Progressive Party (United States, 1912)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Progressive Party
Chairman Theodore Roosevelt
Founded 1912 (1912)
Dissolved 1916 (1916)
Split from Republican Party
Headquarters Washington, D.C.
Ideology New Nationalism
Political position Center-left
International affiliation None
Colors      Light green
National Progressive Convention, 1912, in the Chicago Coliseum

The Progressive Party of 1912 was an American third party. It was formed by former President Theodore Roosevelt, after he lost the nomination of the Republican Party to his former protégé, President William Howard Taft, who had since become his political adversary. The new party was known for taking advanced positions on progressive reforms, and attracting some leading reformers. Roosevelt did not win the presidential election and beset by factionalism and failure to win many offices, the party went into rapid decline by 1914. In 1916, Roosevelt abandoned the party and told his supporters to vote for the Republican Party, effectively ending the Progressive Party.

The Progressive party was nicknamed the "Bull Moose Party" after journalists quoted Roosevelt saying that he felt "fit as a bull moose" shortly after the new party was formed.[1]

Birth of a new party[edit]

Theodore Roosevelt was the founder of the Bull Moose Progressive Party and thus is often associated with the party.

Roosevelt left office in 1909. He had selected Taft, his Secretary of War, to succeed him as presidential candidate, and Taft easily won the 1908 presidential election. Roosevelt became disappointed by Taft's increasingly conservative policies. Taft upset Roosevelt when he used the Sherman Anti-Trust Act to sue U.S. Steel for an action that President Roosevelt had explicitly approved.[2] They became openly hostile, and Roosevelt decided to seek the presidency.

Roosevelt entered the campaign late, as Taft was already being challenged by progressive leader Senator Robert La Follette of Wisconsin. Most of La Follette's supporters switched to Roosevelt, leaving the Wisconsin Senator embittered.

Nine of the states where progressive elements were strongest had set up preference primaries, which Roosevelt won. But Taft had worked far harder than Roosevelt to control the Republican Party's organizational operations and the mechanism for choosing its presidential nominee, the 1912 Republican National Convention. For example, he bought up the votes of delegates from the southern states, copying the technique Roosevelt himself used in 1904. The Republican national convention rejected Roosevelt's protests. Roosevelt and his supporters walked out, and the convention re-nominated Taft. The next day, Roosevelt supporters met to form a new political party of their own. California governor Hiram Johnson became its chairman, and a new convention was scheduled for August. Most of the funding came from wealthy sponsors, magazine publisher Frank A. Munsey provided $135,000; George W. Perkins, a director of U.S. Steel and chairman of the International Harvester Company, gave $130,000 and became its executive secretary. Roosevelt's family gave $77,500 and others gave $164,000. The total was nearly $600,000, far less than the major parties.[3][4]

The new party had serious structural defects. Since it insisted on running complete tickets against the regular Republican ticket in most states, few Republican politicians were willing to support it. The exception was California, where the progressive element took control of the Republican Party and Taft was not even on the November ballot. Only five of the 15 more progressive Republican Senators declared support for it. Republican Representatives, governors, committeemen, and the publishers and editors of Republican-leaning newspapers showed comparable reluctance. Many of Roosevelt's closest political allies supported Taft, including his son-in-law, Nicholas Longworth (though Roosevelt's daughter Alice stuck with her father, causing a permanent chill in her marriage). For men like Longworth, expecting a future of his own in Republican politics, bolting the party would have seemed tantamount to career suicide.

However, many independent reformers still signed up.

The Progressive convention and platform[edit]

Despite these obstacles, the August convention opened with great enthusiasm. Over 2,000 delegates attended, including many women. In 1912, neither Taft nor Wilson endorsed women's suffrage on the national level.[5] The notable suffragist and social worker Jane Addams gave a seconding speech for Roosevelt's nomination. However, Roosevelt insisted on excluding black Republicans from the South (whom he regarded as a corrupt and ineffective element).[6] Yet he alienated white southern supporters on the eve of the election by publicly dining with black people at a Rhode Island hotel.[7][8]

Roosevelt was nominated by acclamation, with Johnson as his running mate.

The main work of the convention was the platform, which set forth the new party's appeal to the voters. It included a broad range of social and political reforms long advocated by progressives. It spoke with near-religious fervor, and the candidate himself promised, "Our cause is based on the eternal principle of righteousness; and even though we, who now lead may for the time fail, in the end the cause itself shall triumph."[9]

16-page campaign booklet with the platform of the new Progressive Party

The platform's main theme was reversing the domination of politics by business interests, which allegedly controlled the Republican and Democratic parties, alike. The platform asserted that:

To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.[10]

To that end, the platform called for:

In the social sphere the platform called for:

The political reforms proposed included:

The platform also urged states to adopt measures for "direct democracy", including:

  • The recall election (citizens may remove an elected official before the end of his term)
  • The referendum (citizens may decide on a law by popular vote)
  • The initiative (citizens may propose a law by petition and enact it by popular vote)
  • Judicial recall (when a court declares a law unconstitutional, the citizens may override that ruling by popular vote).[11]

Besides these measures, the platform called for reductions in the tariff, and limitations on naval armaments by international agreement.

