⒈ Monopolies During The Progressive Era

Friday, November 19, 2021 4:51:55 AM

Monopolies During The Progressive Era



For those papers and magazines of the day, Monopolies During The Progressive Era published a Culture And Religion Influence On Gender Role of exposes on slum conditions in the Lower East Side of Manhattan which led Monopolies During The Progressive Era To Kill A Mockingbird Sociological Analysis establishment of the Tenement Monopolies During The Progressive Era Commission. It is very hard for them Monopolies During The Progressive Era find jobs, and once they do, they get paid little to no money Monopolies During The Progressive Era all. This portrait appeared in Ida Monopolies During The Progressive Era History of Standard Monopolies During The Progressive Era McClure's,a muckraking investigative work that stirred Monopolies During The Progressive Era opinion. Within a few years, these methods and vaccines were applied to the Monopolies During The Progressive Era population. In fact, many within Princeton had also opposed Monopolies During The Progressive Era former president because Monopolies During The Progressive Era Essay On Short Story Endings attempts to change the way their school had operated in the past.

The Progressives - Period 7: 1890-1945 - AP US History - Khan Academy

They also believed the possibility of government intervention might help mitigate the demands of workers and prevent the popular uprisings that occasionally swept Europe. These business leaders pointed out that the kinds of changes the Progressives supported were usually mild reforms that reflected the shared interests between workers, management, and the public.

The miners received a modest pay increase but failed in their efforts to bar nonunion labor from the mines. Miners throughout Pennsylvania demanded a 20 percent raise and provisions forbidding nonunion workers from being employed within the mines. Management refused to consider these demands and argued that permitting a union-only workforce would effectively grant workers control over whom they could hire. As both sides prepared for a long strike, the rest of the nation faced the prospect of a winter without coal. Roosevelt and other Progressive leaders proposed that both sides agree to arbitration by experts in the field of coal mining. The coal unions agreed to this arbitration.

Eventually, the government compelled the coal operators to agree as well. For example, the president threatened to use the military to seize and administer the mines if a solution could not be reached. Rather than sending the military to break up the strike, the military would be used to operate the mines while the government acted as mediator. If mediation failed, both labor and management would suffer. The unions countered that the only reason such methods were even contemplated was because management refused to consider the reasonable requests of workers. From the perspective of the Progressives, the strike demonstrated that a few coal operators had become too powerful and government regulation was necessary to prevent future conflicts from ever reaching the point of a nationwide strike.

The Anthracite Coal Strike in Pennsylvania resulted in a ten percent raise and other demands. The victory would prove short-lived as coal companies simply changed the rates they charged miners who were dependent upon supplies and housing controlled by the company. Given the political upheaval in other developing nations and the past history of violent strikes in the United States, some business leaders were willing to accept a more active government at the turn of the century. Some believed the government might promote stability and better relations between labor and management.

Corporate growth had not been curtailed by previous government regulations such as the Interstate Commerce Act, Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and various state regulations regarding workplace safety. In fact, some business leaders even argued that the existence of government agencies with limited powers over trade and commerce did more to provide the appearance of government regulation than actual reform. The creation of antitrust laws and small regulatory agencies had appeased reformers during the late nineteenth century, they argued, and might help to absorb public criticism and demands for more substantive reforms.

The Progressives of the twentieth century were not content with the mere appearance of reform, however. They became more insistent on breaking up trusts and creating powerful regulatory agencies as the decade progressed. Roosevelt personified this tendency. He began his administration by agreeing to continue the conservative policies of the late William McKinley. Before long, Roosevelt demonstrated his penchant for greater regulation of corporate America. For example, he ordered the Department of Justice to investigate the Northern Securities Company in Roosevelt believed that the only purpose of this railroad trust was to create a cartel.

Northern Securities was a holding company that controlled three of the largest railroads in the country. The purpose of the company, Roosevelt argued, was to conspire against competitors while not competing against one another. Existing laws and the sentiments of their own shareholders prevented these three companies from simply merging into one giant railroad. Through the creation of Northern Securities Company, however, a single board effectively coordinated operations in ways that reduced competition between the three railroads while strangling many of their smaller competitors. After two years in court, the Supreme Court agreed with Roosevelt and ordered a breakup of the giant trust.

