THE LEGISLATIVE BATTLEFIELD

Old-Age Pensions: “A Note of Humanity”

Reuben’s first bold act of the 55th General Assembly was to introduce the Old Age Pension Bill, echoing his successful strategy with the Injunction-Limitation Bill: get out of the gate quick and strong with a momentous piece of legislation. If he were at a poker game, he would have been all-in with the first hand dealt…again.

Supported by the ISFL, the Joint Labor Legislative Board, the Fraternal Order of Eagles and other humanitarian organizations, the bill was “regarded as one of primary importance by the labor movement of the state.”[1] During this era thousands of law-abiding citizens who had worked at unskilled jobs found themselves at retirement age without savings, and many were forced to spend their final years in the wretched County Poor House. Reub started the session with an impassioned speech on the floor that was carried throughout the newspapers of Illinois:

I find no pride in the Poorhouses of our State, into which the aged men and women are cast and crowded together as so much worthless refuse. I want less of these scrap-baskets of humanity and more homes. Many aged, destitute couples who now inhabit these cheerless places of human misery are needlessly there. A few dollars paid periodically to many of them would have kept the private home in existence and would have allowed them to end their years with some measure of comfort and contentment…I claim that the right to die comfortably is just as desirable as the right to live prosperously. The silver lace of old age touches me more deeply than the flash and color of youth. I admire the dash and vigor of strength, but I honestly sympathize with the uncertain step and movement of weakness.[2]

That a married couple could be torn from one another horrified Reuben. According to Olga, the idea “disturbed Reuben greatly…Many County Poor Houses were badly managed, but the most distressing thing about them was this—the poor houses divided male and female. Each lived in different departments. Thus, when an old couple entered, they were separated…Reuben believed this was all wrong and hoped someday he could change this.”[3]

The preservation of marriage was also one of the many reasons Reub’s bill enjoyed such strong support among the religious community. Reub traces his passion for the issue back to his preacher father:

My father was intensely interested in proper care for aged people. He told that in Scandinavian countries that aged people over there were always rather happy with smiles on their faces and worried about nothing because they did have an income, and they got that as a matter of right. At the age of 18 in the Scandinavian countries citizens are compelled to pay into an old age pension fund. And at the age of 60 no matter how rich they may be or how poor they may be, they must accept this old age pension. They have the right, of course, to return that to the fund, and many of them do who feel that they do not need that money, but they receive that as a matter or right.[4]

Most of the “Old World” already had some form of pension system, a central point of Reuben’s argument. As he said:

The older countries of Europe that do not boast of being “The Home of the Brave and The Free” have long since adopted the course of pensioning their old and impoverished citizens. Great Britain has such a law. Are we less generous? The State of Montana, the State of Nevada, the States of Tennessee, Colorado, Wisconsin and the territory of Alaska have taken favorable action on Old Age Pension Bills. Illinois—a prosperous, progressive State—should not hold back any longer.[5]

Reuben’s bill provided $260 annually for those 70 and older who had been US citizens for 20 years or more. But despite this modest approach, the fight was intense as the Soderstrom Bill came to the House for a vote on April 20. Opponents—primarily from industrial interests—derided the bill as “socialistic” and “unworkable,” while simultaneously (if disingenuously) claiming that the fund was too small to make any meaningful difference.[6] Reub responded from the floor:

I want this Old Age Pension Bill because it will put a note of humanity into the work that we are doing. I want the work of the fifty-fifth General Assembly…to apply fairly to all the people in this State…I want this bill because it will demonstrate to the people of Illinois that they do not cease to be of concern to the State simply because they became old and poor. I want the Legislature to declare for homes instead of Poorhouses…I want liberty instead of imprisonment for the old. I want this grand old State of Illinois, whenever possible (and it is possible in our prosperous State), to help that old couple, gray-haired, bent with age, to live together and dream their dreams out under their own roof, at their own table, by their own fireside.[7]

