by Jodie T. Allen, Senior Editor, Pew Research Center

Were confirmation needed that the American public is in a sour mood, the 2010 midterm elections provided it. Every bit both pre-election and post-election surveys made clear, Americans are non only strongly dissatisfied with the state of the economy and the direction in which the country is headed, but with authorities efforts to amend them. Equally the Pew Research Center's assay of exit poll data concluded, "the outcome of this year'southward election represented a repudiation of the political status quo…. Fully 74% said they were either aroused or dissatisfied with the federal regime, and 73% disapproved of the job Congress is doing."

This outlook is in interesting contrast with many of the public'south views during the Bully Depression of the 1930s, not merely on economic, political and social issues, but also on the role of government in addressing them.

Quite different today's public, what Depression-era Americans wanted from their government was, on many counts, more not less. And despite their far more dire economical straits, they remained more optimistic than today's public. Nor did average Americans then turn their ire upon their Groton-Harvard-educated president — this despite his failure, over his first term in office, to bring a swift end to their hardship. FDR had his detractors only these tended to be fellow members of the social and economic aristocracy.

Still, every bit now, the public had some reservations about the stretch of government power and found little consensus on specific policies with which to tackle the nation'southward troubles.

Broadly representative measures of public opinion during the first years of the Depression are not available — the Gallup organization did not begin its regular polling operations until 1935. And in its early years of polling, Gallup asked few questions straight comparable with today's more standardized sets. Moreover, its samples were heavily male person, relatively well off and overwhelmingly white. However, a combined information set of Gallup polls for the years 1936 and1937, made bachelor by the Roper Center, provides insight into the significant differences, but as well notable similarities, betwixt public opinion then and at present.1

Bear in mind that while unemployment had receded from its 1933 elevation, estimated at 24.9% by the economist Stanley Lebergott,2 it was still nearly 17% in 1936 and 14% in 1937.iii By dissimilarity, today's unemployment situation is far less dismal. To be certain, despite substantial job gains in Oct, unemployment remains stubbornly high relative to the norm of recent decades and the ranks of the long-term unemployed have risen sharply in recent months. But the electric current 9.8% official government rate, as painful as it is to jobless workers and their families, remains far below the levels that prevailed during most of the 1930s.

Notwithstanding, despite their far higher and longer-lasting record of unemployment, Depression-era Americans remained hopeful for the time to come. About half (50%) expected general business conditions to improve over the next half dozen months, while simply 29% expected a worsening. And fully lx% idea that opportunities for getting ahead were better (45%) or at least as good (15%) as in their father'due south twenty-four hour period.

Today'due south public is far gloomier most the economic outlook: Only 35% in an October Pew Research Center survey expected meliorate economic atmospheric condition by October 2011, while 16% expected a still weaker economic system. The Reagan-era recession found the public somewhat more hopeful than at present, simply less optimistic than in the 1930s.four In November 1982, with unemployment at its recession summit of nearly 11%, Americans believed their personal financial situation would improve over the next year by a 41%-to-22% margin.

Nonetheless, the most striking difference between the 1930s and the present day is that, past the standards of today's political parlance, average Americans of the mid-1930s revealed downright "socialistic" tendencies in many of their views about the proper role of government.

True, when asked to draw their political position, fewer than ii% of those surveyed were set to depict themselves every bit "socialist" rather than every bit Republican, Democratic or independent. But past a lopsided margin of 54% to 34%, they expressed the opinion that if in that location were another depression (and fears of 1 were mounting), the government should follow the same spending pattern as FDR's administration had followed before.

And, those surveyed said they supported Roosevelt, the architect of the New Bargain's expansive programs, over his 1936 Republican opponent, Alfred Landon by more than 2-to-ane (62%-xxx%).5

Pro-Authorities Preferences …

Among policies approved by roughly two-in-three in 1936-seven, was the new Social Security plan — this despite the fact that the questions asked about it focused on the compulsory equal monthly contributions by employers and employees rather than on any promised benefits at retirement.

