The Roosevelt defense
By Dan Dick | Staff Writer
Editor’s note: This article is an open letter to UIndy Trustee Alex Carroll, who’s Nov. 12 letter to the editor invited a response from the columnist.
I would like to thank you for your comments on my article in the Oct. 29 issue of The Reflector. We are always grateful to know our work is appreciated and thought-provoking. I would, however, like to address the validity of some of your criticisms.
In response to your letter regarding the accuracy of my statement, “he believed in capitalism, but he knew that the government must regulate industry”, I can assure you, the statement was not just my conviction, but it was the belief of President Theodore Roosevelt.
During his time as president, Roosevelt enforced regulation on a number of industries, which led to the creation of child labor laws, fair treatment between labor and capital and the safety of food across the country. I have gathered a plethora of Roosevelt’s quotes from the books “Theodore Rex” by Edmund Morris, “T.R.: The Last Romantic” by H. W. Brands, “The Lion’s Pride: Theodore Roosevelt” and “His Family in Peace and War” by Edward J. Renehan to support my statements.
The fraudulent practices of the railroads spurred him to state, “The government must in increasing degree supervise and regulate the workings of the railways engaged in interstate commerce,” and after learning about the corruption in the meat packing industry he said, “The misdeeds of those are responsible for the abuses we design to cure will bring discredit and damage not only upon them but upon the innocent stock growers, the ranchmen and farmers of the country.”
Roosevelt did not believe that business was evil, but he did say that the “tyranny of mere wealth” was not in keeping with the democratic values of our country. The average citizen does not elect the leaders of business and thus has little influence over their dealings. It is the government, elected by the people, to keep the practices of business fair and in his opinion, “We should accept the fact that big business deserves fair treatment and should not be penalized; but that it should not be left unregulated, uncontrolled. The nation must be the master of the corporation; not in the least to destroy the corporation; on the contrary, to help it and see that an ample reward comes to those who invest in it and who manage it, but to see also that no injustice is done competitors, that the public is served, and that the labor men, the workingmen, are treated as in effect partners who must have their full share of the prosperity.”
Secondly, when I wrote, “government must regulate,” I did not specifically mean the president, congress, any party or candidate. We elect people to office so that they maintain the structure and security of our society by “enforcing the rules of responsible behavior.”
Just as there are laws that enforce the rules of responsible behavior on individual citizens, such as speed limits in residential or schools areas, so too must there be similar laws for business. Most people want restaurants to be held to a high standard of cleanliness despite the financial burden it might place on the establishment’s owner.
No parent wants their child playing with toys made from hazardous materials. The sick should not have to worry that the medicines they take are just highly advertised placebos, just as people who entrust banks with their money should not fear that their wealth will vanish. I believe, just as President Roosevelt said, that businesses should not be penalized without just cause, though a set of regulations must be available if or when businesses act illegally. The University of Indianapolis, Eli Lilly and Company and Crystal House International are all held to some form of government regulation. There should be no exception for certain industries, just as there should be no exceptions for certain people.
Finally, I would like to address your comment that we are the government and that we should fix it. Some would argue we did, on Nov. 4, change the course of government in a new and positive direction. The majority of Americans, upset with the current state of our nation, elected a leader who, “holds his position purely because he is able to appeal to the conscience and to the reason of those who support him,” the very definition of a leader Roosevelt would admire.