Reub’s bill gathered a respectable 65 votes, but fell 12 votes shy of the required majority.[8] He was flustered but not deterred when he walked the hallways of the statehouse and saw JM Glenn of the IMA sitting in the offices of various anti-labor legislators. Undaunted, Reub immediately scrambled to save the bill. He worked with the Senator Sneed to introduce a version of his bill that finally passed the Senate on June 23. With Senate approval secured, Reub redoubled his efforts in the House. This time he came remarkably close, as the ISFL newsletter reported:

Representative Soderstrom again led the fight, but in spite of his earnest efforts and the support given him by the entire Joint Labor Legislative Board and all other friends of the measure in the House, it received but 75 votes, two short of the constitutional majority and thus was defeated. While the measure was defeated, its passage by the Senate and the large vote it received in the House in face of the formidable opposition against it, lends considerable confidence that this humane measure may find more favorable consideration in the future.[9]

But alas, the bill was doomed to lose. While this was partly due to the IMA’s efforts, it also was a result of labor’s smaller caucus in the legislature. Three labor-friendly legislators who won their elections died before the start of the 55th General Assembly, while another two were hospitalized during the session. A sixth pro-labor representative, who also served as an Alderman in Chicago, was unable to travel to Springfield without the opposition declaring his seat vacant under Chicago law. This meant labor was down a total of six votes total in the House.[10] These losses deepened during the 1928 election when six pro-labor representatives were beaten in their primary races, double the number of employer-friendly candidates.[11]

The IMA had the upper hand, and a vote on the Old Age Pension bill would have to wait for another day. Like the injunction limitation bill before it, the Old Age Pension measure required even more attempts designed to recruit votes and bolster public awareness. To succeed, Reub would have to retool his plan and face-off against a fresh, new foe.

The IMA: A New Antagonist

After expertly engineering the defeat of the Old Age Pension Bill in the 1927 legislature, John M Glenn, the Lion of the Illinois Manufacturer’s Association, died in Hot Springs Arkansas on April 21, 1928.[12] Until the end, Glenn had worked tirelessly for what he took to be his personal mission, the destruction of the “menace of labor.”[13] Just before his death he conducted a “Good-will, Get-Acquainted” tour by train throughout Illinois, courting industrialists for his organization.[14] His death shook the IMA. More than any other man, Glenn had made the organization what it was, and his passing left the ship without a clear captain.

But the manufacturers were a resourceful organization and immediately found an effective torchbearer in James L. Donnelly. They matched the youthful energy of Reuben Soderstrom with Donnelly, aged 38 and Secretary of the Western Cartridge Company of East Illinois. He was selected to replace Glenn by the IMA board of directors on September 11, 1928.[15] An IMA Director for eight years and a vice president for one, the 38 year-old Donnelly was something of an outsider, eschewing the Chicago elite for his hometown of Alton, IL after a brief sojourn abroad. There he headed the Southern Division of the IMA, building a reputation for both a quick mind and silver tongue. Ably stepping into the shoes of the legendary JM Glenn, Donnelly would go toe-to-toe with Reuben for years to come.

LIFE IN AMERICA, LIFE IN STREATOR

Wall Street Versus Main Street

For the rich, 1927 and 1928 were boom years. The Wall Street Stock Exchange became home to a new gold rush, and those with means increased their share of the country’s wealth dramatically. According to economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, the top 1% saw their incomes jump by 69% during the “boom years,” from $204,363 to $345,567, between 1923 and 1928. America’s elite did even better, increasing their annual gains from $2.61 million to over $7.25 million over the same period, an increase of over 177%. Average Americans, meanwhile, saw their meager average salary of $8,828 decrease by nearly 5% as manufacturers used their wealth and influence to keep organized labor weak.[16] Illinois was hurt particularly badly. In the words of ISFL President John Walker, the state suffered from “an industrial depression that is almost as bad as the one that was obtained just after the signing of the Armistice.” Despite growing anger over the inequality that many suspected was at the heart of the crisis, “labor has seldom made any progress in legislative or other matters during such depressions.”[17]

