The tumultuous economic climate of the Great Depression, coupled with the cultural conservatism of the Republican Party, served as a catalyst for a dramatic party realignment in the national United States government: notably, the rise of Catholics as an indispensable voting bloc within the Democratic Party. In the 1920s, Democratic politicians in Northern urban areas began to recognize the grievances of Catholic, working-class voters, offering them a platform to challenge the cultural authoritarianism championed by the Republican Party. Among these politicians was the former Governor of New York, Alfred (Al) Smith, who successfully campaigned on an anti-prohibition platform and played a pivotal role in its repeal. By contrast, former President Franklin D. Roosevelt pursued policies that primarily addressed the economic interests of Catholics, rather than focusing on cultural matters. Throughout his presidency, Roosevelt established a series of welfare programs and agencies, collectively known as the New Deal aimed at alleviating the economic turmoil following the Great Depression. While some Catholic leaders, including Governor Smith and Father Charles Coughlin, began to express reservations about the statist and cosmopolitan nature of the New Deal, the economic appeal of the New Deal policies continued to garner support from working-class Catholics, as well as Jews, industrial workers, and other disenfranchised groups across the nation. The Democratic vote surged from 9 million to 28 million between 1920 and 1936, in large part due to the support of the Catholic voting bloc. By embracing the concept of a “social gospel,” and thereby aligning the Catholic faith with the pursuit of social justice, the American Catholic priest Father J. Ryan further cemented the ties between Catholicism and the Democratic Party. Thus, the New Deal became a pivotal moment of convergence for marginalized groups, all united around their shared economic aspirations. As described by numerous scholars, both historical and contemporary, a partnership began to form between the formidable Catholic voting bloc and the Democratic Party in the early 1920s, which was cemented by the Great Depression, the economic situation of Catholics, and their cultural values. This strategic alliance played a pivotal role in securing the political prominence and popularity of both the New Deal and the Democratic Party.
By the 1930s, Catholics were a burgeoning constituency within the Democratic Party, a sharp contrast to the traditional source of Democratic strength among White supremacists in the South. The key to mobilizing the Catholic electorate and propelling the Democratic Party to power was the unprecedented economic toll of the Great Depression. In the wake of the Wall Street Crash of 1929, a staggering 15 million Americans—a quarter of the nation’s workforce—found themselves unemployed. As banks collapsed, so too did consumer demand for the automobile industry; this slump caused the steel industry to lose its largest client, resulting in the industry operating at a mere 10% capacity. As these troubling circumstances infiltrated social life, they elicited strong indignation, including within Catholic communities. One story by The Pittsburgh Catholic weekly newspaper recounted the plight of three schoolchildren who returned home for lunch only to discover themselves stranded outside in pouring rain, their family having been evicted by the bank, with all their possessions sold off. In addition to the economic disparities faced by all Americans, Catholics faced a distinct form of religious discrimination. Many corporations vehemently refused to hire Catholics and Jews for managerial roles. Similarly, numerous private and public universities imposed admissions quotas specifically targeting Catholics. Confronted with limited professional prospects, over 45% of the 21,000 priests and 100 Bishops in 1921 came from working-class backgrounds, opting for careers in church law and education (with a mere 9% enjoying an upper-class lifestyle). The political turmoil among Catholics was particularly pivotal in the realm of post-Hoover politics as Catholics, alongside Jews, comprised a swing voter group. By 1940, the twelve largest Catholic and Jewish cities in the nation wielded sufficient electoral influence to determine the outcome of presidential elections. But, public confidence in the Republican president Herbert Hoover’s ability to deliver economic recovery gradually eroded with each bank failure and job loss. Moreover, the Republican United States Secretary of the Treasury, Andrew W. Mellon, did little to endear himself when he advocated the liquidation of labor, stocks, farmers, and real estate, which would have significant repercussions on the middle and lower classes. Concurrently, the Washington Commonwealth Federation (WCF), a political pressure group, began to field left-wing candidates, securing positions in the state legislature and Congress, while popularizing progressive reforms, including unions, social programs, and old-age pensions. The weakening of the Republican fortress commenced in the 1930 election when voters elected several Democrats to join the still predominantly Republican legislature.1 Then, in 1931, Seattle voters rebelled against Republican Mayor Frank Edwards, who had recently dismissed the popular manager of the city-owned utility company and made minimal efforts to aid the thousands of jobless and homeless residents of Seattle. The subsequent recall election ousted Edwards from office and set a precedent for future elections. A long era of Republican Party dominance drew to a close with the election of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in November 1932.2
One politician that was particularly instrumental in recognizing the voting power of Catholics was David Lawrence, an Irish, Catholic leader of Pittsburgh’s modest Democratic party. While politicians from the lower middle class often opposed industrial unions and harbored resentment towards Catholics gaining control of city government at the expense of Italians and Jews, Lawrence and his Irish counterparts in Chicago, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh adopted a different approach: confronting powerful corporations in alliance with marginalized sectors of society. This strategy sparked a political revolution, exemplified by the stark contrast between the popularity of the 1924 Democratic presidential candidate in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, who garnered a mere 9% of the 225,000 votes cast, and Roosevelt, who later secured an overwhelming 70% of the 562,000 votes cast. Then, in 1944, Lawrence’s group successfully convinced laborers to abandon the incumbent Vice President Henry Wallace, securing the Democratic vice presidential nomination for Senator Harry Truman of Missouri. The work of Lawrence and his coalition serves as a compelling example of the evolving political landscape during the New Deal era, showcasing how marginalized groups could attain political power through strategic alliances and maneuvering.3
The Democratic Party also enticed Catholic voters by playing a significant role in opposing the cultural statism embraced by Republicans, specifically concerning the policy of prohibition. Al Smith, a prominent figure within the Democratic Party and the former Governor of New York, emerged as a key player in the anti-prohibition movement. During the 1928 presidential election, Smith ran as the Democratic nominee against Republican Herbert Hoover. Smith’s anti-prohibition stance resonated strongly with a substantial portion of the American public. His efforts not only shed light on the cultural and social ramifications of prohibition—including the rise of organized crime, illegal activities, and social instability—but also highlighted the Democratic Party’s dedication to safeguarding individual liberties and rejecting excessive state intervention in personal matters. While Smith ultimately did not secure the presidency, brought the anti-prohibition movement to the forefront of public debate, contributing greatly to the overturning of the 18th Amendment in 1933.
