Mudy A STUDY OF POLITICAL AND SECTIONAL VOTING ALIGNMENT) IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, 1921-1929 by Patrick Gene O'Brien A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Office for Graduate Studies, Graduate Division of Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 1968 MAJOR: HISTORY (RECENT AMERICAN) >BY: lser Date Order No............................^ ^ § No. Of Volumes ........ ................. Color .......................................... Trim S iz e ...... ......... Vol. No. /Sylu^L/ Part No................................. M onths............... o express my Y ea r.................................... Imprint ( ) ye* ( ) no l e r ’ Wh° Provided me with the aavanuagt ui ^ x ights into American politics of the 1920's which were the basis of this disser­ tation. He also contributed to the enterprise through encouragement and advice. Dr. Alfred H, Kelly read the manuscript and made a number of valuable suggestions for its improvement. My thanks are also extended to Dr. Lloyd Edwards and Mr. Donald Leaky of Kansas State Teachers College Data Processing Center who assisted me with the statistical design of this study and wrote the IBM programs. All errors of omission and commission are, of course, my own. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A brief reference is inadequate to express my appreciation to Professor Raymond C. Miller, who provided me with the advantage of his perceptive insights into American politics of the 1920's which were the basis of this disser­ tation. He also contributed to the enterprise through encouragement and advice. Dr. Alfred H, Kelly read the manuscript and made a number of valuable suggestions for its improvement. My thanks are also extended to Dr. Lloyd Edwards and Mr. Donald Leaky of Kansas State Teachers College Data Processing Center who assisted me with the statistical design of this study and wrote the IBM programs. All errors of omission and commission are, of course, my own. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF T A B L E S .............................................. INTRODUCTION .............................. 1 Chapter I. A POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE, 1921-29 8 II. A MEASUREMENT OF DIVISION AND LIKENESS BETWEEN THE REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC PARTIES ............ .... .......... 29 III. AN ANALYSIS OF DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN PARTY COHESION ....................... 4l IV. A MEASUREMENT OF THE PARTY LOYALTY OF REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC SENATORS .......... 64 V. THE REPUBLICAN INSURGENTS: THEIR PARTY PRACTICES AND THE LIBERAL TRADITION ......... 97 VI. A STUDY OF SECTIONAL VOTING PATTERNS . 0 „ . 114 CONCLUSION........................... ................... 141 APPENDIX ...................................................1^6 BIBLIOGRAPHY 157 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Political Composition of Geographical Regions--United States Senate, 1921-1929 12 2, Interparty Likeness by Issue and Congress, 1921-1929 37 3* Comparison of Interparty Likeness in the 1920's with the Average Interparty Likeness (1880-19^0) on Certain Issues . .................. .......... 38 4. Number of Times that Various Percentages of the Democrats Vote Together, 1921-29 ..... ^3 5. Number of Times that Various Percentages of the Democrats Vote Together According to Issues, 1921-29 ...... ... ^5 6 . Democratic Cohesion According to Issue for Each Congress with the Average Cohesion for the 67th Through the 70th Congress, 1921-29 ^8 7. Comparison of Democratic Cohesion in the 1920's with Their Average Cohesion Between 1880-19^0 on Selected Issues . ............................. ^9 8. Number of Times That Various Percentages of the Republicans Vote Together, 1921-29 .... 52 9. Number of Times that Various Percentages of the Republicans Vote Together According to Issues, 1921-29 ........................ 5^ 10. Republican Cohesion According to Issue for Each Congress with the Average Cohesion for the 67th Through the 70th Congress, 1 9 2 1 - 2 9 ......................................... 55 11. Comparison of Republican Cohesion in the 1920's with Their Average Cohesion Between 1880-19^0 on Selected Issues ........... .... 5° V TABLE PAGE 12. Comparison of Democratic and Republican Cohesion According to Issue, 1921-29 .... 58 13. Comparison of Democratic and Republican Cohesion on Substantive and Non- Substantive Issues, 1921-29 ......... 59 14. Republican Loyalty Index ........... 67 15. Democratic Loyalty Index . ................. 84 16. Selective Loyalty Index for Republican Senators, 1921-1929 . ....................... 100 17. Cohesion Index for Geographical Regions, 1921-29 ...................................... 115 18, Cohesion Index for Central States Senators for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-1929 • • • 118 19* Cohesion Index for Central States Republicans for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-29 .... 