, after centuries of
ave made our Nation
our faith.
e allowed to become
ity, a pious hope, to
ust be made to have
d acts of every man,
g year and the years
jnse, the fundamental
th against faith, race
1 of hatred in men too
selves, were used as
ride to power. And
es on whole nations,
mst begin to be more
ra. and equally those
themselves in a false
conomic, financial, or
ricks upon us, seeking
, weakening us in the
ile to fighting among
ed to plunge Europe
he plague, if American
We cannot afford to
> tliis continent the
n
jy, and of fair play as
n that is to come,
the beating of drums,,
pars between nations,
i harmful in the inter)mestic scene. Peace
he advantage of peace
ng run history ampty
wins less than calm
m , recognizing that
erica—passes through
closing session of the
Eighth Annual Message
2855
Seventy-Sixth Congress will consider the needs of the Nation and of
humanity with calmness, tolerance, and cooperative wisdom.
May the year 1940 be pointed to by our children as another period
when democracy justified its existence as the best instrument of
govemment yet devised by mankind.
EIGHTH ANNUAL MESSAGE.
THE WHITE HOUSE, January
6, iDJ,!.
To the Congress oj the United States:
I address you, tho Members of the Seventy-seventh Congress, at
a moment unprecedented in the history of the Union. I use the word
"unprecedented," because at no previous time has American security
been as seriously threatened from without as it is today.
Since the permanent formation of our Government under the
Constitution, in 1789, most of the periods of crisis in our history
have related to our domestic affairs. Fortunately, only one of these—
the 4-yeftr War between the States—ever threatened our national
unity. Today, thank God, 130,000,000 Americans, in 48 States,
have forgotten points of the compass in our national unity.
It is true that prior to 1914 the United States often had been disturbed by events in other continents. We had even engaged in two
wars with European nations and in a number of undeclared wars in
the West Indies, in the Mediterranean and in the Pacific for the
maintenance of American rights, and for the principles of peaceful
commerce. In no case, however, had a serious threat been raised
against our national safety or our independence.
What I seek to convey is the historic truth that the United States
as a nation has at all times maintained opposition to any attempt to
lock us in behind an ancient Chinese wall while the procession of
civilization went past. Today, thinking of our children and their
children, we oppose enforced isolation for ourselves or for any part
of the Americas.
That determination of ours was proved, for example, during the
quarter century of wars following the French Revolution.
While the Napoleonic struggles did threaten interests of the United
States because of the French foothold in the West Indies and in
Louisiana, and while we engaged in the War of 1812 to vindicate our
right to peaceful trade, it is, nevertheless, clear that neither France
nor Great Britain nor any other nation was aiming at domination of
the whole world.
In like fashion, from 1815 to 1914—99 years—no single war in
Europe or in Asia constituted a real threat against our future or
against the future of any other American nation.
Except in the Maximilian interlude in Mexico, no foreign power
sought to establish itself in this hemisphere; and tlie strength of the
Britishfleetin the Atlantic has been a friendly strength. It is still a
friendly strength.
Even when the World War broke out in 1914, it seemed to contain
only small threat of danger to our own American future. But, as
time went on, the American people began to visualize what the down-
�2856
FRANKLIN
D.
ROOSEVELT
fall of democratic nations might mean to our own democracy.
We need not overemphasize imperfections in the Peace of Versailles.
We need not harp on failure of the democracies to deal with problems
of world reconstruction. We should remember that the pence of 1919
was far less unjust than the kind of "pacification" which began even
before Munich, and which is being carried on under the new order of
tyranny that seeks to spread over every continent today. The
American people have unalterably set their faces against thnt tyranny.
Every realist knows that the democratic way of life is at this moment
being directly assailed in every part of the world—assailed either by
arms, or by secret spreading of poisonous propaganda by those who
seek to destroy unity and promote discord in nations still at peace.
During 1(5 months this assault has blotted out the whole pattern
of democratic life in an appalling number of independent nations,
groat nnd small. The assailants are still on the march, threatening
other nations, great and small.
Therefore, as your President, performing my constitutional duty
to "give to the Congress information of the state of the Union," I
find it necessary to report that tho future and the safety of our country
and of our democracy arc overwhelmingly involved in events far
bcyond our borders.
Armed defense of democratic existence is now being gallantly waged
in four continents. If that defense fails, all the population and all
the resources of Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australasia will be dominated by the conquerors. Tho total of those populations and their
resources greatly exceeds thit sum total of the population and resource
of the whole of the Western Hemisphere—many times over.
In times like these it is immature—and iiicidcntuily untrue—for
anybody to brag that an unprepared America, single-handed, and
with one hand tied behind its back, can hold oft the whole world.
No realistic American can expect from a dictator's peace international generosity, or return of true independence, or world diaarmament, or freedom of expression, or freedom of religion—or even
good business.
Such a peace would bring no security for us or for our neighbors.
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.'
As a nation we may take pride in the fact that we are soft-hearted;
but we cannot afford to be soft-headed.
We must always be wary of those who with sounding brass and a
tinkling cymbal preach the "ism" of appeasement.
Wo must especially beware of that small group of selfish men who
would clip tlie wings of the American eagle in order to feather their
own nests.
I have recently pointed out how quickly the tempo of modern warfare could bring into our very midst the physical attack which we must
expect if the dictator nations win this war.
There is much loose talk of our immunity from immediate and
direct invasion from across the seas. Obviously, as long as the British
Navy retains its power, no such danger exists. Even if tliero wero
no British Navy, it is not probable that any enemy would be stupid
enougli to attack us by landing troops in the United States from
across thousands of miles of ocean, until it had acquired strategic
bases from which to operate.
