Franklin Delano Roosevelt
State of the Union 1937 - 6 January 1937
For the first time in our national history a President delivers his annual message to a new Congress within a fortnight of the expiration of his term of office. While there is no change in the Presidency this year, change will occur in future years. It is my belief that under this new constitutional practice the President should in every fourth year, insofar as seems reasonable, review the existing state of our national affairs and outline broad future problems, leaving specific recommendations for future legislation to be made by the President about to be inaugurated.
At this time, however, circumstances of the moment compel me to ask your immediate consideration of: First, measures extending the life of certain authorizations and powers which, under present statutes, expire within a few weeks; second, an addition to the existing Neutrality Act to cover specific points raised by the unfortunate civil strife in Spain; and, third, a deficiency appropriation bill for which I will submit estimates this week.
In March 1933 the problems which faced our Nation and which only our National Government had the resources to meet, were more serious even than appeared on the surface.
It was not only that the visible mechanism of economic life had broken down. More disturbing was the fact that long neglect of the needs of the underprivileged had brought too many of our people to the verge of doubt as to the successful adaptation of our historic traditions to the complex modern world. In that, lay a challenge to our democratic form of government itself.
Ours was the task to prove that democracy could be made to function in the world of today as effectively as in the simpler world of a hundred years ago. Ours was the task to do more than argue a theory. The times required confident answer of performance to those whose instinctive faith in humanity made them want to believe that in the long run democracy would prove superior to more extreme forms of government as a process of getting action when action was wisdom without the spiritual sacrifice which those other forms of government exact.
That challenge we met. To meet it required unprecedented activities under Federal leadership - to end abuses - to restore a large measure of material prosperity - to give new faith to millions of our citizens who had been traditionally taught to expect that democracy would provide continuously wider opportunity and continuously greater security in a world where science was continuously making material riches more available to man.
In the many methods of attack with which we met these problems, you and I, by mutual understanding and by determination to cooperate, helped to make democracy succeed by refusing to permit unnecessary disagreement to arise between two of our branches of government. That spirit of cooperation was able to solve difficulties of extradordinary magnitude and ramification with few important errors, and at a cost cheap when measured by immediate necessities and the eventual results.
I look forward to a continuance of that cooperation in the next 4 years. I look forward also to a continuance of the basis of that cooperation - mutual respect for each other's proper sphere of functioning in a democracy which is working well, and a common-sense realization of the need for play in the joints of the machine.
On that basis, it is within the right of Congress to determine which of the many new activities shall be continued or abandoned, increased or curtailed.
On that same basis the President alone has the responsibility for their administration. I find that this task of Executive management has reached the point where our administrative machinery needs comprehensive overhauling. I shall, therefore, shortly address the Congress more fully in regard to modernizing and improving the executive branch of the Government.
That cooperation of the past 4 years between Congress and the President has aimed at the fulfillment of a twofold policy - first, economic recovery through many kinds of assistance to agriculture, industry, and banking; and second, deliberate improvement in the personal security and opportunity of the great mass of our people.
The recovery we sought was not to be merely temporary. It was to be a recovery protected from the causes of previous disasters. With that aim in view - to prevent a future similar crisis - you and I joined in a series of enactments - safe banking and sound currency, the guarantee of bank deposits, protection for the investor in securities, the removal of the threat of agricultural surpluses, insistence on collective bargaining, the outlawing of sweatshops, child labor and unfair trade practices, and the beginning of security for the aged and the worker.
Nor was the recovery we sought merely a purposeless whirring of machinery. It is important, of course, that every man and woman in the country be able to find work, that every factory run, that business as a whole earn profits. But government in a democratic nation does not exist solely, or ever primarily, for that purpose.
It is not enough that the wheels turn. They must carry us in the direction of a greater satisfaction in the life for the average man. The deeper purpose of democratic government is to assist as many of its citizens as possible - especially those who need it most - to improve their conditions of life, to retain all personal liberty which does not adversely affect their neighbors, and to pursue the happiness which comes with security and an opportunity for recreation and culture.