The biggest controversy at the convention was over the platform section dealing with trusts and monopolies. The convention approved a strong "trust-busting" plank, but Perkins had it replaced with language that spoke only of "strong National regulation" and "permanent active [Federal] supervision" of major corporations. This retreat shocked reformers like Pinchot, who blamed it on Perkins. The result was a deep split in the new party that was never resolved.[12]

In general the platform expressed Roosevelt's "New Nationalism", an extension of his earlier philosophy of the Square Deal. He called for new restraints on the power of federal and state judges along with a strong executive to regulate industry, protect the working classes, and carry on great national projects. This New Nationalism was paternalistic, in direct contrast to Wilson's individualistic philosophy of "New Freedom". However, once elected, Wilson's actual program resembled Roosevelt's ideas, apart from the notion of reining in judges.[13]

Roosevelt also favored a vigorous foreign policy, including strong military power. Though the platform called for limiting naval armaments, it also recommended the construction of two new battleships per year, much to the distress of outright pacifists such as Jane Addams.[14]



Roosevelt mixing spicy ingredients in his speeches in this 1912 editorial cartoon by Karl K. Knecht (1883–1972) in the Evansville Courier
Roosevelt and Johnson after nomination

Roosevelt ran a vigorous campaign, but the campaign was short of money, as the business interests which had supported Roosevelt in 1904 either backed the other candidates or stayed neutral. Roosevelt was also handicapped because he had already served nearly two full terms as President, and thus was challenging the unwritten "no third term" rule.

In the end Roosevelt fell far short of winning. He drew 4.1 million votes—27%, well behind Wilson's 42% but ahead of Taft's 23%. (6% went to Socialist Eugene Debs.) He received 88 electoral votes, compared to 435 for Wilson and 8 for Taft.[15] This was nonetheless the best showing by any third party since the modern two-party system was established in 1864. Roosevelt was the only third-party candidate to outpoll a candidate of an established party.

Pro-Roosevelt cartoon contrasts the Republican Party bosses in back row and Progressive party reformers in front

Many historians have concluded that the Republican split was essential to allow Wilson to win the presidency. Others argue that even without the split, Wilson would have won (as he did in 1916).

In addition to Roosevelt's presidential campaign, hundreds of other candidates sought office as Progressives in 1912.

Twenty-one ran for governor. Over 200 ran for U.S. Representative (the exact number is not clear because there were many Republican-Progressive fusion candidacies, and some candidates ran with the labels of ad hoc groups such as "Bull Moose Republicans" or (in Pennsylvania) the "Washington Party".

On October 14, 1912, Theodore Roosevelt was shot in the chest in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and still delivered his 90-minute presidential campaign speech as planned. The would-be assassin, John Flammang Schrank, claimed the ghost of William McKinley had appeared to him in a dream and ordered him to avenge his death by killing Roosevelt. Had it not been for the 50-page speech and steel eyeglass case Roosevelt was carrying in his jacket, the bullet would have gone deeper into his chest and penetrated his lung. When asked if the shooting would affect his election campaign, he said to the reporter "I'm fit as a bull moose", which inspired the party's emblem.[16]

In California, the state Republican party was controlled by governor and Roosevelt ally Hiram Johnson, the Vice-Presidential nominee, so progressives there stayed with the Republican label (with one exception).

Most of the Progressive candidates were in New York, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Massachusetts. Only a few were in the South.

The lesser Progressive candidates generally got between 10% and 30% of the vote. Nine Progressives were elected to the House; none won governorships.[17]

Some historians speculate that if the Progressive Party had run only the Roosevelt presidential ticket, it might have attracted many more Republicans willing to split their ballot. But the progressive movement was strongest at the state level, and, so the new party had fielded candidates for governor and state legislature. In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the local Republican boss, at odds with state party leaders, joined Roosevelt's cause.

In spite of this, very few Progressives were elected to local offices: about 250. The Democrats gained many state legislature seats, which gave them 10 additional U.S. Senate seats; they also gained 63 U.S. House seats.


