PARTY REFORM AND POLITICAL REALIGNMENT: THE NEW POLITICS MOVEMENT IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ADAM HILTON A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY GRADUATE PROGRAM IN POLITICAL SCIENCE YORK UNIVERSITY TORONTO, ONTARIO October 2016 © Adam Hilton 2016 ABSTRACT This dissertation offers an analysis of the New Politics movement to reform and realign the Democratic Party in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The central problem is to develop an understanding of the origins, nature, and limits of the reform movement. This study also addresses questions regarding the interactive relationships between political parties and social movements, the capacity of social movement actors to transform party institutions to better influence American public policy, and the role of contingency and agency in moments of political crisis. Whereas many scholars have interpreted the New Politics movement as a conflict between “amateurs” and “professionals” or “blue collar” workers and “white collar” reformers, I offer an explanation that roots the New Politics reform project in the longer historical struggle over Democratic Party structure and programmatic identity going back to the early New Deal period. By placing the New Politics movement in its proper historical and institutional context, this dissertation draws on extensive archival research as well as participant interviews to reassess this episode of reform, not as an effort to “dismantle the party” but to renew it by transforming it into a party of a different type. This study finds that the New Politics movement, while scoring many important victories, such as including more women, young people, and people of color in the party hierarchy, failed in its ultimate ambition to build a national programmatic party due to the staunch opposition of state party leaders, cold war intellectuals, and especially the leadership of the trade union federation. This was due primarily to the labor movement’s own institutional position in the party, which channeled its influence through the smoke- ii filled back rooms of elite brokerage – an arrangement which democratizing the party threatened. Rethinking the New Politics movement challenges the predominant narrative that treats the post-1980 reorientation of the Democratic Party toward the political center as the inevitable and “common sense” response to the “excesses” of the late 1960s. As I try to show, rather than the inexorable result of liberalism’s failures, the making of the modern Democratic Party was the result of a struggle between contending political projects. While the New Politics did not succeed in winning that war, it did decisively shape the contours of Democratic Party politics today. iii For Ashlee iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS As the product of years of intensive work, I feel there is no better way than to begin this dissertation with a note of thanks to all those on whom I have often relied for love, encouragement, and support during the research and writing of this study. First and foremost, I want to thank my excellent committee. Leo Panitch, my supervisor, mentor, and friend, trained me to cross-examine the thinking of giants, taking no assumption or conclusion for granted. Over the course of my graduate studies this often involved loosening my grip on tightly held beliefs, some of which were drawn more from the world of wishful thinking than from reality. He has taught me the invaluable lesson that solidarity involves asking the hard questions, not turning a blind eye to shortcomings of those with whom you sympathize. Stephen Hellman has been a constant source of support for me, from his course on Comparative Politics to our frequently wide-ranging discussions over coffee. His consistent encouragement to roll up my sleeves and “get my hands in the pasta” motivated me to dig ever deeper, seek out more sources, and let the research lead me to unexpected conclusions. Dennis Pilon brought onboard both a contagious concern for historical-institutional methodology as well as an enthusiasm for the study of the complexity of democratization, which brought out similar themes in my own thinking. Guys, I could not have done it with you. Also, there are probably few other universities where I could have produced such a dissertation. York University’s graduate program in political science has provided me with the resources and intellectual stimuli to undertake a project of this scope. My sincere thanks to all the department faculty and staff who have made York political science a welcoming and productive environment for a student to pursue a PhD. My special thanks v to Judy Hellman, Elizabeth Dauphinee, George Comninel, Greg Albo, David McNally, Stephen Newman, and Sabah Alnasseri, as well as Marleen Quesenberry, Carolyn Cross, Judy Matadial, and Angie Schwartz. My fellow graduate students and Toronto friends, especially Paul Gray, Sara Bernardo, Bob Froese, Janaya Letkeman, Tom Cheney, Riiko Bedford, Jordan House, Sarah Ovens, Nicole Bernardt, and Kim Carty, have all been unconditional sources of support and comradery for me. I would have never made it to York, however, had it not been for the undergraduate experience I enjoyed at the Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington. There I was fortunate enough to learn political economy from teachers who taught me how to think rather than what to think. I especially want to extend my gratitude to my professor and friend Alan Nasser, whose generosity and intellect over the years have continued to be a source of inspiration and motivation. I also owe a debt of gratitude to Jeanne Hahn, who convinced me that history “from the bottom up” was incomplete insofar as it could not be connected with history “from the top down,” and Tom Womeldorff, who provided me with my first opportunity to teach at the college level. My fellow Greeners, including Thomas Herdon, Ellis Scharfenaker, James Parisot, and Jenine Adam, have all continued to be sources of inspiration to me, even as we have pursued different paths since our time in Oly. I also want to thank Vivek Chibber at New York University for the urging me to clarify the party dynamics attending the decline and fall of the New Deal order from the Democratic side of the story. His encouragement of my progress at various stages of the process was invaluable. My thanks also to David Plotke at the New School for Social vi Research for corresponding with me at the very first stage of the project and generously sharing some of his unpublished manuscript with me. The enjoyment I have had digging through the archives of manuscript libraries around the United States has been made possible by the patience and expertise of their staffs. While there have been too many to name here, I am indebted to them all. Special thanks, however, are due to the Democratic National Committee, the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations Committee on Political Education, as well as the National Women’s Political Caucus for granting me permission to access their records and unprocessed materials. Some of that research was made possible by a generous dissertation grant from the Arthur and Elizabeth Schlesinger Library at Harvard University, as well as various funds made available by York University’s Faculty of Graduate Studies and Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 3903. I owe so much to my family. Sadly, my stepmother, a constant source of loving support in my educational pursuits, is not able to see those pursuits come to fruition. However, this dissertation bears the mark of the positive influence she left behind. The members of both my immediate and wider family have been there for me throughout, providing encouragement and temporary respite from the project when necessary. I am lucky to have such a large family tree. I hope they excuse me for not namely them all individually. I owe the most to my partner Ashlee Wactor. Ashlee has been on the frontlines of my graduate career, joining me to celebrate my triumphs and consoling me during the inevitable frustrations. She has borne the brunt of the burdens of having a graduate vii student for a partner and I will spend the rest of my life repaying her. As a first act of gratitude, I dedicate this dissertation to her. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………... ii DEDICATION……………………………………………………………………………iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................................................................................................v TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………………………... ix LIST OF ACRONYMS………………………………………………………………….xii LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………................................xiv LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………………...xv INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………...1 1. THE NEW POLITICS AND ITS CRITICS…………………………………………. 13 What Was the New Politics Movement? ………………………………………. 17 The Critique of the New Politics……………………………………………….. 20 Party Organization………………………………………………………22 Electoral Performance………………………………………………….. 25 Public Policy Influence…………………………………………………..26 Reformers’ Class Character……………………………………………..27 Assessing the Critique………………………………………………………….. 30 Explaining the Critique…………………………………………………………. 44 Reassessing the New Politics…………………………………………………….49 2. IN THE SHADOW OF STATES’ RIGHTS: DEMOCRATIC PARTY STRUCTURE AND THE NEW DEAL COALITION……………………………………………… 53 States’ Rights, Class Politics, and National Party Structure……………………. 55 The New Deal Coalition…………………………………………………………64 The Labor-Liberal