�LT
democracy,
te Peace of Versailles,
o deal with problems
uat the peace of 1919
a" which began even
ider the new order of
ntinent today. The
against that tyranny.
life is at this moment
d—; iiiled either by
iganda by those who
tations still at peace,
it the whole pattern
independent nationa,
e march, threatening
;
, constitutional duty
ate. of the Union," I
"ety of our country
volvcd in events far
being gallantly waged
lie population and all
tralasia will be domipopulations and their
pulation and resources
ir times over,
identally untrue—for
a, single-handed, and
)f[ the whole world,
lictator's peace intorndence, or world disn of religion—or even
i or for our neighbors,
lurch
a little tcmpoat we are soft-hearted;
sounding brass and a
ent.
up of selfish men who
order to feather their
tempo of modem war1 attack which we must
' from immediate and
f, as long as the British
*. Even if tliero were
•ncmy would bo stupid
ie United States from
had acquired strategic
Eighth Annual Message
2857
But we learn much from the lessons of tho past yeara in Europe—
particularly the lesson of Norway, whose essential seaports were
captured by treachery and surprise built up over a series of years.
The first phase of tho invasion of this hemisphere would not bo tho
landing of regular troops. The necessary strategic points would be
->ccupiod by secret agents and their dupes—and great numbers of
thorn an' already here, and in Latin America.
As long ns the aggressor nation smaintain the offensive, they—not
we—will choose the time nnd the place and the method of their attack.
That is why the future of all American Republics is today in serious
danger.
That is why this annual message to the Congress is unique in our
history.
That is why every member of tho executive branch of tho Government and every Member of the Congress face great responsibility—and
great accountability.
Tho need of the moment is that our actions and our policy should
be devoted primarily—almost exclusively—to meeting this foreign
peril, for all our domestic problems are now a part of tho great
emergency.
Just as our national policy in internal affairs has been based upon a
decent respect for the rights and dignity of all our fellow men within
our gates, so our national policy in foreign affairs has been based on a
decent respect for the rights and dignity of all nations, large and
small. And the justice of morality must and will win in the end.
Our national policy is this:
First, by an impressive expression of the public will and without
regard to partisanship, wo are committed to all-inclusivo national
defense.
Second, by an impressive expression of the public will and without
regard to partisanship, we are committed to full support of all those
resolute i)ooplos, everywhere, who are resisting aggression and aro
thereby keeping war away from our hemisphere. By this support,
we express our determination that the democratic cause shall prevail;
and we strengthen tho defense nnd security of our own Nation.
Third, by an impressive expression of the public will and without
regard to partisanship, we are committed to the proposition that principles of inornlity and considerations for our own security will never
)0rmil us to acquiesce in a peace dictated by aggressors and sponsored
> appeasers. Wo know that enduring peace cannot be bought at
y
the cost of other people's freedom.
In the recent national election there was no substantial difference
between the two groat parties in respect to that national policy. No
issue was fought out on this line before the American electorate.
Today, it is abundantly evident that American citizens everywhere arc
demanding and 8up|>oi'ting speedy and complete action in recognition
of obvious danger.
Therefore, the inuiiediate need is a swift and driving increase in our
armament production.
Leaders of industry and labor have responded to our summons.
Goals of speed have been set. In some cases these goals arc being
reached ahead of time; in some cases we are on schedule; in other
cases there are slight but not serious delays; and in some cases—and
I am sorry to say very important cases—wo arc all concerned by the
1
�2858
FRANKLIN
D.
ROOSEVELT
slownosa of tho necomplislimont of our plans.
Tho Army and Navy, however, have made substantial progress during the uast year. Actual experience is improving and speeding up
our motliods of production with every passing day. And to* ay's
best is not. good enough for tomorrow.
I am not satisfied with the progress thus far made. The men in
charge of the program represent the best in training, ability, and
patriotism. They are not satisfied with the progress thus far"mode.
None of us will be satisfied until the job is done.
No matter whether the original goal was set too high or too low,
our objective is quicker and better results.
To give two illustrations:
We are behind schedule in turning out finished airplanes; wc are
working day and night to solve the innumerable problems and to
catch up.
We are ahead of schedule in building warships; but we are working
to get even further ahead of schedule.
To change a whole nation from a basis of peacetime production of
To
implements of peace to a basis of wartime production of implements
of war is no small task. And the greatest difficulty comes at the
beginning of the program, when new tools and plant facilities and new
assembly lines and ship ways must first be constructed before the
actual materiel begins to flow steadily and speedily from them.
The Congress, of course, must rightly keep itself informed at all
times of the progress of the program. However, there is certain information, as the Congress itself will readily recognize, which, in the
interests of our own security and those of the nations we arc supporting, must of needs bo kept in confidence.
New circumstances arc constantly begetting new needs for our
safety. I shall ask this Congress for greatly increased new appropriations and authorizations to carry on what we have begun.
I also ask this Congress for authority and for funds sufficient to
manufacture additional munitions and war supplies of many kinds,
to be turned over to those nations which are now in actual war with
aggressor nations.
Our most useful and immediate role is to act as an arsenal for them
as well as for ourselves. They do not need man power. They do
need billions of dollars worth of the weapons of defense.
The time is near when they will not be able to pay for them in
ready cash. We cannot, and will not, tell them they must surrender,
merely because of present inability to pay for the weapons which we
know they must have.
I do not recommend that we make them a loan of dollars with which
to pay for these weapons—a loan to be repaid in dollars.