Big majorities favored the federal government providing free medical care for those unable to pay (76%), helping state and local governments cover the costs of medical treat mothers at childbirth (74%), spending $25 million (large bucks in those days) to control crabs diseases (68%), and giving loans on "a long fourth dimension and like shooting fish in a barrel ground" to enable tenant farmers to purchase the farms they so rented (73%).

Moreover, a 46%-plurality favored concentration of power in the federal, rather than state government (34% favored the latter).

Of course, the New Deal had many song critics. A favorite target was the WPA, the employer of some eight million workers over its 8-yr lifetime.

Although these workers somehow managed to build such indelible monuments every bit La Guardia and Washington (now Reagan) National airports, Grand Canyon Dam, the Outer Drive in Chicago, San Francisco'due south Bay Span and New York's Triborough Bridge, likewise as parks, schools, playgrounds, overpasses, golf game courses and airfields scattered across the land, they were featured in many a cartoon as passing their time leaning on their shovels.six In response, the WPA Theatre project produced a play satirizing that common criticism (see photo at right).

Some contemporaneous complaints have a familiar ring. In a 1935 radio broadcast, the president of the New York Economic Council saw it this fashion: "This, of course, is nothing merely the same one-time European and Asiatic tyranny from which our ancestors fled Europe in lodge to establish real freedom."

But this was not the bulk view. One-half of the public even supported enactment of a second NRA (National Recovery Administration), the New Deal agency declared unconstitutional past a Supreme Court that aimed to reduce "destructive competition" by encouraging industry agreements and wage and 60 minutes protections for workers. Also, a 55%-bulk thought that the wages paid to workers in manufacture were as well low, while half said that big business organisation concerns were raking in too much profit.

And Gear up to Regulate …

Statist views were not express to support for authorities spending. Major regulatory programs likewise received potent endorsements: Fully 70% favored limitations and prohibitions on child labor, even if that required alteration the Constitution. Fifty-fifty more (88%) endorsed a law that would prevent misleading food, cosmetic and drug ad. Past 52% to 36%, the public also supported an amendment that would allow greater congressional regulation of industry and agriculture — and, at least in war-time, federal control of "all profits from business concern and industry" was favored by a 64%-to-26% margin.

Perhaps the sharpest departure from today's prevailing ethos is that, by a lopsided 59%-to-29% margin, Americans then said they would prefer public rather than private ownership of the electrical ability industry! Even more (69%) gave a thumbs-up to a takeover of the war munitions industry.

… But Only Up to a Point

Still, even then there were limits on the ambition for government takeovers. By a 55%-to-29% margin, the public rejected public ownership of the railroads and split 42%-44% on the question of regime buying of the banks (though a 48%-plurality expected that sooner or later on that would happen.)

Indeed, when asked if they had to brand the option would they opt for fascism or communism, the public expressed a substantial preference for fascism (39%) over communism (25%), while 36% offered no opinion. (When the question was phrased in terms of living under a German- versus a Russian-blazon government, the public showed a similar preference for the German model.

Moreover, despite widespread impecuniousness far beyond anything experienced in modern-day America, past a margin of 50%-to-42%, Americans in the mid-1930s rejected the idea of government limiting the size of private fortunes.

Nor was the public was ready to give organized labor a wholehearted comprehend. Only 10% said they belonged to a union, and, during the 1936-1937 Full general Motors strike, only a third said their sympathy lay with the strikers, while 41% sided with the employers. What's more than, fully sixty% supported the passage of state laws making sit-down strikes illegal, and about the same proportion favored forceful intervention by land and local authorities; half would phone call out the militia if strike trouble threatened.

In this dim view of unions, the 1930s public finds visitor amid today's voters. As Andrew Kohut describes in a contempo analysis in the New York Times, the majority support that unions had come to enjoy has faded sharply since 2007. In a February 2010 Pew Research survey, only 41% of the public expresses a favorable opinion of organized labor, downwardly from 58% three years before.