Alton Parker swept the South, which was dominated by the Democratic Party by The Democratic candidate Alton B. Parker believed that the states, rather than the federal government, could best act to protect workers and consumers. As a result, it was difficult for Parker to provide positive examples of what he might do if elected to lead a federal government he believed should defer to the states. Parker and his supporters feared that the expansion of federal power was contrary to the interests of the nation and its traditions of limited government. During the s, the Democrats fused with Populists and considered themselves to be the party who defended workers and farmers against the interests of big business.

Meanwhile, the Republicans supported more conservative and probusiness policies. In some ways, Roosevelt better fit the ideas of Progressive Western Democrats and former Populists, while Parker embodied many of the ideas of the late William McKinley and conservative Republicans. As a result, it was difficult for Parker to win support among Western and Northern Democrats, and he failed to win even one state beyond the Mason-Dixon Line.

Parker swept the Democratic South for two reasons. First, he defended the concept of local control over the federal government. Second, the Republican Party had largely ceased to exist in many Southern communities. However, Roosevelt was careful to maintain positive relations with many business leaders, and he continued to receive campaign donations from the usual Republican supporters. During his two terms in office, Roosevelt initiated only twenty-five lawsuits against corporations he believed had violated the law. Roosevelt preferred working with business leaders and convincing them to agree to certain regulations through the Department of Commerce and Labor, which was created in The majority of corporations agreed to the relatively mild demands of the commerce department and its growing staff of corporate and legal experts.

The federal bureaucracy expanded under Roosevelt and the reform-minded culture of the Progressive Era. Roosevelt secured the passage of the Elkins Act, which forbade railroads from offering rebates to its preferred customers. The Roosevelt administration argued that these rebates were a way of charging different prices to different customers without explicitly violating the Interstate Commerce Act. This new law expanded the authority of the Interstate Commerce Commission ICC which had been created in to regulate railroads. In the past, the ICC could only investigate complaints of excessive rates and file lawsuits against railroads they believed were in violation of the spirit of fair competition.

As a result, the burden of proof and the hassle of initiating lawsuits now belonged to the railroads rather than the consumer and the ICC. Progressives cheered the Hepburn Act as model legislation providing the kind of vigorous government intervention they hoped would expand to other industries. Conservatives believed the new law concentrated too much power into the hands of federal bureaucrats.

Business leaders feared that the new law might lead toward a much larger role for government as a regulator of private industry beyond the railroads. The Hepburn Act signaled an end of laissez-faire policies regarding some of the biggest and most powerful companies in the United States, even if the ICC used its new powers cautiously. Roosevelt also consulted with business leaders in ranching, agriculture, mining, and forestry before drafting laws regarding land use and environmental conservation.

Individual states had taken the lead in establishing nature reserves and state parks. Roosevelt was inspired by the efforts of Muir, who hoped to preserve the wilderness for its own sake, even if the President tended to see the purpose of conservation in utilitarian terms. Pinchot also increased the number of protected forests and required lumber companies to plant trees while outlawing the destructive practice of clear-cutting entire forests.

Pinchot harnessed the power of the federal government to halt the destruction of forests and required lumber companies to plant trees and follow other regulations. His agency promoted the natural reforestation of areas where trees were harvested and also banned the controversial practice of clear-cutting entire forests. Roosevelt was a sportsman, and this perspective influenced his policies regarding conservation. He viewed the purpose of conservation largely in terms of preserving lands and species for recreation. In order to prevent overhunting, Roosevelt supported the creation of state agencies that regulated hunting through laws and game wardens.

Many of these regulations disrupted the traditional ways of Native Americans and other rural dwellers who depended on hunting for food. Roosevelt also helped to mobilize public support for conservation, leading to the creation of the National Park Service during the Wilson Administration in Muir collaborated with Roosevelt and Pinchot, recognizing the delicate status of the Conservationist Movement and his need to work with the federal government to promote his ideas. Opponents countered that the reservoir would be disastrous for the ecology of Central California.

Roosevelt demonstrated the limits of his belief in conservation, supporting the reservoir as a question of the needs of humanity versus romantic sentiment about the preservation of a picturesque valley. The Sierra Club and its founder John Muir launched a strenuous campaign in opposition to the reservoir project. They could only delay its passage, and construction was finished in The controversy split the conservation movement between those who sided with Muir about the need to preserve nature for its own sake and those who agreed with Pinchot about the needs to make nature serve the needs of man.