Compounding the situation were divisions within labor that prevented Illinois workers from realizing their full potential. Many Illinois unions were not contributing members of the American Federation of Labor, and even more were not members of the Illinois State Federation of Labor. John Walker wrote in an open report to AFL President William Green regarding pro-labor legislations: “If all the local unions in Illinois belonging to the international organizations affiliated with the American Federation of Labor had been members of the Illinois State Federation of Labor, paying their taxes to it and working unitedly in it for our program, there would have been no question about our putting it through in its entirety.”[18]

Streator’s Open Shop Fallout

Though Glenn was gone, his impact was keenly felt in Reuben’s Streator. The legacy of the devastating Open Shop vs. Closed Shop fight left the town a different place. Reuben argued that the evisceration of local unions left workers unprotected and exposed to lower wages, unable to afford quality products from local merchants. As a result, the worker with weaker buying power preferred discount stores and mail-order catalogues, which supplanted local merchants. Reuben spoke to the issue:

Seven years ago the open shop association of Streator, Illinois began its drive to destroy the labor movement and reduce wages in this community. Fourteen hundred men and women were locked out and more destitution, misery and suffering was caused by this short-sighted policy of employers, business and professional men (who joined them) than was experienced here as a result of the World War. In their frenzy to reduce wages many strangers were imported, farmers and urbanites living in villages within a radius of fifty miles of Streator were brought into the open-shop plants to take the places of union workmen.

Seven labor unions were destroyed—but twenty-nine chain stores are now occupying buildings in this city that formerly housed merchants who enjoyed a prosperous business when trade agreements were in operation in the open-shop plants. Most of the strangers who came here were mail order customers before they arrived and low wages made it impossible for them to buy quality groceries and merchandise. Whipped by necessity to buy where they could get what they needed the cheapest, merchant after merchant went out of business and chain stores appear everywhere today in the business district. Probably no illustration can be found anywhere of complete vindication of organized labor’s defense of high wages than in Streator. The salvation of business prosperity rests on union wages. Legitimate merchants selling quality goods can exist only in communities where high wages are paid.[19]

With the legacy of the Open Shop vs. Closed Shop battle lingering and the Old Age Pension bill stalled in the statehouse, Reuben put his shoulder into his next campaign. Amidst all the social turbulence, it was imperative that he maintain his seat in the statehouse.

The Election of 1928

The election season of 1928 began with a shocking death: Democratic House leader and 39th District Representative Lee O’Neil Browne drowned in a river near his Ottawa home.[20] The loss meant that Reuben’s race could look quite different; many of Browne’s voters were up for grabs, especially given the state’s unique three-vote/three-representative election rules. A candidate with high name recognition, even one from the opposing party, could conceivably swoop in and take a share of Browne’s vote.

One man threatened to do exactly that. Ole Benson, Reub’s old nemesis, had announced his intent to run in the Republican primary just days prior, a candidacy possibly engineered by the IMA to eliminate Reuben after their failure with Welter in 1926.[21] This wasn’t Benson’s first attempt to retake his old seat; in 1922 he actually won as an independent after failing in the Republican primary, denying Republicans one of their two traditional seats. Browne’s death gave Benson a potential advantage, particularly if some of Browne’s more conservative voters decided to switch to the Republican party. As was always the case, Reuben’s survival would be determined in the Republican primary.

