'Opposition to the New Deal was its greatest weakness.' How far do you agree? Explain your answer. [40]

This question asks you to evaluate whether opposition was the New Deal's greatest weakness. A strong answer must weigh opposition against other weaknesses and reach a supported judgement.

Evidence that opposition was a major weakness:

• The Supreme Court struck down the National Recovery Administration (NRA) in the Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States case (1935) and the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) in United States v. Butler (1936), ruling both unconstitutional. This dismantled key First New Deal programmes.
• Roosevelt's court-packing plan of 1937, which proposed adding up to six extra justices to the Supreme Court, was widely criticised and failed in Congress. It damaged Roosevelt's reputation and united opponents against him.
• A conservative coalition of Republicans and southern Democrats formed in Congress after 1937, blocking further major reforms.
• Business groups such as the American Liberty League attacked the New Deal as socialist interference with free enterprise.
• Critics from the left, including Huey Long ('Share Our Wealth' programme), Father Coughlin (radio broadcasts), and Dr Francis Townsend (old-age pension plan), argued the New Deal did not go far enough, pressuring Roosevelt from both directions.

Evidence that other weaknesses were more significant:

• The New Deal failed to end the Great Depression. Unemployment remained above 14 per cent throughout the 1930s and only fell dramatically with the onset of wartime production after 1941.
• The 'Roosevelt Recession' of 1937-1938 was triggered when Roosevelt cut government spending, demonstrating the fragility of recovery and suggesting the New Deal had not created self-sustaining growth.
• Many programmes discriminated against African Americans. The AAA, for example, benefited white landowners while displacing Black sharecroppers. The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) operated segregated camps. The Federal Housing Administration refused to guarantee mortgages in predominantly Black neighbourhoods.
• Some programmes created bureaucratic confusion and overlapping agencies.
• The New Deal did not fundamentally reform the banking system or redistribute wealth. Structural economic problems persisted.

Reaching a judgement: A strong conclusion should argue that while opposition constrained the New Deal and forced compromises, its inability to end unemployment and its failure to address racial inequality were more fundamental weaknesses. Opposition limited what the New Deal could do, but these internal shortcomings limited what it did do.

Mark scheme guidance:

• Level 5 (33-40): A balanced, well-supported argument that evaluates opposition against other weaknesses, using precise evidence, and reaches a sustained judgement about which was the 'greatest' weakness.
• Level 4 (25-32): Good analysis of both sides with relevant evidence, but the judgement may lack full development or the balance between sides may be uneven.
• Level 3 (17-24): Some explanation with evidence, but may be one-sided (e.g. only discussing opposition) or rely on general statements rather than specific examples.
• Level 2 (9-16): Descriptive narrative about the New Deal with limited analytical engagement with the question.
• Level 1 (1-8): General, unsupported statements with little relevant knowledge.

Exam tip: The question asks 'how far do you agree,' which requires you to consider both sides before reaching a judgement. Simply listing types of opposition without comparing them to other weaknesses will not reach the top levels.