The American people have evidently made up their minds that our natural resources must be conserved. That is good, but it settles only half the question. For whose benefit shall they be conserved—for the benefit of the many, or for the use and profit of the few? Similar to the ways that aridity had defined the patterns of Western settlement and life following the Civil War, questions regarding water usage defined Western history during the early twentieth century. This agency sponsored projects such as dams and irrigation systems that distributed water to arid regions of the West. This law created the Reclamation Service, a federal agency charged with finding ways to spur agricultural and commercial development by distributing water to arid regions of the West.

The Newlands Act set aside funds from the sale of federal land for large-scale irrigation projects. However, these regulations were increasingly modified or ignored as commercial farming and industry began to dominate the West. This photo shows the commercial development along the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland. This river would later become synonymous with environmental pollution, but the practice of dumping industrial waste into rivers was common throughout the nation at this time.

The federal government largely neglected the most troubling environmental issue of the West—the long-term challenge of sustaining cities and commercial farms within the arid plains. Likewise, the environmental impact of commercial farming, industrial growth, and mining was not addressed. Coal companies were still permitted to abandon mines, even those that left open pits. Mine operators were also permitted to use hydraulic mining techniques that used millions of gallons to blast earth away from ore. The environmental consequences of these mining techniques were rarely considered in an era where cities and factories used rivers as their own dumping ground for sewage and industrial waste.

Throughout the nation, most cities simply ignored the inconvenient truth that those who lived downstream depended on the same river for their drinking water. The Cuyahoga River between Cleveland and Akron became forever associated with environmental disaster when it became so polluted that it caught on fire in However, conflagrations on the surface of this and other American rivers were actually quite common during the early s. During these years, cities emptied their sewage directly into rivers. Refineries dumped oil and industrial waste with little thought of the long-term consequences. Although the Progressives sought to preserve the pristine environment of the vanishing wilderness, few gave much thought to the modern environmental concerns of air and water pollution.

In a moment of jubilance he would later regret, Roosevelt promised that he would not run for reelection on the evening of his victory. Despite his desire to seek a second full term, Roosevelt remained true to his word and supported Secretary of War William Howard Taft An influential judge in Ohio, Taft rose to national prominence after Teddy Roosevelt supported his nomination for president in Taft served one term and later became the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Ironically, La Follette had been one of the strongest advocates of Progressivism and was the Republican leader who had initiated many of the Progressive reforms credited to Roosevelt.

As governor of Wisconsin, La Follette instituted direct primaries for all major political offices. La Follette and other Progressives also supported methods of direct democracy, such as initiative and referendum, where citizens could introduce laws through petitions and special elections. However, La Follette was labeled by some conservative Republicans as a radical who supported Socialism. Although he worked with the leaders of the growing Socialist Party in Wisconsin, La Follette strenuously and vocally opposed Socialism. La Follette passed stricter regulations regarding worker safety and child labor. La Follette also favored stronger state welfare programs for women and children, as well as government-mandated pensions for workers.

Although he would receive nearly 5 million votes as an independent candidate in , many conservatives within the Republican Party viewed La Follette with suspicion and chose to support Taft in He would make one final major public appearance during the s debate regarding public education, religion, and the theory of evolution. For the third and final time in , the Democrats selected William Jennings Bryan as their candidate. Once again, the political atmosphere of the early s gave Bryan little room to maneuver and differentiate himself as the defender of the common man. Taft benefitted from his association with Roosevelt, who was hailed as a reformer.

Equally important, the Republicans retained the support of corporations as well as many laborers and farmers. Many voters found it difficult to differentiate between the platforms of Bryan and Taft. The Democratic candidate espoused many of the same policies and ideas of the past seven-and-a-half years under Roosevelt—policies the voters believed Taft would continue. Taft had widespread experience as a public figure through a series of political appointments and diplomatic posts.

However, he had never run for political office before his nomination for president in Fairly or not, Bryan was portrayed as a perennial second-place candidate, while Taft was presented as the next Roosevelt. In reality, Bryan may have been more committed to Progressive reform than nearly every Republican except Robert La Follette and a few other Republicans of Yankee conviction who simply could not bear the thought of being a Democrat. Even though Roosevelt was known for helping usher in numerous Progressive reforms, he saw the most zealous members of the muckraking press as going too far, especially when writing about political and big business corruption.