Upon assuming the presidency on March 4, 1933, President Roosevelt faced a nation ravaged by the economic devastation and political turmoil of the Great Depression. Thus, his social security and stimulus packages were key to maintaining the political backing of the Catholics and the working class. It is important to clarify, though, that the American Catholic population, comprising nearly 20 million individuals of diverse ethnic backgrounds, has long defied the notion of a monolithic bloc. Nevertheless, it is still possible to identify a cohesive Catholic community within New Deal Era politics, given the highly structured and hierarchical nature of the Catholic Church, which emphasized adherence to a shared set of beliefs. Historian Jay Dolan concurs that the Catholic perspective on “authority, sin, ritual, and the miraculous” set them apart from other segments of the American population. This religious norm is particularly salient during periods of economic and political uncertainty, such as World War II, during which Catholics found powerful unity through their devotion to patron saints like Our Lady of Sorrow and Saint Jude. Similarly, following the Great Depression, Catholics were attracted to Franklin Roosevelt’s inclusive rhetoric and, even more so, to the promise of jobs and economic security.
By the early 1940s, Americans ranked the New Deal as both the greatest accomplishment and worst calamity of the Roosevelt administration. Some perceived the federal initiative—comprised of two rounds of programs, public work projects, financial reforms, and regulations aimed at boosting workers’ income and stimulating consumer spending—to be not only fiscally irresponsible but also politically manipulated. A comparison of the years 1929 and 1940—before and after the first round of New Deal relief and reforms—reveals a significant surge in government expenditure, with the annual spending of the United States government nearly doubling from $21 billion to $40 billion, with the majority of these funds being allocated to federal welfare and entitlement programs. Consequently, President Roosevelt faced substantial risks if the New Deal relief program were perceived as politically motivated. Indeed, numerous political figures, including senators, representatives, governors, and mayors, sought to exert control over relief efforts for their own political advantage. At the local level, for instance, political officials were frequently accused of selecting relief beneficiaries based on their party affiliation or demanding that recipients vote for their preferred candidate, accusations that compromised the integrity of the relief programs and undermined the goal of providing assistance to those in need. Roosevelt understood the potential consequences of political interference in relief efforts; in order to address these corrupt practices, he established offices tasked with investigating allegations of corruption and implementing a more bureaucratic administration of public welfare. However, this was not the end of the backlash against President Roosevelt and the New Deal.