I recommend that we make it possible for those nations to continue
to obtain war materials in the United States, fitting their orders into
our own program. Nearly all of their materiel would, if the time ever
came, be useful for our own defense.
Taking counsel of expert military and naval authorities, considering
what is best for our own security, we are free to decide how much
should be kept here and how much should be sent abroad to our friends
who by their determined and heroic resistance are giving us time in
which to make ready our own defense.
For what we send abroad, we shall be repaid, within a reasonable
�BBSS
Eighth Annual Message
In lial progress durI? and spmlinc up
I ay. And today's
J ado. Tlio mon in
lining, ability, and
oss thus far made.
ho high or too low,
1 airplanes; we aro
e problems and to
but we aro working
ctimc production of
ction of implements
lenity comes at the
nt facilities and new
structed before the
ly from them,
tself informed at all
there is certain inognize, which, in the
tions we arc supportnew needs for our
ncreased new approe have begun,
or funds sufficient to
•plies of many kinds,
> in actual war with
w
is an arsenal for them
ian power. They do
f defense.
e to pay for them in
i they must surrender,
the weapons which we
r of dollars with which
»
in dollars.
ise nations to continue
tting their orders into
would, if the time ever
iithorities, considering
i to decide how much
t abroad to our friends
are giving us time iu
i, within a reasonable
2859
time following the close of hostilities, in similar materials, or, at our
option, in other goods of many kinds which they can produce and
which we need.
Let us say to the democracies: "We Americans arc vitally concerned in your defense of freedom. We arc putting forth our energies,
our resources, and our organizing powers to give you the strength
to regain and maintain a free world. We shall send you, in everincreasing numbers, ships, planes, tanks, guns. This is our purpose
and our pledge."
In fulfillment of this purpose wc will not be intimidated by the
threats of dictators that thoy will regard as a breach of international
law and as an act of war our aid to the democracies which dare to
resist their aggression. Such aid is not an act of war, even if a dictator
should unilaterally proclaim it so to be.
When the dictators are ready to make war upon us, they will not
wait for an act of war on our part. They did not wait for Norway
or Belgium or the Netherlands to commit an act of war.
Their only interest is in a new one-way international law, which
lacks mutuality in its observance, and, therefore, becomes an instrument of oppression.
The happiness of future generations of Americans may well depend
upon how effective and how immediate we can make our aid felt.
No one can tell the exact character of the emergency situations that
we may be called upon to meet. The Nation's hands must not be tied
when the Nation'sfifeis in danger.
We must all prepare to make the sacrifices that the emergency—as
serious as war itself—demands. Whatever stands in the way of speed
and efficiency in defense preparations must give way to the national
need.
A free nation has the right to expect full cooperation from all
groups. A free nation has the right to look to the leaders of business,
of labor, and of agriculture to take the lead in stimulating effort, not
among other groups but within their own groups.
Tho best way of dealing with the few slackers or troublemakers in
our midst is,first,to shame them by patriotic example, and, if that
fails, to use the sovereignty of government to save govemment.
As men do not live by bread alone, they do notfightby armaments
alone. Those who man our defenses, and those behind them who
build our defenses, must have tho stamina and courage which come
from an unshakable belief in the manner of life which they are
defending. The mighty action which we are calling for cannot be
based on a disregard of all things worthfightingfor.
Tho Nation takes great satisfaction and much strength from the
things which have been done to make its people /conscious of their
individual stake in the preservation of democratic life in America.
Those things have toughened the fiber of our people, have renewed
their faith, and strongthened their devotion to the institutions we
make ready to protect.
Certainly this is no time to stop thinking about the social and
economic problems which are the root cause of the social revolution
which is today a supreme factor in the world.
There is nothing mysterious about the foundations of a healthy
and strong democracy. The basic things expected by our people of
their political and economic systems aro simple. They are—
�2&60
FRANKLIN
D.
ROOSEVELT
Equality of opportunity for youth and for others.
Jobs for those who can work.
Security for those who need it.
The ending of special privilege for the few.
The preservation of civil liberties for all.
The enjoyment of the fruits of scientific progress in a wider and
constantly rising standard of living.
These are the simple and basic things that must never be lost sight
of in the turmoil and unbelievable complexity of our modern world.
The inner and abiding strength of our economic and political systems
is dependent upon the degree to which they fulfill tliese expectations.
Many subjects connected with our social economy call for immediate improvement.
As examples:
We should bring more citizens under the coverage of old-age
pensions and unemployment insurance.
We should widen the opportunities for adequate medical care.
We should plan a better system by which persons deserving or
needing gainful employment may obtain it.
I have called for personal sacrifice. I am assured of the willingness
of almost all Americans to respond to that call.
A part of the sacrifice means the payment of more money in taxes.
In my Budge^ message I recommend that a greater portion of this
great defense program be paid for from taxation than we are paying
today. No person should try, or be allowed, to get rich out of this
program; and the principle of tax payments in accordance wilh ability
to pay should be constantly before our eyes to guide our legislation.
If the Congress maintains these principles, the voters, putting
patriotism ahead of pocketbooks, will give you their applause.
In the future dnys, which wc seek to make secure, we look forward
to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression—everywhere in tho
world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own
way—everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want—which, translated into world
terms, means economic understanding which will secure to every
nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants—everywhere iu
the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear—which, translated into world
terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point
and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to
commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor—anywhere
in the world.
That is no vision of a distant millennium. It is a definite basis for a
kind of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind
of world is tlio very nntithesis of the so-called new order of tyranny
which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb.
To that new order we oppose the greater conception—the moral
order. A good society is able to face schemes of world domination
and foreign revolutions alike witliout fear.