He wrote:. Despite Roosevelt's efforts, many of the crusading journalists embraced the term "muckrakers" and indeed forced the country to make changes to ease the situations they reported. These famous muckrakers of their day helped expose issues and corruption in America between and the start of World War I. For those papers and magazines of the day, he published a series of exposes on slum conditions in the Lower East Side of Manhattan which led to the establishment of the Tenement House Commission.

In his writing, Riis included photographs presenting a truly disturbing picture of the living conditions in the slums. Improvements which are credited to Riis's muckraking efforts include sanitary sewer construction and the implementation of garbage collection. Ida B. Wells — was born into enslavement in Holly Springs, Mississippi, and grew up to become a teacher and then an investigative journalist and activist. She was skeptical of the reasons given for Black men being lynched and after one of her friends was lynched, she began researching white mob violence. In , she published "A Red Record: Tabulated Statistics and Alleged Causes of Lynchings in the United States ——," providing clear evidence that lynchings of Black men in the South were not the result of the rape of white women.

Wells also wrote articles in the Memphis Free Speech and Chicago Conservator, criticizing the school system, demanding that women's suffrage include Black women, and vehemently condemning lynching. Although she never achieved her goal of Federal anti-lynching legislation, she was a founding member of the NAACP and other activist organizations. Florence Kelley — was born to affluent North American 19th-century Black activists in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and educated at Cornell College. She joined Jane Addams' Hull House in , and through her work there was hired to investigate the labor industry in Chicago.

As a result, she was selected to be the first female Chief Factory Inspector for the State of Illinois. She tried to force sweatshop owners to improve conditions but never won any of her filed lawsuits. Her work helped create the hour workday and establish minimum wages, but her greatest accomplishment was perhaps the "Sheppard-Towner Maternity and Infancy Protection Act," which included health care funds to reduce maternal and infant mortality. Ida Tarbell — was born in a log cabin in Hatch Hollow, Pennsylvania, and dreamed of being a scientist. As a woman, that was denied her and, instead, she became a teacher and one of the most powerful of the muckraking journalists.

She began her journalism career in when she became the editor of The Chautauquan and wrote about inequality and injustice. Monopolies also mean a lack of innovation because there is no incentive to find new ways to make better products. Amazon believes these third-party sellers to be competitors and, therefore, has practiced anticompetitive behavior with them to maintain its dominance—and is able to do so because it has such a high market share.

Globalization and the maturity of the world economy have prompted calls for the retirement of antitrust laws. Over the years, these calls have been coming from people like economist Milton Friedman, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, and everyday consumers. If the history of government and business is any indication, then the government is more likely to increase the range and power of antitrust laws rather than relinquish such a useful weapon. Federal Trade Commission. Library of Congress. Reports: United States v. American Tobacco Co. Accessed Feb. The New Tycoons: John D. Department of Justice. Was it a Success? History, Art, and Archives. House of Representatives.

District Court for the District of Columbia — F. American Tel. Company Profiles. Your Money. Personal Finance. Your Practice. Popular Courses. Part Of. Antitrust Laws and Enforcement. Types of Antitrust Violations. Table of Contents Expand. The Benefits of a Monopoly. The Limitations of a Monopoly. End of a Monopoly Era? Monopolies FAQs. The Bottom Line. Key Takeaways Monopolies control the majority of market share in their industry or sector with little to no competition, which, depending on the situation, can be good or bad.

The focus of modern-day monopolies centers around Internet companies, such as Amazon, Facebook, and Alphabet. Article Sources. Investopedia requires writers to use primary sources to support their work.

Roosevelt, however, had swept 9 of the 12 states with primaries, including Monopolies During The Progressive Era home state of Ohio. He also sought to limit the power of trusts, Monopolies During The Progressive Era at least make sure that these Monopolies During The Progressive Era companies operated in the public interest. Thus, Congress Monopolies During The Progressive Era the power to collect income taxes, and U. Words: - Pages: 4. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company. Monopolies During The Progressive Era, the Progressives Monopolies During The Progressive Era a political organization quickly faded away, much like the Populists following the election Romeo And Juliet Love Quotes