Support for aid programs was also waning somewhat by 1937. A 53%-majority expressed support for "the government'southward policy of reducing relief expenditures at this fourth dimension," while stance was carve up on whether farm benefits should be increased (39%), decreased (31%) or left the same (31%). Relatively few (25%) were ready to decrease soldiers' pensions but only 24% wanted to see them increased.

This weakening of back up for government spending was no uncertainty tied to concern over the buildup of federal debt. Government borrowing had not nevertheless exploded to the even so-unmatched levels relative to the size of the economic system seen during World War Two, but New Deal stimulus spending had pushed the federal debt to 40% of GDP by 1933, a level around which it hovered throughout the residual of the decade.

At the time of the November 1936 election, a solid 65%-majority said that it was necessary for the new assistants to balance the upkeep – though 62% too idea that was Congress's responsibleness rather than the president'south. To that cease, many were fifty-fifty set to raise some taxes: Nearly half (45%) supported a sales tax in their country to raise acquirement. Likewise, by a 49%-to-32% margin, the public favored taxing income from federal bonds, a levy that would, presumably, fall most heavily on well-to-do coupon-clippers.

When it came to the spending side of the federal balance sheet, however, they like today's voters, shied away from specificity. Fully 70% signed on to a subtract in "full general government running expenses," that era'due south likely equivalent of today'south "fraud, waste material and abuse." Still, as now, that consensus wobbled when the question got downward to the specific consequences of spending cuts. About half opted for unspecified cuts in relief programs, and relatively few (31%) thought WPA workers should go a pay raise. Merely no more 28% thought relief workers should be dropped from the plan before they had found jobs in private industry. And 67% best-selling finding piece of work exterior of the WPA would exist hard to do.

… And Not Near to Coronate

His popularity notwithstanding, America was not prepared to enthrone its leader in the White Firm. The public was divided as to whether Congress should give Roosevelt the ability to enlarge the cabinet and reorganize government. The same was truthful of FDR's plan to "pack" the Supreme Court so as to increment its liberal membership.

Simply a third (34%) so favored the 3rd term for Roosevelt that he afterwards won. (In the throes of the deep 1981-82 recession, a nearly identical minority, 36%, wanted Reagan to seek a 2nd term.7 Past comparison, despite seemingly intractable unemployment, a 47%-plurality still wants President Obama to run in 2012.)

Nor was the Grapes-of-Wrath era public totally forgiving. In 1938, afterwards previously failing unemployment took a abrupt upward turn, Democrats lost vii seats in the Senate and a nonetheless record-setting full of 72 seats in the Firm. In the 1982 midterm elections, Republicans lost 26 seats in the Business firm, strengthening the Democratic majority, though Republicans retained control of the Senate, non losing a single seat. Of course, two years after these setbacks for their parties, voters returned both Reagan and Roosevelt to the White Firm.

How Different a World?

More mundane differences than the absenteeism of dust bowls, migrating Okies, and starving sharecroppers separate today'due south American landscape from that of the 1930s. There was TVA — simply no Goggle box. And, of course, in that location was no internet. More than half of the 66%-male person, 98%-white sample surveyed past Gallup in 1936-37 had average or to a higher place average incomes; but 10% were on relief. But 46% had no telephone and 43% lacked a car. And while most (82%) frequented the movies, 38% still preferred the erstwhile black-and-white variety to colour.

Train was the preferred mode of travel on a long trip, handily beating out planes, cars and the motorcoach. And despite active efforts by the aviation industry to encourage passengers (including the introduction of female stewardesses and the introduction in 1936 of a "buy now, pay later" discounted ticket programme that will seem familiar to modernistic-day consumers), also equally participant-friendly air shows in localities across the nation, two out of iii among those surveyed had never traveled in an airplane. And most didn't want to: 6-in-10 (61%) said that fifty-fifty if someone paid their full expenses, they nonetheless wouldn't want to go by airplane to Europe and dorsum, whereas lxxx% would gladly have the bargain if they could go by gunkhole.