Since the beginning of our American history wc have been engaged
in change—in a perpetual peaceful revolution—a revolution wliich
goes ou steadily, quietly adjusting itself to changing conditions—with-
�:VEET
Ninth Annual Message
others.
out the concentration camp or the quick-lime in the ditch. The
world order which we seek is the cooperation of free countries, working
together in a friendly, civilized society.
This Nation has placed its destiny in the liands and heads and hearts
of its millions of free men and women; and its faith in freedom under
the guidance of God. Freedom means the supremacy of human
rights everywhere. Our support goes to those who struggle to gain
those rights or keep them. Our strength is in our unity of purpose.
To that high concept there can be no end save victory.
progress in a wider nnd
must never be lost sight
,y of our modern world,
lie and political systems
iilfill these expectations,
economy call for immehe coverage of old-age
NINTH
ANNUAL
MESSAGE
equate medical care,
ch persons deserving or
THE
WHITE
2861
HOUSE,
January 6, 1942.
ired of the willingness
ill.
of more nnoney in taxes,
i greater portion of this
,tion than we are paying
1, to get rich out of this
n accordance with ability
to guide our legislation,
les, the voters, putting
)U their applause.
• secure, we look forward
n freedoms.
sion—everywhere in the
worship God in his own
i, translated into world
ch will secure to every
abitants—everywhere in
i, translated into world
laments to such a point
n will be in a position to
any neighbor—anywhere
It is a definite basis for a
generation. That kind
ed new order of tyranny
tish of a bomb.
• conception—the moral
ies of world domination
y we have been engaged
on—a revolution which
mging conditions—with-
Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Senate and
of tho House of Representatives, in fulfilling my duty to report upon
the state of tho Union, I am proud to say to you that tlie spirit of
tho American people was never higher than it is today—tho Union
was never more closely knit together—this country was never more
deeply determined to face tho solemn tasks before it.
The response of the American people has been instantaneous.
It will be sustained until our security is assured.
Exactly 1 year ago today I said to this Congress: "When the
dictators aro ready to make war upon us, they will not wait for an
act of war on our part * * *. They—not wo—will choose the
time and tlie place and the method of their attack."
We now know their choice of the time. A peaceful Sunday morning—December 7, 1941.
Wo know their choice of tho place. An American outpost in the
Pacific.
We know their choice of tho method. The method of Hitler
himself.
Japan's scheme of conquest goes back half a century. It was not
merely a policy of seeking living room; it was a plan which included
the subjugation of all tlio peoples in tho Far East and in the islands
of the Pacific, and tlio domination of that ocean by Japanese military
and naval control of the western coasts of North, Central, and South
America.
The development of this ambitious conspiracy was marked by the
war against China in 1894; the subsequent occupation of Korea; the
war against Russia in 1904; tho illegal fortification of the mandated
Pacific Islands following 1920; tho seizure of Manchuria in 1931;
and tho invasion of China in 1937.
A similar policy of criminal conquest was adopted by Italy. Tho
Fascists first revealed their imperial designs in Libya and Tripoli.
In 1935 they seized Abyssinia. Their goal was tlie domination of all
North Africa, Egypt, parte of France, and tho entire Mediterranean
world.
�4- Message on the State of the Unim
4 (["Unless There Is Security Here at Home,
There Cannot Be Lasting Peace in the World"
— Message to the Congress on the State of the
Union. January 11, 1944
To the Congress:
Nation in the past two years has become an active partner
in the world's greatest war against human slavery.
We have joined with like-minded people in order to defend
ourselves in a world that has been gravely threatened with gangster rule.
But I do not think that any of us Americans can be content
with mere survival. Sacrifices that we and our allies are making
impose upon us all a sacred obligation to see to it that out of this
war we and our children will gain something better than mere
survival.
We are united in determination that this war shall not be followed by another interim which leads to new disaster — that we
shall not repeat the tragic errors of ostrich isolationism — that we
shall not repeat the excesses of the wild twenties when this Nation went for a joy ride on a roller coaster which ended in a
tragic crash.
When Mr. Hull went to Moscow in October, and when I went
to Cairo and Teheran in November, we knew that we were in
agreement with our allies in our common determination to fight
and win this war. But there were many vital questions concerning the future peace, and they were discussed in an atmosphere
of complete candor and harmony.
In the last war such discussions, such meetings, did not even
begin until the shooting had stopped and the delegates began to
assemble at the peace table. There had been no previous opportunities for man-to-man discussions which lead to meetings of
minds. The result was a peace which was not a peace.
That was a mistake which we are not repeating in this war.
And right here I want to address a word or two to some suspiTHIS
32
�4. Message on the State of the Union
Home,
World"
of the
I
•f
1
:tive partner
;r to defend
with gangi be content
are making
it out of this
r than mere
1 not be fol1
er — that we
im — that we
ben this Naended in a
when I went
we were in
ition to fight
ons concerni atmosphere
lid not even
ites began to
vious oppormeetings of
this war.
»some suspi-
•T
cious souls who are fearful that Mr. Hull or I have made "commitments" for the future which might pledge this Nation to
secret treaties, or to enacting the role of Santa Claus.
To such suspicious souls — using a polite terminology — I wish
to say that Mr. Churchill, and Marshal Stalin, and Generalissimo
Chiang Kai-shek are all thoroughly conversant with the provisions of our Constitution. And so is Mr. Hull. And so am I.
Of course we made some commitments. We most certainly
committed ourselves to very large and very specific military plans
which require the use of all Allied forces to bring about the defeat of our enemies at the earliest possible time.
But there were no secret treaties or political orfinancialcommitments.