Five candidates—Incumbents Soderstrom and Wylie, Ole Benson, and newcomers William Isermann and Richard Entwistle—vied for a spot on the ticket in April of 1928. Reuben hustled hard. He addressed countless congregations, chapters, and any other group willing to listen. The speech Reub gave to the Plum Elementary School Parent Teacher Group on March 15 was a prime example of how he connected with the everyday voters of his district. With a folksy wit, he touted the benefits of active, good government through real-life, tangible examples. According to the Streator Independent Times detailed account:

[Soderstrom’s] preliminary remarks also touched upon taxation, through which he surely made each taxpayer feel that he was receiving much for his yearly payment to the government. He compared the small amount of taxation, with the privileges of enjoying such advantages as paved roads and highways, bridges, parks, libraries, schools, police and fire protection and many others, to the cost of education for one child in any one branch of art, say music. The cost of a musical education would amount to at least sixty dollars a year, what the average homeowner pays in taxes with its multifarious privileges.[22]

Soderstrom was also quick to note the funding he’d brought to the district, including money for 226 miles of paved roads, the huge Shippingsport Bridge at LaSalle and Fox River Bridge at Ottawa, as well as the Starved Rock and Buffalo State Parks.[23] As the election approached, posters plastered his face across the district touting his reputation as an “Honest, Efficient, and Human” as well as a man “who has nerve enough to work and vote for things the farmer, worker, soldier, educator and progressive businessman want.”[24] Others put the challenge to his opponents, with Reuben declaring, “I defy any person to point to a single instance where my vote and voice have not been recorded on the side of the people, on the side of humanity.”[25] Reuben’s aggressive defense of labor and good government carried the day, giving Reuben a substantial primary win, with the second spot going to Wylie.

Soderstrom’s opponents didn’t give up. Unfazed, they convinced the Republican Party to field three candidates in the fall, with his old foe Ole Benson and the IMA again playing the role of spoiler. Their incumbent-unseating strategy worked, but it was Wylie who fell instead of Reub, whose status as the elder statesmen of the 39th district helped him secure a landslide victory in the general election.

THE 1929 SPRINGFIELD SESSION

Old-Age Pensions, Round Two

Jim Donnelly glared from the galleys of the statehouse as the energetic Soderstrom crossed the House floor, happily shaking hands and discussing the promise of a new session. To his chagrin, all attempts to unseat the labor legislator only seemed to make him stronger. And with a new session came a new post for the 41-year-old Soderstrom—Chairman of the House Education Committee.[26]

As soon as the 56th Illinois General Assembly of 1929 convened, Reub again introduced the Old Age Pension Bill to floor of the House.[27] All factions anticipated Reub’s persistent effort and a contentious fight immediately followed. Some anti-labor legislators rejected the idea that a Poorhouse problem even existed; as the ISFL Weekly recorded, “Representative Roy Juul denied the claim that industry men are being ‘scrapped at 45 years of age,’ and referred to the bill as dealing with ‘an alleged social problem’ on which there was no need for legislation.”[28] Other attacks were more sensational. During the roll call, Representative Igoe voted against the bill only after launching into an extended personal attack of ISFL President Walker, falsely insinuating that he had led the mob responsible for the Herrin Strip Mine Massacre of 1922.[29] Reub refrained from such tactics, saying instead that “opponents of the bill are just as human as those supporting it” and that he “would not become abusive in [my] remarks.”[30]

Once last time, Reub came to the floor and delivered an impassioned call for the bill’s passage, imploring his colleagues to act on behalf of older workers “so that in the twilight of life they may dream their dreams out by their own firesides.”[31] The speech was incredibly effective, described by the Pontiac Leader as “a splendid plea for passage of the bill as a humanitarian issue. (Soderstrom) was roundly applauded when he finished his talk.”[32] As members spoke among themselves, Reub worked the room in an attempt to garner additional votes. “Fighting what at first appeared to be a losing battle,” the Peru News-Herald noted, “Rep. RG Soderstrom, Streator steadily gained support for the measure as the roll call progressed.”[33] The entire experience closely echoed Reub’s success with the Injunction Limitation Bill, and by the time debate ended, Reub had rounded up an overwhelming number of votes, passing the legislation by a count of 84 to 49.[34] The labor press was overwhelmed by the win, calling the bill “one of the most humanitarian pieces of legislation that has ever passed the House…March 19, 1929, will be recorded as a great day in the history of Illinois.”[35]

