Labor Reform by American States, 1900-1917: A Test of the Sanders’ Hypothesis

• In Event: 397 - Section on Labor and Labor Movements Roundtable Session (one-hour).
  In Refereed Roundtable: Table 04. States, Workers and Labor Movements

Abstract

Why did some states adopt pro-labor laws while other states passed more anti-labor legislation during the Progressive Era, 1900-1917? One explanation is offered by Elizabeth Sanders in her book, Roots of Reform. She argues that regional differences, class alliances, and contender mobilization are central to understanding policy shifts. The key is a coalition between farmers and workers. Unfortunately her focus is on social policy at the federal level. This paper tests her theory to analyze labor reforms at the state level. Panel regression is used to assess policy change by the 48 states over an 18 year period. Labor reform is measured using the data recently collected and disseminated by Fishback. The results show partial support for Sanders’ theory. States outside the core do adopt more pro-labor reforms. However, adoption is higher in diverse regions relative to peripheral ones contrary to her prediction. Farmer mobilization and Democratic control have inconsistent and weak effects. Socialist strength is important for generating policy outcomes favorable to labor. Diverse states may create more favorable conditions for alliance formation given more equal numbers of farmers and workers. The Socialist Party could act as a “bridge” contender with linkages both inside and outside the polity. Future research will attempt to clarify the effects of regional disparities considering mixed agricultural and manufacturing states and to consider the role of third parties as policy brokers.

Author

• Robert Biggert, Assumption College