The one supreme objective for the future, which we discussed
for each Nation individually, and for all the United Nations,
can be summed up in one word: Security.
And that means not only physical security which provides
safety from attacks by aggressors. It means also economic security, social security, moral security — in a family of Nations.
In the plain down-to-earth talks that I had with the Generalissimo and Marshal Stalin and Prime Minister Churchill, it was
abundantly clear that they are all most deeply interested in the
resumption of peaceful progress by their own peoples — progress
toward a better life. All our allies want freedom to develop their
lands and resources, to build up industry, to increase education
and individual opportunity, and to raise standards of living.
All our allies have learned by bitter experience that real development will not be possible if they are to be diverted from
their purpose by repeated wars — or even threats of war.
China and Russia are truly united with Britain and America
in recognition of this essential fact:
The best interests of each Nation, large and small, demand
that all freedom-loving Nations shall join together in a just
and durable system of peace. In the present world situation,
evidenced by the actions of Germany, Italy, and Japan, unquestioned military control over disturbers of the peace is as necessary
33
�4. Message on the State oj the Union
i 1
1
among Nations as it is among citizens in a community. And an
equally basic essential to peace is a decent standard of living for
all individual men and women and children in all Nations. Freedom from fear is eternally linked with freedom from want.
There are people who burrow through our Nation like unseeing moles, and attempt to spread the suspicion that if other
Nations are encouraged to raise their standards of living, our
own American standard of living must of necessity be depressed.
The fact is the very contrary. I t has been shown time and
again that if the standard of living of any country goes up, so
does its purchasing power —and that such a rise encourages a
better standard of living in neighboring countries with whom it
trades. That is just plain common sense — and it is the kind of
plain common sense that provided the basis for our discussions
at Moscow, Cairo, and Teheran.
Returning from my journeyings, I must confess to a sense of
"let-down" when I found many evidences of faulty perspective
here in Washington. The faulty perspective consists in overemphasizing lesser problems and thereby underemphasizing the
first and greatest problem.
The overwhelming majority of our people have met the demands of this war with magnificent courage and understanding.
They have accepted inconveniences; they have accepted hardships; they have accepted tragic sacrifices. And they are ready
and eager to make whatever further contributions are needed to
win the war as quickly as possible — if only they are given the
chance to know what is required of them.
However, while the majority goes on about its great work
without complaint, a noisy minority maintains an uproar of
demands for special favors for special groups. There are pests
who swarm through the lobbies of the Congress and the cocktail
bars of Washington, representing these special groups as opposed
to the basic interests of the Nation as a whole. They have come
to look upon the war primarily as a chance to make profits for
themselves at the expense of their neighbors — profits in money
or in terms of political or social preferment.
34
�4. Message on the State of the Union
mity. And an
of living for
Nations. Freejm want,
ition like unthat if other
)f living, our
be depressed,
wn time and
y goes up, so
encourages a
with whom it
is the kind of
ur discussions
to a sense of
:y perspective
isists in overiphasizing the
e met the denders landing,
ccepted hardicy are ready
are needed to
are given the
ts great work
an uproar of
icre are pests
id the cocktail
ips as opposed
iey have come
ike profits for
jfits in money
Such selfish agitation can be highly dangerous in wartime. It
creates confusion. It damages morale. It hampers our national
effort. It muddies the waters and therefore prolongs the war.
If we analyze American history impartially, we cannot escape
the fact that in our past we have not always forgotten individual
and selfish and partisan interests in time of war — we have not
always been united in purpose and direction. We cannot overlook the serious dissensions and the lack of unity in our war of
the Revolution, in our War of 1812, or in our War Between the
States, when the survival of the Union itself was at stake.
In thefirstWorld War we came closer to national unity than
in any previous war. But that war lasted only a year and a half,
and increasing signs of disunity began to appear during the final
months of the conflict.
In this war, we have been compelled to leam how interdependent upon each other are all groups and sections of the population of America.
Increased food costs, for example, will bring new demands for
wage increases from all war workers, which will in tum raise all
prices of all things including those things which the farmers
themselves have to buy. Increased wages or prices will each in
tum produce the same results. They all have a particularly disastrous result on allfixedincome groups.
And I hope you will remember that all of us in this Govemment represent thefixedincome group just as much as we represent business owners, workers, and farmers. This group of fixedincome people includes: teachers, clergy, policemen, firemen,
widows and minors on fixed incomes, wives and dependents of
our soldiers and sailors, and old-age pensioners. They and their
families add up to one-quarter of our one hundred and thirty
million people. They have few or no high pressure representatives at die Capitol. In a period of gross inflation they would be
the worst sufferers.
If ever there was a time to subordinate individual or group
selfishness to the national good, that time is now. Disunity at
home — bickerings, self-seeking partisanship, stoppages of work,
35
�4. Message on the State oj the Union
li!
inflation, business as usual, politics as usual, luxury as usual —
these are the influences which can undermine the morale of the
brave men ready to die at the front for us here.
Those who are doing most of the complaining are not deliberately striving to sabotage the national war effort. They are laboring under the delusion that the time is past when we must make
prodigious sacrifices — that the war is already won and we can
begin to slacken off. But the dangerous folly of that point of view
can be measured by the distance that separates our troops from
their ultimate objectives in Berlin and Tokyo — and by the sum
of all the perils that lie along the way.
Overconfidence and complacency are among our deadliest
enemies. Last spring — after notable victories at Stalingrad and
in Tunisia and against the U-boats on the high seas — overconfidence became so pronounced that war production fell off. I n
two months, June and July, 1943, more than a thousand airplanes that could have been made and should have been made
were not made. Those who failed to make them were not on
strike. They were merely saying, "The war's in the bag — so let's
relax."