Simply for all their differences in twenty-four hour period-to-day experience — non to mention their views of authorities — Americans in the 1930s shared attitudes with many of today's voters that extend across their low stance of unions and their non-specific worry about federal debt.

The Bonnie-and-Clyde/John Dillinger era of celebrity gangsters had ended a couple of years earlier and in 1936-7, Americans were by and large as tough on offense as they are now: 60% favored the capital punishment — though among these merely a quarter supported capital penalty for persons younger than age 21.

3-in-4 (74%) thought parole boards should be stricter. And almost everyone (86%) wanted jail sentences for drunken drivers. Still, most (54%) favored giving more than attention to prisoners' occupational training, rather than dealing with them more than severely (22%).

As now, Americans in the 1930s worried virtually immigrants, whether legal or non, taking jobs from native-born Americans: 2 in 3 thought "aliens on relief" should be sent back to their "own countries."

With domestic problems so pressing, few were interested in the United States taking on foreign obligations. A striking 64% chosen it a mistake for the U.Due south. to have entered World War I, despite its victory, and by ii to one (53%-26%), they withal rejected U.S. membership in the League of Nations. Furthermore, to make information technology hard for the state to get involved in another massive conflict, not but did they assume the at present all-just-nullified constitutional requirement that Congress should declare war, well-nigh seven-in-ten (68%) thought Congress should start be required to "obtain the blessing of the people by ways of a national vote."

In today's global economic system, the U.South. public is far more internationally minded. Still, as in the 1930s, neutralist tendencies have cropped up. In a Dec 2009 Pew Research poll, nearly half (49%) said that the Us should "mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own. " In improver, 44% agreed that "the U.S. should go our own way in international matters," a record level since Gallup offset asked the question in 1964. This twelvemonth, a pre-election survey found jobs and wellness care were the runaway summit problems amidst likely voters; Transitional islamic state of afghanistan or terrorism ranked at the very bottom of a list of six possible bug.

Dorsum then, people were generally supportive of a costless press. More than half (52%) agreed that "the press should have the right to say ANYTHING it pleases about public officials" — with the emphasis supplied in the Gallup question.

3 years after the repeal of Prohibition in 1933, few (29%) said they would vote to "make the country dry" again.

Simply these were far from thorough-going libertarians. Though identity theft and terrorists boarding planes were absent-minded from the denizens's list of concerns in the mid-thirties, past a 63%-to-29% margin, the public favored a requirement that everyone in the United states be fingerprinted, a proportion remarkably close to the 57% who favored a national identity card when a Pew Research Center survey last tested this upshot at the shut of 2006.

More strikingly, nearly iii-quarters of the U.S. public (73%) favored sterilization of habitual criminals and the hopelessly insane, a view now considered so retrograde that pollsters no longer even inquire about information technology.

The "birth command movement," which might be viewed as either a libertarian freedom-to-choose crusade or an disciplinarian population-control effort, depending on one'southward betoken of view, drew strong 61%-to-26% support.

Views on civil rights were evolving, but slowly. Six in 10 said Congress should brand lynching a federal crime. Two-thirds thought information technology was acceptable to take women serve on juries in their land. Moreover, among those favoring the death punishment, fully 77% were ready to give women equal opportunity for the scaffold or electrical chair. Simply while a 60%-bulk was ready to vote for a well-qualified Catholic for president, and the surveyed public split evenly (46%-47%) on the choice of a Jew, merely a third (33%) would send a woman to the Oval Office, even if she "were qualified in every other respect." The possibility of a black president was plain and then remote that Gallup didn't bother to test public reaction.