Even within our present recovery we are far from the goal of that deeper purpose. There are far-reaching problems still with us for which democracy must find solutions if it is to consider itself successful.
For example, many millions of Americans still live in habitations which not only fail to provide the physical benefits of modern civilization but breed disease and impair the health of future generations. The menace exists not only in the slum areas fo the very large cities, but in many smaller cities as well. It exists on tens of thousands of farms, in varying degrees, in every part of the country.
Another example is the prevalence of an un-American type of tenant farming. I do not suggest that every farm family has the capacity to earn a satisfactory living on its own farm. But many thousands of tenant farmers - indeed, most of them - with some financial assistance and with some advice and training, can be made self-supporting anon land which can eventually belong to them. The Nation would be wise to offer them that chance instead of permitting them to go along as they do now, year after year, with neither future security as tenants nor hope of ownership of their homes nor expectation of bettering the lot of their children.
Another national problem is the intelligent development of our social security system, the broadening of the services it renders, and practical improvement in its operation. In many nations where such laws are in effect success in meeting the expectations of the community has come through frequent amendment of the original statute.
And, of course, the most far-reaching and the most inclusive problem of all is that of unemployment and the lack of economic balance, of which unemployment is at once the result and the symptom. The immediate question of adequate relief for the needy unemployed who are capable of performing useful work I shall discuss with the Congress during upcoming months. The broader task of preventing unemployment is a matter of long'-range evolutionary policy. To that we must continue to give our best thought and effort. We cannot assume that immediate industrial and commercial activity which mitigates present pressures justifies the National Government at this time in placing the unemployment problem in a filing cabinet of unfinished business.
Fluctuations in employment are tied to all other wasteful fluctuations in our mechanism of production and distribution. One of these wastes is speculation. In securities or commodities, the larger the volume of speculation the wider become the upward and downward swings and the more certain the result that in the long run there will be more losses than gains in the underlying wealth of the community.
And, as is now well known to all of us, the same net loss to society comes from reckless overproduction and monopolistic underproduction of natural and manufactured commodities.
Overproduction, underproduction, and speculation are three evil sisters who distill the troubles unbound inflation and disastrous deflation. It is to the interest of the Nation, to have government help private enterprise to gain sound general price levels and to protect those levels form wide perilous fluctuations. We know now that if early in 1931 government had taken the steps which were taken 2 and 3 years later the depression would never have reached the depths of the beginning of 1933.
Sober second thought confirms most of us in the belief that the broad objectives of the National Recovery Act were sound. We know now that its difficulties arose from the fact that it tried to do too much. For example, it was unwise to expect the same agency to regulate the length of working hours, minimum wages, child labor, and collective bargaining on the one hand and the complicated questions of unfair trade practices and business controls on the other.
The statute of N.R.A. has been outlawed. The problems have not. They are still with us.
That decent conditions and adequate pay for labor and just return for agriculture can be secured through parallel and simultaneous action by 48 states is a proven impossibility. It is equally impossible to obtain curbs on monopoly, unfair trade practices, and speculation by State action alone. There are those who, sincerely or insincerely, still cling to State action as a theoretical hope. But experience with actualities makes it clear that Federal laws supplementing State laws are needed to help solve the problems which result from modern invention applied in an industrialized nation which conducts its business with scant regard to State lines.
During the past year there has been a growing belief that there is little fault to be found with the Constitution of the United States as it stands today. The vital need is not an alteration of our fundamental law but an increasingly enlightened view with reference to it. Difficulties have grown out of its interpretation; but rightly considered, it can be used as an instrument of progress and not as a device for the prevention of action.