That attitude on the part of anyone — Government or management or labor —can lengthen this war. I t can kill American
boys.
Let us remember the lessons of 1918. I n the summer of that
year the tide turned in favor of the allies. But this Government
did not relax. I n fact, our national effort was stepped up. I n
August, 1918, the draft age limits were broadened from 21-31
to 18-45. The President called for "force to the utmost," and his
call was heeded. And in November, only three months later,
Germany surrendered.
That is the way to fight and win a war — all out — and not with
half-an-eye on the battlefronts abroad and the other eye-and-ahalf on personal, selfish, or political interests here at home.
Therefore, in order to concentrate all our energies and resources on winning the war, and to maintain a fair and stable
economy at home, I recommend that the Congress adopt:
36
�4. Message on the State of the Union
:ury as usual —
: morale of the
ire not deliberThey are laborwe must make
on and we can
it point of view
ur troops from
ind by the sum
our deadliest
Stalingrad and
seas — overconion fell off. In
i thousand airave been made
n were not on
ie bag — so let's
tent or managekill American
ummer of that
is Government
stepped up. In
ed from 81-31
tmost," and his
: months later,
— and not with
»ther eye-and-ae at home,
nergies and refair and stable
s adopt:
I
(1) A realistic tax law —which will tax all unreasonable
profits, both individual and corporate, and reduce the ultimate
cost of the war to our sons and daughters. The tax bill now
under consideration by the Congress does not begin to meet
this test.
(2) A continuation of the law for the renegotiation of war
contracts — which will prevent exorbitant profits and assure
fair prices to the Government. For two long years I have
pleaded with the Congress to take undue profits out of war.
(3) A cost of food law — which will enable the Govemment
(a) to place a reasonablefloorunder the prices the farmer may
expect for his production; and (b) to place a ceiling on the
prices a consumer will have to pay for the food he buys. This
should apply to necessities only; and will require public funds
to carry out. It will cost in appropriations about one percent
of the present annual cost of the war.
(4) Early reenactment of the stabilization statute of October,
1942. This expires June 30, 1944, and if it is not extended well
in advance, the country might just as well expect price chaos
by summer.
We cannot have stabilization by wishful thinking. We must
take positive action to maintain the integrity of the American
dollar.
(5) A national service law — which, for the duration of the
war, will prevent strikes, and, with certain appropriate exceptions, will make available for war production or for any other
essential services every able-bodied adult in this Nation.
Thesefivemeasures together form a just and equitable whole.
I would not recommend a national service law unless the other
laws were passed to keep down the cost of living, to share equitably the burdens of taxation, to hold the stabilization line, and to
prevent undue profits.
The Federal Govemment already has the basic power to draft
capital and property of all kinds for war purposes on a basis of
just compensation.
As you know, I have for three years hesitated to recommend
37
�4. Message on the State of the Union
a national service act. Today, however, I am convinced of its
necessity. Although I believe that we and our allies can win the
war without such a measure, I am certain that nothing less than
total mobilization of all our resources of manpower and capital
will guarantee an earlier victory, and reduce the toll of suffering
and sorrow and blood.
I have received a joint recommendation for this law from the
heads of the War Department, the Navy Department, and the
Maritime Commission. These are the men who bear responsibility for the procurement of the necessary arms and equipment, and for the successful prosecution of the war in the field.
They say:
"When the very life of the Nation is in peril the responsibility for
service is common to all men and women. I n such a time there can be no
discrimination between the men and women who are assigned by the
Government to its defense at the battlefront and the men and women
assigned to producing the vital materials essential to successful military
operations. A prompt enactment of a National Service Law would be
merely an expression of the universality of this responsibility."
I believe the country will agree that those statements are the
solemn truth.
National service is the most democratic way to wage a war.
Like selective service for the armed forces, it rests on the obligation of each citizen to serve his Nation to his utmost where he is
best qualified.
It does not mean reduction in wages. It does not mean loss of
retirement and seniority rights and benefits. It does not mean
that any substantial numbers of war workers will be disturbed
in their present jobs. Let these facts be wholly clear.
Experience in other democratic Nations at war — Britain,
Canada, Australia, and New Zealand — has shown that the very
existence of national service makes unnecessary the widespread
use of compulsory power. National service has proven to be a
unifying moral force — based on an equal and comprehensive
legal obligation of all people in a Nation at war.
There are millions of American men and women who are not
38
�4. Message on the State of the Union
Mivinced of its
ies can win the
•thing less than
ver and capital
.oil of suffering
is law from the
ment, and the
) bear responms and equipar in the field.
-esponsibility for
: there can be no
assigned by the
nen and women
iccessful military
: Law would be
bility."
ements are the
0 wage a war.
on the obligaost where he is
)t mean loss of
iocs not mean
1 be disturbed
clear.
war — Britain,
i that the very
he widespread
>roven to be a
:omprehensive
m who are not
in this war at all. It is not because they do not want to be in it.
But they want to know where they can best do their share. National service provides that direction. It will be a means by
which every man and woman can find that inner satisfaction
which comes from making the fullest possible contribution to
victory.
I know that all civilian war workers will be glad to be able
to say many years hence to their grandchildren: "Yes, I, too, was
in service in the great war. I was on duty in an airplane factory,
and I helped make hundreds of fighting planes. The Government told me that in doing that I was performing my most useful
work in the service of my country."