And in Conclusion …

Is there a message in this for today'southward America? 2 possible lessons: First, information technology'southward worth remembering that the social programs and cyberbanking controls that the New Deal era produced stood the nation in skilful stead over many decades of unprecedented prosperity. Second, Depression-era Americans' faith in the country and its guiding institutions steeled them confronting the challenges of a double-dip recession and, years later, Globe War II. They had it worse, simply they also expected it to go meliorate, faster.

Acquire how early 1980s Americans responded to their deep economical downturn in an accompanying commentary: "Reagan'southward Recession"

1. The Gallup poll samples are drawn from 21 private surveys conducted nationally and reweighted to conform to population demographics The Roper Center'south provides the post-obit description of survey methodology and their additional "cleaning" efforts to make the data consistent and representative across surveys.

General Information:

This data set is made up of 21 private surveys. They were conducted during the years 1936 and 1937 by the American Constitute of Public Opinion. There are a total of 63,052 records in the file. The actual report numbers and their corresponding Due north'due south are presented below:

Survey N's do Not represent the "true" number of persons interviewed. As was the custom in the early days of information processing, a "card" weighting procedure was used to brand the samples conform to population parameters. Instead of cosmos of a "weight" variable (which serves as a multiplication gene) individual response records were only duplicated. The information from the surveys were candy co-ordinate to standard Roper Center procedures. Cleaning procedures (converting from multi-punch formats to characters formats) were performed and so as to preserve the integrity of the original survey instruments. Certain variables accept been recoded from their "single" survey forms to insure cross- study consistency. This cumulative data set merges all 21surveys into a single data set with repeated questions across surveys defines as the same variables. The survey identification variable serves as a ways for specific survey identification. Missing data codes take been established for questions non asked in the various surveys. The surveys included for each question are documented in "notes" after each question in the following codebook. Sampling Technique: Modified Probability. Prior to 1950, the samples for all Gallup surveys, excluding special surveys, were a combination of what is known as a purposive design for the selection of cities, towns, and rural areas, and the quota method for the option of individuals inside such selected areas. these were distributed by six regions and five or six city size, urban rural groups or strata in proportion to the distribution of the population of voting age past these regional-city size strata. The distribution of cases between the not-due south and s, nevertheless, was on the footing of the vote in Presidential elections. Within each region the sample of such places was drawn separately for each of the larger states and for groups of smaller states. The places were selected to provide broad geographic distribution within states and at the aforementioned time in combination to be politically representative of the country or grouping of states in terms of three previous elections. Specifically they were selected so that in combination they matched the state vote for iii previous elections inside modest tolerances. Great emphasis was placed on election data every bit a command in the era from 1935 to 1950. Within the civil divisions in the sample, respondents were selected on the footing of age, sexual practice and socio-economic quotas. Otherwise, interviewers were given considerable latitude within the sample areas, being permitted to draw their cases from households and from persons on the street anywhere in the customs.
 2. The BLS did not begin producing official estimates of unemployment until 1940, but the estimates produced by Lebergott are well-regarded within the bookish customs. Lebergott, however, includes WPA and other piece of work relief participants among the unemployed. Past counting these workers as employed, economist Michael Darby reduces the 1933 peak to 20.6%.
 3. If WPA and other work-relief workers are counted among the employed, the unemployment rate is estimated to have been reduced to 10% in 1936 and 9% in 1937.
 4. For a more detailed description of public opinion during the 1981-1982 recession, see "Reagan'due south Recession."
 5. Averaged over both pre- and postal service-ballot surveys.
 half-dozen. A blog of Americana recounts i typical joke of the era: A motorist honored the terminate sign preceding a bend in the route, in which you couldn't see the end of the curve. A W.P.A. worker was there to advise the motorists — simply he had laryngitis and had to speak in a raspy whisper. He said: "Exist careful, there'due south W.P.A.workers around the bend." The motorist spoke back to the human being, using the same raspy, whispering, vocalism – "Don't worry – I WON'T WAKE 'EM UP!!"
 7. For a more detailed clarification of public opinion during the 1981-1982 recession, meet "Reagan's Recession."