Despite his role in securing the Catholic vote for President Roosevelt’s presidential election, Al Smith strongly opposed Roosevelt’s New Deal programs. During his speech at the American Liberty League dinner in 1936, Smith emphatically declared that “[w]e shall never tolerate any legislation that imposes restraints on our citizens” and criticized the unprecedented level of federal debt brought about during the Roosevelt administration. He concluded with a solemn warning concerning the statist and cosmopolitan nature of the New Deal, stating, “I must offer this grave admonition: There can only be one capital – either Washington or Moscow.” Another prominent Catholic by the name of Charles Coughlin initially endorsed the National Recovery Act, one of several New Deal programs, which aimed to spread jobs among a larger number of workers by limiting hours, launching a public works program, and establishing minimum wage rates. However, by 1935, Coughlin’s disagreement with Roosevelt over America’s recognition of the World Court, coupled with his anti-Semitic views, made him increasingly critical of the New Deal.1 Moreover, many Catholic publications, such as the Catholic Sentinel in Portland and the Catholic Telegraph Register in Cincinnati, took positions that diverged from the mainstream Catholic sentiment. They criticized anti-Franco movements and specific liberal policies like the ban on child labor. Moreover, a significant portion of the American Catholic Church, consisting mainly of reformist clergy located in Slavic cities such as Chicago, Cleveland, Toledo, Pittsburgh, and Youngstown, also critiqued laissez-faire capitalism. Inspired by papal encyclicals, particularly Leo XIII’s 1891 “Rerum Novarum,” they aimed to bring about social reconstruction in accordance with Church teachings.1 Despite these critiques, however, Roosevelt maintained his popularity with the Catholic laity, as reflected in the large number of passionate letters Coughlin received whenever he attacked FDR, his reelection in 1936, and the numerous newspapers and magazines which backed his economic policies, including the establishment of Social Security.1
Despite the constituency’s significant contribution to the Democratic Party’s power, many politicians harbored reservations towards Catholics. Secretary of Interior Harold L. Ickes harbored a deep-seated resentment towards the Church due to their opposition to Former Premier of the Soviet Union Joseph Stalin, support of Spanish Fascist leader Francisco Franco, and affiliation with urban political machines. In 1938, Ickles accused the Catholic Church of pressuring President Roosevelt into appointing former Michigan Governor Frank Murphy to the Supreme Court, asserting that while Catholics were not inherently entitled to such appointments, the Roman Church pursued all available avenues of influence. Indeed, President Roosevelt appointed a significantly greater number of Catholic federal judges compared to Republican presidents. During the same year, Ickes recounted a conversation with Fiorello LaGuardia, the Episcopalian mayor of New York, in which criticism from several Catholic Bishops regarding liberal child labor legislation reminded him of the Spanish Inquisition. Moreover, throughout 1939, Ickes expressed the view that the Roman Catholic Church exhibited sympathies towards dictatorships, evident in its staunch anti-communist stance. Ickes and the New York mayor were not alone in their criticism of the American Catholic Church. Socialists and Communists, who perceived the Church as their primary competitor for the loyalty of American workers, vehemently denounced Catholicism. In 1938, Norman Thomas, the leader of the Socialist Party and a former Presbyterian minister, accused Catholics of engaging in clandestine subversion. Likewise, in 1941, an experienced reporter for The Nation by the name of Richard Rovere openly expressed his animosity towards the Catholic Church, characterizing it as Machiavellian in its approach and implicitly un-American.
By contrast, other Catholic leaders espoused the “social gospel” ideology, aligning the Catholic faith with the principle of social justice. One particular religious figure, by the name of Father J. Ryan, was instrumental in advocating for the involvement of Catholic clergy in social reform movements, such as the labor movement and the New Deal. In the late 1930s, the Democratic National Committee recognized the influence of Catholic voters and sought Father Ryan’s participation to counter Coughlin’s claims that FDR was a communist who no longer deserved Catholic support. In a nationally broadcasted speech entitled “Roosevelt Safeguards America,” Ryan claimed that Coughlin’s monetary theories were 90% incorrect. Drawing heavily from his knowledge of the papal encyclicals in his rebuttal of the communist charge, Ryan described that Roosevelt’s policies were more consistent with papal teachings than with radical political philosophies. In fact, he argued that the inequalities of American society and the injustices of the American economy were more dangerous than any communist or fascist threat, and ended his broadcast by calling for all working Americans to lend their active support to re-electing President Roosevelt. In large part due to the support of the Catholic voting bloc, Franklin Roosevelt would enjoy another three terms as President of the United States.
The alliance between the Democratic Party and the Catholic voting bloc during the New Deal era marked a transformative moment in American politics. The economic hardships of the Great Depression, coupled with the cultural conservatism of the Republican Party, propelled Catholics to seek a platform that addressed their grievances. Democratic politicians, led by figures like Al Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt, recognized the importance of appealing to the Catholic working class, offering economic relief and challenging cultural authoritarianism. This strategic partnership not only secured the political prominence of the New Deal and the Democratic Party but also highlighted the power of marginalized groups uniting around shared economic aspirations. The Catholic vote played a pivotal role in reshaping the political landscape and ushering in a new era of social security in the United States.
Bibliography
Glaeser, Edward L., and Claudia Goldin. “Corruption and Reform: Lessons from America’s Economic History.” National Bureau of Economic Research. National Bureau of Economic Research, March 2006. http://www.nber.org/books/glae06-1.
Gregory, James. “Politics in Great Depression: Washington State.” depts.washington.edu, 2009. https://depts.washington.edu/depress/politics.shtml.
Heineman, Kenneth J. Catholic New Deal. Penn State Press, 2010.
Koman, Rita G. “Relief, Recovery, Reform: The New Deal Congressional Reaction to the Great Depression.” OAH Magazine of History 12, no. 4 (1998): 39–48. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/25163235.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A485e6f70371667bad14a33cf38899e05&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&origin=&initiator=&acceptTC=1.
Meyerson, Harold. “God and the New Deal.” The American Prospect, November 22, 2004. https://prospect.org/features/god-new-deal/.
Smith, Alfred E. Speech at the American Liberty League Dinner, Washington, D.C. January 25, 1936.
Sutton, Matthew Avery. “Was FDR the Antichrist? The Birth of Fundamentalist Antiliberalism in a Global Age.” The Journal of American History 98, no. 4 (2012): 1052–74. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41509575.
Turrini, J. M. “Catholic School Reform and the New Deal: The Papers of Monsignor John A. Ryan and Bishop Francis J. Haas.” Wayne State University, 2002. https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1080&context=slisfrp.