It is argued that we have passed the stage in the war where
national service is necessary. But our soldiers and sailors know
that this is not true. We are going forward on a long, rough
road — and, in all journeys, the last miles are the hardest. And
it is for that final effort — for the total defeat of our enemies —
that we must mobilize our total resources. The national war program calls for the employment of more people in 1944 than in
1943It is my conviction that the American people will welcome this
win-the-war measure which is based on the eternally just principle
of "fair for one, fair for all."
It will give our people at home the assurance that they are
standing four-square behind our soldiers and sailors. And it will
give our enemies demoralizing assurance that we mean business
— that we, 130,000,000 Americans, are on the march to Rome,
Berlin, and Tokyo.
I hope that the Congress will recognize that, although this is
a political year, national service is an issue which transcends
politics. Great power must be used for great purposes.
As to the machinery for this measure, the Congress itself
should determine its nature —but it should be wholly nonpartisan in its make-up.
Our armed forces are valiantly fulfilling their responsibilities
to our country and our people. Now the Congress faces the re39
�4. Message on the State of the Union
sponsibility for taking those measures which are essential to national security in this the most decisive phase of the Nation's
greatest war.
Several alleged reasons have prevented the enactment of legislation which would preserve for our soldiers and sailors and
marines the fundamental prerogative of citizenship — the right
to vote. No amount of legalistic argument can becloud this issue
in the eyes of these ten million American citizens. Surely the
signers of the Constitution did not intend a document which,
even in wartime, would be construed to take away the franchise
of any of those who are fighting to preserve the Constitution
itself.
Our soldiers and sailors and marines know that the overwhelming majority of them will be deprived of the opportunity
to vote, if the voting machinery is left exclusively to the States
under existing State laws —and that there is no likelihood of
these laws being changed in time to enable them to vote at the
next election. The Army and Navy have reported that it will be
impossible effectively to administer forty-eight different soldiervoting laws. It is the duty of the Congress to remove this unjustifiable discrimination against the men and women in our armed
forces — and to do it as quickly as possible.
It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the
strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment
of an American standard of living higher than ever before known.
We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard
of living may be, if some fraction of our people — whether it be
one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth — is ill-fed, ill-clothed, i l l housed, and insecure.
This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present
strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political
rights —among them the right of free speech, free press, free
worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and
seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.
As our Nation has grown in size and stature, however — as our
40
�4. Message on the State of the Union
sssential to naf the Nation's
tment of legisid sailors and
lip —the right
loud this issue
ns. Surely the
:ument which,
t the franchise
i Constitution
that the overLC opportunity
• to the States
f
likelihood of
to vote at the
that it will be
ferent soldiere this unjustiin our armed
determine the
establishment
before known,
leral standard
whether it be
ll-clothed, ill:o its present
able political
ee press, free
searches and
'ever — as our
industrial economy expanded — these political rights proved
inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. "Necessitous men are not free men." People who are
hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships
are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as selfevident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights
under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all — regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries
or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and
clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a
return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in
an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to
achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears
of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we
must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of
these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America's own rightful place in the world depends in large
part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried
into practice for our citizens. For unless there is security here at
home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.
One of the great American industrialists of our day — a man
4i
�4. Message on the State of the Union
i'i! '
who has rendered yeoman service to his country, in this crisis —
recently emphasized the grave dangers of "rightist reaction" in
this Nation. A l l clear-thinking businessmen share his concern.
Indeed, if such reaction should develop — if history were to repeat
itself and we were to return to the so-called "normalcy" of the
1920's —then it is certain that even though we shall have conquered our enemies on the battlefields abroad, we shall have
yielded to the spirit of Fascism here at home.
I ask the Congress to explore the means for implementing this
economic bill of rights —for it is definitely the responsibility
of the Congress so to do. Many of these problems are already
before committees of the Congress in the form of proposed legislation. I shall from time to time communicate with the Congress
with respect to these and further proposals. In the event that no
adequate program of progress is evolved, I am certain that the
Nation will be conscious of the fact.
Our fighting men abroad — and their families at home — expect such a program and have the right to insist upon it. I t is to
their demands that this Government should pay heed rather
than to the whining demands of selfish pressure groups who seek
to feather their nests while young Americans are dying.
The foreign policy that we have been following — the policy
that guided us at Moscow, Cairo, and Teheran — is based on the
common sense principle which was best expressed by Benjamin
Franklin on July 4, 1776: "We must all hang together, or
assuredly we shall all hang separately."
I have often said that there are no two fronts for America in
this war. There is only one front. There is one line of unity which
extends from the hearts of the people at home to the men of our
attacking forces in our farthest outposts. When we speak of our
total effort, we speak of the factory and the field, and the mine
as well as of the battleground — we speak of the soldier and the
civilian, the citizen and his Government.
Each and every one of us has a solemn obligation under God
to serve this Nation in its most critical hour —to keep this Nation great — to make this Nation greater in a better world.
42
�4. Message on the State of the Union
m
7 in this crisis —
itist reaction" in
tare his concern.
> y were to repeat
r
lormalcy" of the
; shall have coni, we shall have
UBSE:
:
iplementing this
ie responsibility
lems are already
if proposed legisith the Congress
he event that no
certain that the
JS at home — exupon it. It is to
Day heed rather
groups who seek
s dying.
ing —the policy
- is based on the
ed by Benjamin
ng together, or
; for America in
e of unity which
i the men of our
we speak of our
d, and the mine
soldier and the
tion under God
:o keep this Natter world.