Unfortunately, the IMA lay in waiting across the hall in the Senate. Through a series of procedural tricks and turns by Senate Judiciary Committee Chair James Barbour and others, anti-labor legislators worked in concert with Jim Donnelly and the Illinois Manufacturer’s Association to prevent the bill from receiving a fair vote. Reub and the aged, working poor he represented were forced to defer their dream yet again.[36]

Reub’s pension bill wasn’t the manufacturers’ only victim. The IMA itself noted with pride that “while 1,547 bills and resolutions were introduced in the General Assembly not a single bill seriously inimical to the manufacturing industries was enacted into law.”[37] Donnelly was quick to attribute such “success” to his organizing efforts. “The importance to industry of effective legislative organization was conspicuously demonstrated during the 56th General Assembly,” he noted in his report to IMA President Cunningham. “Nearly the entire staff of the Illinois Manufacturer’s Association has been engaged throughout the session, either on the ground at Springfield or at our headquarters office in Chicago in the arduous task of earnestly protecting or advancing the legislative interests of its membership.”[38] Donnelly singled out the defeat of Reuben’s Old Age Pension Bill, which he derided as “another pet measure of organized labor…This bill (Old Age Pension) slipped through the House, but as the result of an aggressive campaign against it, led by the Illinois Manufacturers’ Association following its passage in the House it was quickly disposed of by the Senate.”[39]

For two sessions in a row, the IMA thwarted Reuben’s Old Age Pension bill. Soderstrom had to sit with the odd reality that the bill passed both the House and the Senate, but not in the same legislative sessions.

The Coming Storm

Although Reub and his allies weren’t able to pass much in the way of pro-labor legislation in the late 1920s, they weren’t without their wins; Reuben personally secured amendments to the Workman’s Compensation Act including additional hazardous employment benefits, minimum death benefits, payment reform, and more. In education, Reub was also able to provide a minimum eight months of school, raise the requirement for obtaining work certificates for child laborers, and increase funding for public schools and State Normal (teaching) schools by over 25%—advances made possible by his appointment as Chair of the House Education Committee. Labor was also twice able to amend the Mother’s Pension Law, providing additional funds to widowed women who lost husbands in work-related accidents. The 1927 legislature additionally passed improvements to public employee pensions, an amendment to the Educational Distributive fund allowing money to be spent according to need, and a Wage Guarantee bill making shareholders personally liable for two weeks unpaid labor. Labor also stopped a State Military Police bill and filed opposition to a bill promoting sterilization of criminals.[40]

These minor successes paled in comparison to their defeats, however. The Women’s Eight-Hour Bill and the One Day Rest in Seven Bill both failed to pass. Attempts to enact laws ending “Yellow Dog” contracts, which prevented signees from joining (or even talking to) a union also failed. These sessions represented modest wins, but no major victories for labor; and unfortunately, the worst was yet to come.

With the completion of the 1929 legislative season, Reuben returned to his life as a linotype operator, rolling up the sleeves of his dress shirt to set type in the hot press room. As the end of the year approached, he looked forward to a year of family and friends, free from many of the struggles and frustrations of Springfield. As he read the wire reports from the East coast, however, Reub began to see troubling trends. In the final hours of trading on Thursday, Oct. 23, stock prices took a precipitous dive. The following day the prices plunged even further. Despite assurances from President Hoover that “the fundamental business of the country…is on a sound and prosperous basis,” the opening bell on Monday the 28 rang in a deepening crisis culminating in the notorious “Black Tuesday.” By November 13, the market had bottomed out, with $25 billion lost in the crash.[41]

Late fall turned to deep winter as the Vermillion River froze solid. By 1930 the world Reub knew had turned on its head, and soon he would be called to help stem the crisis in the role of a lifetime.

* * *