120 20. Cohesion Index for Central States Democrats for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-29 .... 121 21. Cohesion Index for the Eastern Senators for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-29 ...... 122 22. Cohesion Index for Eastern Republicans for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-1929 .................................... 23. Cohesion Index for Eastern Democrats for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-1929 ..... 125 24. Cohesion Index for the Southern Senators for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-1929 ..... 127 25. Cohesion Index for Southern Democrats for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-1929 ..... 128 26. Cohesion Index for Southern Republicans for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-1929 129 27. Cohesion Index for Western Senators for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-1929 ....•••• 131 vi TABLE PAGE 28. Cohesion Index for Western Democrats for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-1929 ........... 132 29• Cohesion Index for Western Republicans for Each Issue and Congress, 1921-1929 ........... 133 30. Likeness Between Democrats and Republicans From the Same Section, 1921-1929 ........... 135 31. Likeness Between Democratic Sectional Groups, 1921-1929 ...........* .............. 135 32. Likeness Between Republican Sectional Groups, 1921-1929 136 33. Likeness Between Sectional Groups of One Party with Sectional Groups of the Other Party, 1921-1929 ....................... 136 3^. Likeness of the Urban and Rural Groups and the Likeness Between the Urban and Rural Sections, 1921-1929 • • • • ........... 137 35. Likeness Between the Urban and Rural Sections Upon Selected Issues, 1921-1929 137 INTRODUCTION The politics of the 1920's, often caricaturized in a few simple generalizations, prove upon thoughtful investiga­ tion to be exceedingly complex.-*- Several common and casual assertions about "twenties" politics should come under critical reanalysis, including traditional descriptions of the extent and character of party division. The usual historical generalization is that, although conservativism was the predominant political attitude, both parties were fragmented by sectional and ideological struggles. As a con­ sequence there was a breakdown in the party system. This dissertation tests this conclusion through an examination of voting patterns in the United States Senate from the 6?th through the 70th Congress (1921-29), Virtually every politi­ cal history of the era touches upon Senate voting align­ ments, but there is no extant study with the scope, structure, and methodology of this dissertation. The need for this investigation stems from severe deficiencies in political studies of the 1920's. Many des­ criptions are little more than tedious exposes of debauchery lFor a perceptive critique of "twenties" historio­ graphy see Kenry F. May, "Shifting Perspectives on the 1920's," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XLIII (December, 195^)» ^05-27• 2 and incompetence,^ Moreover, nearly every political study is written from the liberal "frame of reference." Some political critiques of the 1920's can be dismissed as fundamentally liberal vendettas, but even responsible scholars reflect the same bias which is all but universal among practitioners of the historical craft.3 This study is neither a defense nor advocacy of a political group or philosophy. The conclusions herein are based upon a detached analysis of Senate voting patterns and presented with a determination for accuracy. The historian should be eclectic in his methodology. Any technique should be adopted which will contribute to clarity, precision, and insight into the historical topic. Traditional research techniques have usually been used as a basis for descriptions of politics and parties in the 1920's. The results have often been impressive, but the methodology has sometimes contributed to excessive selectivity in materials, reliance upon fragmentary data, casualness in definitions, and little regard for criteria. The dimensions classic of this type is Samuel Hopkins Adams, Incredible Era: The Life and Times of Warren Gamabiel Harding (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1939 )~T 3a representative study of the polemic school is Karl Schriftgiesser, This Was Normalcy: An Account of Party Politics During Twelve Republican Years: 1920-1932~ TBoston '• Little, Brown and Company, 19^8), whereas Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., The Crisis of the Old Order 1919-1933 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1957T~?sflects the scholarly bias. 3 of methodology have recently been expanded by historians who have developed new techniques and adopted others, primarily, from the social sciences,^ Ideas and methods advanced by these historians are incorporated into this dissertation. This study should be perceived as paralleling standard politi­ cal histories of the 1920*s,