It is worth our while to read and re-read the preamble of the Constitution and the article I thereof which confers the legislative powers upon the Congress of the United States. It is also worth our while to read again the debates in the Constitutional Convention of 150 years ago. From such reading, I obtain the very definite thought the the members of that Convention were fully aware that civilization would raise problems for the proposed new Federal Government, which they themselves could not even surmise; and that it was their definite intent and expectation that a liberal interpretation in the years to come would give the Congress the same relative powers over new national problems as they themselves gave Congress over the national problems of their day.
In presenting to the Convention the first basic draft of the Constitution, Edmund Randolph explained that its purpose "to insert essential principles only, lest the operation of government should be clogged by rendering those provisions permanent and unalterable which ought to be accommodated to times and events."
With a better understanding of our purposes, and a more intelligent recognition of our needs as a nation, it is not to be assumed that there will be prolonged failure to bring legislative and judicial action into closer harmony. Means must be found to adapt our legal forms and our judicial interpretation to the actual present national needs of the largest progressive democracy in the modern world.
That thought leads to a consideration of world problems. To go no further back than the beginning of this century, men and women everywhere were seeking conditions of life very different from those which were customary before modern invention and modern industry and modern communications had come into being. The World War, for all of its tragedy, encouraged these demands and stimulated action to fulfill these new desires.
Many national governments seemed unable adequately to respond; and, often with the improvident assent of the masses of the people themselves, new forms of government were set up with oligarchy taking the place of democracy. In oligarchies, militarism has leaped forward, while in those nations which have retained democracy militarism has waned.
I have recently visited three of our sister republics in South America. The very cordial receptions with which I was greeted were in tribute to democracy. To me the outstanding observation of that visit was that the masses of the peoples of all the Americas are convinced that the democratic form of government can be made to succeed and do not wish to substitute for it any other form of government. They believe that democracies are best able to cope with the changing problems of modern civilization within themselves, and that democracies are best able to maintain peace among themselves.
The Inter-American Conference, operating on these fundamental principles of democracy, did much to assure peace in this hemisphere. Existing peace machinery was improved. New instruments to maintain peace and eliminate causes of war were adopted. Wider protection of the interests of the American republics in the event of war outside the Western Hemisphere was provided. Respect for, and observance of, international treaties and international law were also strengthened. Principles of liberal trade policies, as effective aids to the maintenance of peace were reaffirmed. The intellectual and cultural relationship among American republics were broadened as part of the general peace program.
In a world unhappily thinking in terms of war, the representatives of 21 nations sat around a table, in an atmosphere of complete confidence and understanding, sincerely discussing measures for maintaining peace. Here was a great and a permanent achievement directly affecting the lives and security of 250,000,000 human beings who dwell in this Western Hemisphere. Here was an example which must have a wholesome effect upon the rest of the world.
In a very real sense, the conference in Buenos Aires sent forth a message on behalf of all the democracies of the world to those nations which live otherwise. Because such other governments are perhaps more spectacular, it was high time for democracy to assert itself.
Because all of us believe that our democratic form of government can cope adequately with modern problems as they arise, it is patriotic as well as logical for us to prove that we can meet new national needs with new laws consistent with a historic constitutional framework clearly intended to receive liberal and not narrow interpretation.
The United States of America, within itself, must continue the task of making democracy succeed.
In that task the legislative branch of our Government will, I am confident, continue to meet the demands of democracy whether they relate to the curbing of abuses, the extension of help to those who need help, or the better balancing of our interdependent economies.
So, too, the executive branch of the Government must move forward in this task, and, at the same time, provide better management for administrative action of all kinds.
The judicial branch also is asked by the people to do its part in making democracy successful. We do not ask the courts to call nonexistent powers into being, but we have a right to expect that conceded powers or those legitimately implied shall be made effective instruments for the common good.
The process of our democracy must not be imperiled by the denial of essential powers of free government.
You task and mine is not ending with the end of the depression. The people of the United States have made it clear that they expect us to continue our active efforts in behalf of their peaceful advancement.
In that spirit of endeavor and service I greet the Seventy-Fifth Congress at the beginning of this auspicious new year.