Despite the failure of 1912, the Progressive Party did not disappear at once. One hundred thirty eight candidates, including women,[18] ran for the U.S. House as Progressives in 1914, and 5 were elected. However, almost half the candidates failed to get more than 10% of the vote.[19]

Hiram Johnson was denied renomination for Governor as a Republican; he ran as a Progressive and was re-elected. Seven other Progressives ran for governor; none got more than 16%.[20] Some state parties remained fairly strong. In Washington, Progressives won a third of the seats in the Washington State Legislature.


Louisiana businessman John M. Parker ran for governor as a Progressive early in the year. (The Republican Party was deeply unpopular in Louisiana.) Parker got a respectable 37% of the vote. He was the only Progressive to run for governor that year.[21]

Later that year, the party held its second national convention, in conjunction with the Republican national convention. This was to facilitate a possible reconciliation. Five delegates from each convention met to negotiate. The Progressives wanted reunification with Roosevelt as nominee, which the Republicans adamantly opposed. Meanwhile, Charles Evans Hughes, a moderate progressive, became the front-runner at the Republican convention. He had been on the Supreme Court in 1912 and thus was completely neutral on the bitter debates that year. The Progressives suggested Hughes as a compromise candidate. Then Roosevelt sent a message proposing conservative Senator Henry Cabot Lodge. The shocked Progressives immediately nominated Roosevelt again, with Parker as the Vice Presidential nominee. Roosevelt refused to accept the nomination and endorsed Hughes, who was immediately approved by the Republican convention.[22]

The remnants of the national Progressive party promptly disintegrated. Most Progressives reverted to the Republican Party, including Roosevelt, who stumped for Hughes, and Hiram Johnson, who was elected to the Senate as a Republican. Some leaders, such as Harold Ickes of Chicago, supported Wilson.


All the remaining "Progressives" in Congress rejoined the Republican Party, except Whitmell Martin, who became a Democrat. No candidates ran as Progressives for governor, Senator, or Representative.

Later years[edit]

Robert M. La Follette, Sr. broke bitterly with Roosevelt in 1912, and ran for President on his own ticket, the 1924 Progressive Party, during the 1924 presidential election.

From 1916 to 1932 the Taft wing controlled the Republican Party and refused to nominate any prominent 1912 Progressives to the Republican national ticket. Finally, Frank Knox was nominated for Vice President in 1936.

The relative domination of the Republican Party by conservatives left many former Progressives with no real affiliation until the 1930s, when most joined the New Deal Democratic Party coalition of President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Office holders from the Progressive Party[edit]

Position Name State Dates held office
Representative James W. Bryan Washington 1913–1915
Governor Joseph M. Carey Wyoming 1911-1912 as a Republican, 1912-1915 as a Progressive
Representative Walter M. Chandler New York 1913–1919
Representative Ira Clifton Copley Illinois 1915–1917 as a Progressive
Representative John Elston California 1915–1917 as a Progressive, 1917–1921 as a Republican
Lieutenant Governor John Morton Eshleman California 1915–1917
Representative Jacob Falconer Washington 1913–1915
Representative William H. Hinebaugh Illinois 1913–1915
Representative Willis J. Hulings Pennsylvania 1913–1915
Governor Hiram Johnson California 1911–1917
Representative Melville Clyde Kelly Pennsylvania 1917–1919 as a Progressive, 1919–1935 as a Republican
Representative William MacDonald Michigan 1913–1915
Representative Whitmell Martin Louisiana 1915–1919 as a Progressive, 1919–1929 as a Democrat
Senator Miles Poindexter Washington 1913–1915
Representative William Stephens California 1913–1917
Representative Henry Wilson Temple Pennsylvania 1913–1915
Representative Roy Woodruff Michigan 1913–1915
State Treasurer Homer D. Call New York 1914
Mayor Louis Will Syracuse, New York 1914–1916
Representative Parley P. Christensen Utah 1914–1916

See also[edit]