1
N O T E : The President sent the
foregoing annual message to the
Congress at noon on January 11,
1944. At 9 P.M. on January 11, the
President delivered his annual message over the radio. The President's
radio address followed the text of
his annual message to Congress
printed as the above item, with the
exception of the following introductory remarks:
"Today I sent my annual message to
Congress, as required by the Constitution. It has been my custom to deliver
these annual messages in person, and
they have been broadcast to the Nation.
I intended to follow this same custom.
"But, like a great many of my fellow
countrymen, I have had the 'flu' and,
though I am practically recovered, my
doctor simply would not permit me to
leave the White House and go up to
the Capitol.
"Only a few of the newspapers of the
United States can print the message in
full, and I am very anxious that the
American people be given the opportunity to hear what I have recommended to Congress for this very fateful year in our history —and the reasons for those recommendations. Here
is what I said":
(Here followed the text of the annual message to Congress as printed
above.)
The President's keynote for his
postwar plans to raise the American
standard of living was the "Economic Bill of Rights," which he set
forth in the foregoing message. The
"Economic Bill of Rights" was designed as a counterpart of the political Bill of Rights in the Constitu-
tion, in order to meet the needs of
the modern, industrialized America. The principles included in this
new statement of objectives had
their origin in a report of the National Resources Planning Board
which the President had transmitted to the Congress on January 14,
1943 (see Item 8 and note, 1948 volume). The text of the N.R.P.B.
"Bill of Rights" was revised , and
simplified by the President, and
presented in the foregoing State of
the Union Message. To give added
emphasis to these vital objectives,
the President included the revised
"Economic Bill of Rights" in his
Chicago speech during the 1944
campaign (see Item 100, this volume).
Not long before the date he was
to deliver the State of the Union
Message, the President told me that
he was very much interested in reviving the plan he had been considering for almost a year to ask the
Congress to pass a National Service
or Universal Conscription Act. He
warned me not to discuss this plan
with anyone.
In 1943, the President had set up
a very informal group consisting of
Bernard M. Baruch, James F. Byrnes,
Admiral William D. Leahy, Harry
Hopkins, and myself to make a
thorough study of available manpower resources and the foreseeable
needs for manpower, and to report
to him with our recommendations.
After extensive conferences with
govemment experts and among our-
3
�4. Message on the State of the Union
selves, and after the examination of
many reports compiled at our request, we unanimously reported to
the President that we felt it unnecessary to enact a law as drastic as a
national service act in order to
meet our manpower needs. We were
unanimous in thinking that the bad
effects of imposing such a statute
upon free American labor would
outweigh any advantages to be
gained from such a form of conscription.
Nevertheless, the manpower situation became more acute as the
war progressed. The armed services,
war production, and civilian industries all faced shortages which were
acute in some areas. The Secretary
of War was pressing the President
to recommend passage of a National
Service Act which would establish
decentralized boards throughout
the country similar to the Selective
Service System, with power to direct
men and women into specific industries where available manpower
could not otherwise be found. A
similar law had been adopted by
Great Britain, and it had been
found that the very fact such a
law existed made it unnecessary to
order people into certain industries.
The fact that the Govemment had
the ultimate power in this regard
served as a lever to redistribute
manpower into those industries
where shortages existed. The armed
services continued to press for such
legislation, and from time to time
the President discussed it with his
advisory group on manpower.
When the President returned
from the Teheran and Cairo Conferences, he made up his mind that,
because of the seriousness of the
manpower situation, he was going
to press for a national service law.
He said that what he had seen at
the fighting fronts, and his knowledge of the coming drives in Europe
and the Pacific convinced him of the
necessity of passing such a measure.
However, he warned Sherwood and
me not to reveal these plans to anyone — not even to Director of War
Mobilization James F. Byrnes and
his associate Bernard M . Baruch,
who would ordinarily be intimately
concerned with such a measure.
The President handed us what he
had dictated for insertion into the
State of the Union message and cautioned us again to preserve secrecy.
We labelled this insert, humorously,
"Project Q-38." It was not typed in
the staff room along with the other
drafts of the speech, but was typed
separately by Grace Tully in order
to maintain secrecy. "Project Q-38"
first appeared in the third draft of
the State of the Union Message.
Even then the President had not
conclusively decided to use it, but
he ultimately did, and it became a
part of the Message. (See also Items
126, 127, and notes, this volume, for
further recommendations by the
President that a national service
law be passed.)
44
11
T
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Michael Waldman
Description
An account of the resource
<p>Michael Waldman was Assistant to the President and Director of Speechwriting from 1995-1999. His responsibilities were writing and editing nearly 2,000 speeches, which included four State of the Union speeches and two Inaugural Addresses. From 1993 -1995 he served as Special Assistant to the President for Policy Coordination.</p>
<p>The collection generally consists of copies of speeches and speech drafts, talking points, memoranda, background material, correspondence, reports, handwritten notes, articles, clippings, and presidential schedules. A large volume of this collection was for the State of the Union speeches. Many of the speech drafts are heavily annotated with additions or deletions. There are a lot of articles and clippings in this collection.</p>
<p>Due to the size of this collection it has been divided into two segments. Use links below for access to the individual segments:<br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=43&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=2006-0469-F+Segment+1">Segment One</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=43&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=2006-0469-F+Segment+2">Segment Two</a></p>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Michael Waldman
Office of Speechwriting
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1993-1999
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0469-F
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
Segment One contains 1071 folders in 72 boxes.
Segment Two contains 868 folders in 66 boxes.
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
[Roosevelt Information]: FDR [Franklin D. Roosevelt] [Folder 1]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 34
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36404"> Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763296">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0469-F Segment 2
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Preservation-Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
6/3/2015
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
7763296
42-t-7763296-20060469F-Seg2-034-021-2015