  1. ^ Morris, Edmund. Colonel Roosevelt. New York: Random House Trade Paperbacks. p. 215. 
  2. ^ Jean Strouse (2012). Morgan: American Financier. Random House. p. 1413. 
  3. ^ John A. Garraty, Right Hand Man: The Life of George W. Perkins (1960)
  4. ^ James Chace (2009). 1912: Wilson, Roosevelt, Taft and Debs -The Election that Changed the Country. Simon and Schuster. p. 250. 
  5. ^ "Bull Moose years of Theodore Roosevelt by Theodore Roosevelt Association". Retrieved 2012-01-06. 
  6. ^ George E. Mowry, "The South and the Progressive Lily White Party of 1912". Journal of Southern History 6#2 (1940): 237–247. JSTOR 2191208.
  7. ^ Baum, B.; Harris, D. (2009). Racially Writing the Republic: Racists, Race Rebels, and Transformations of American Identity. Durham: Duke University Press. p. 188. ISBN 9780822344353. 
  8. ^ Paul D. Casdorph, Republicans, Negroes, and Progressives in the South, 1912-1916 (1981).
  9. ^ Melanie Gustafson (2001). Women and the Republican Party, 1854–1924. p. 117. 
  10. ^ Patricia OToole (2006-06-25). ""The War of 1912," ''Time'' in partnership with CNN, Jun. 25, 2006". Retrieved 2012-01-06. 
  11. ^ Gary Murphy, "'Mr. Roosevelt is Guilty': Theodore Roosevelt and the Crusade for Constitutionalism, 1910–1912". Journal of American Studies 36#3 (2002): 441-457.
  12. ^ William Kolasky, "The Election of 1912: A Pivotal Moment in Antitrust History". Antitrust 25 (2010): 82+
  13. ^ Robert Alexander Kraig, "The 1912 Election and the Rhetorical Foundations of the Liberal State". Rhetoric and Public Affairs (2000): 363–395. JSTOR 41940243.
  14. ^ Gustafson (2001). Women and the Republican Party, 1854-1924. p. 117. 
  15. ^ Congressional Quarterly's Guide to U. S. elections. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc. 1985. pp. 295, 348. 
  16. ^
  17. ^ Congressional Quarterly's Guide to U.S. elections (1985), pp. 489–535, 873–879
  18. ^ "A Kansas Woman Runs for Congress". The Independent. Jul 13, 1914. Retrieved August 14, 2012. 
  19. ^ Congressional Quarterly's Guide to U. S. elections (1985), pp. 880–885
  20. ^ Congressional Quarterly's Guide to U. S. elections (1985), pp. 489–535
  21. ^ Congressional Quarterly's Guide to U. S. elections (1985), p. 503
  22. ^ Fred L. Israel, "Bainbridge Colby and the Progressive Party, 1914–1916". New York History 40.1 (1959): 33–46. JSTOR 23153527.

Further reading[edit]

  • Broderick, Francis L. Progressivism at risk: Electing a President in 1912 (Praeger, 1989).
  • Chace, James. 1912: Wilson, Roosevelt, Taft & Debs—the Election That Changed the Country (2004).
  • Cowan, Geoffrey. Let the People Rule: Theodore Roosevelt and the Birth of the Presidential Primary (2016).
  • Delahaye, Claire. "The New Nationalism and Progressive Issues: The Break with Taft and the 1912 Campaign," in Serge Ricard, ed., A Companion to Theodore Roosevelt (2011) pp. 452–467. online
  • DeWitt, Benjamin P. The Progressive Movement: A Non-Partisan, Comprehensive Discussion of Current Tendencies in American Politics (1915).
  • Flehinger, Brett. The 1912 Election and the Power of Progressivism: A Brief History with Documents (Bedford/St. Martin's, 2003).
  • Gable, John A. The Bullmoose Years: Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressive Party. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, 1978.
  • Gould, Lewis L. Four hats in the ring: The 1912 election and the birth of modern American politics (Univ Pr of Kansas, 2008).
  • Jensen, Richard. "Theodore Roosevelt" in Encyclopedia of Third Parties (ME Sharpe, 2000). pp. 702–707.
  • Kraig, Robert Alexander. "The 1912 Election and the Rhetorical Foundations of the Liberal State". Rhetoric and Public Affairs (2000): 363–395. JSTOR 41940243.
  • Milkis, Sidney M., and Daniel J. Tichenor. "'Direct Democracy' and Social Justice: The Progressive Party Campaign of 1912". Studies in American Political Development 8#2 (1994): 282–340.
  • Milkis, Sidney M. Theodore Roosevelt, the Progressive Party, and the Transformation of American Democracy. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 2009.
  • Mowry, George E. The Era of Theodore Roosevelt and the Birth of Modern America. New York: Harper and Row, 1962.
  • Painter, Carl, "The Progressive Party In Indiana", Indiana Magazine of History, vol. 16, no. 3 (Sept. 1920), pp. 173–283. JSTOR 27785944.
  • Pinchot, Amos. What's the Matter with America: The Meaning of the Progressive Movement and the Rise of the New Party. n.c.: Amos Pinchot, 1912.
  • Pinchot, Amos. History of the Progressive Party, 1912–1916. Introduction by Helene Maxwell Hooker. (New York University Press, 1958).
  • Roosevelt, Theodore. Bull Moose on the Stump: The 1912 Campaign Speeches of Theodore Roosevelt Ed. Lewis L. Gould. (UP of Kansas, 2008).
  • Selmi, Patrick. "Jane Addams and the Progressive Party Campaign for President in 1912". Journal of Progressive Human Services 22.2 (2011): 160–190.

External links[edit]