Hubbry Logo
Public Works AdministrationPublic Works AdministrationMain
Open search
Public Works Administration
Community hub
Public Works Administration
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Public Works Administration
Public Works Administration
Public Works Administration
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works project plaque in the Pine City, Minnesota, City Hall
Public Works Administration Project and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers constructing Bonneville Dam in Oregon

The Public Works Administration (PWA), part of the New Deal of 1933, was a large-scale public works construction agency in the United States headed by Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes. It was created by the National Industrial Recovery Act in June 1933 in response to the Great Depression. It built large-scale public works such as dams, bridges, hospitals, and schools. Its goals were to spend $3.3 billion in the first year, and $6 billion in all, to supply employment, stabilize buying power, and help revive the economy. Most of the spending came in two waves, one in 1933–1935 and another in 1938. Originally called the Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works, it was renamed the Public Works Administration in 1935 and shut down in 1944.[1]

The PWA spent over $7 billion on contracts with private construction firms that did the actual work. It created an infrastructure that generated national and local pride in the 1930s and is still vital nine decades later. The PWA was much less controversial than its rival agency, the Works Progress Administration (WPA), headed by Harry Hopkins, which focused on smaller projects and hired unemployed unskilled workers.[2]

Origins

[edit]

The Administration created the PWA in an attempt to help the U.S.'s economy recover after the Great Depression. Its major objective was to reduce unemployment, which was up to 24% of the work force. Furthermore, the PWA also aimed at increasing purchase power by constructing new public buildings and roads. Frances Perkins had first suggested a federally financed public works program, and the idea received considerable support from Harold L. Ickes, James Farley, and Henry Wallace. After having scaled back the initial cost of the PWA, Franklin Delano Roosevelt agreed to include the PWA as part of his New Deal proposals in the "Hundred Days" of spring 1933.

Projects

[edit]
PWA-funded construction site in Washington, DC, in 1933

The PWA headquarters in Washington planned projects, which were built by private construction companies hiring workers on the open market. Unlike the WPA, it did not hire the unemployed directly. More than any other New Deal program, the PWA epitomized the progressive notion of "priming the pump" to encourage economic recovery. Between July 1933 and March 1939, the PWA funded and administered the construction of more than 34,000 projects including airports, large electricity-generating dams, major warships for the Navy, and bridges and 70 percent of the new schools and a third of the hospitals built in 1933–1939.

Streets and highways were the most common PWA projects, as 11,428 road projects, or 33 percent of all PWA projects, accounting for over 15 percent of its total budget. School buildings, 7,488 in all, came in second at 14 percent of spending. PWA functioned chiefly by making allotments to the various federal agencies; making loans and grants to state and other public bodies; and making loans without grants (for a brief time) to the railroads. For example, it provided funds for the Indian Division of the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) to build roads, bridges, and other public works on and near Indian reservations.

Fort Peck Dam in Montana; spillway construction. One of the largest dams in the world, it continues to generate electricity. In July 1936, its construction employed 10,500 workers.

The PWA became, with its "multiplier-effect" and a first two-year budget of $3.3 billion (compared to the entire GDP of $60 billion), the driving force of America's biggest construction effort up to that date. By June 1934, the agency had distributed its entire fund to 13,266 federal projects and 2,407 non-federal projects. For every worker on a PWA project, almost two additional workers were employed indirectly. The PWA accomplished the electrification of rural America, the building of canals, tunnels, bridges, highways, streets, sewage systems, and housing areas, as well as hospitals, schools, and universities; every year, it consumed roughly half of the concrete and a third of the steel of the entire nation.[3] The PWA also electrified the Pennsylvania Railroad between New York City and Washington, DC.[4] At the local level, it built courthouses, schools, hospitals, and other public facilities that remain in use in the 21st century.[5]

List of most notable PWA projects

[edit]
PWA Project and Army Corps of Engineers Lock & Dam #10 construction
PWA Project and Army Corps of Engineers Lock & Dam #16 construction

Water/wastewater

[edit]
  • Detroit Sewage Disposal Project

Bridges

[edit]

Dams

[edit]

Airports

[edit]

Housing

[edit]
Williamsburg Houses as of April, 2022

The PWA was supposed to be the centerpiece of the New Deal's drive to build public housing for the urban poor. Public housing was a new concept in the United States, tested for the first time during the New Deal. With this in mind the PWA constructed a total of 52 housing communities for a total of 29,000 units, which was less than what many supporters of public housing had hoped for. The first public housing community built by PWA was the whites-only Techwood Homes in Atlanta, Georgia.[12] The PWA also built one of the first public housing projects in New York City, the Williamsburg Houses in Brooklyn.

Criticism

[edit]

The PWA spent over $6 billion but did not succeed in returning the level of industrial activity to pre-Depression levels.[13][14] Though successful in many aspects, it has been acknowledged that the PWA's objective of constructing a substantial number of quality, affordable housing units was a major failure.[13][14] Some have argued that because Roosevelt was opposed to deficit spending, there was not enough money spent to help the PWA achieve its housing goals.[13][14]

Reeves (1973) argues that Roosevelt's competitive theory of administration proved to be inefficient and produced delays. The competition over the size of expenditure, the selection of the administrator, and the appointment of staff at the state level, led to delays and the ultimate failure of PWA as a recovery instrument. As director of the budget, Lewis Douglas overrode the views of leading senators in reducing appropriations to $3.5 billion and in transferring much of that money to other agencies instead of their own specific appropriations. The cautious and penurious Ickes won out over the more imaginative Hugh S. Johnson as chief of public works administration. Political competition between rival Democratic state organizations and between Democrats and Progressive Republicans led to delays in implementing PWA efforts on the local level. Ickes instituted quotas for hiring skilled and unskilled black people in construction financed through the PWA. Resistance from employers and unions was partially overcome by negotiations and implied sanctions. Although results were ambiguous, the plan helped provide African Americans with employment, especially among unskilled workers.[15]

Termination

[edit]
Image of Yorktown and Enterprise Aircraft carriers

When Roosevelt moved industry toward World War II production, the PWA was abolished and its functions were transferred to the Federal Works Agency in June 1943.[16][17] The PWA played an indirect hand in the war by helping fund the construction of two aircraft carriers, Yorktown and Enterprise. Both of these ships played a significant role in the victory in Midway when they sank four Japanese aircraft carriers.[18] The PWA also built four cruisers, four heavy destroyers, light destroyers, submarines, planes, engines, and even instruments for these vessels.[18] The PWA helped get the US get ready to fight in World War II, giving the US an advantage with fresh boats, planes, and equipment.

Legacy

[edit]
Image of Triborough Bridge in February, 2022.

The PWA was responsible for the construction of about 34,000 buildings, bridges, and homes many of which are still in use today.[19] Among these is one of the most recognizable bridges in the U.S., the Triborough Bridge, which was renamed the Robert F. Kennedy Bridge.[20] PWA funded workers to construct the San Francisco Mint, which cost $1,072,254 to build,[21] as well as the Keys Overseas Highway in Florida. Although this highway was already built prior to the PWA's existence, PWA funding made the road usable again. The 1935 Labor Day hurricane had heavily damaged the highway, and the Florida East Coast Railway was only able to repair the bridge after the PWA came in and offered assistance.[22] A large majority of PWA projects are still in use today because of one big reason: the PWA allowed the state and local governments to pick what they wanted to have built or repaired, where they wanted the project as well as who they wanted to build it. Such freedom gave local governments the ability to select a truly useful building that could be used for years down the line.[23]

Contrast with WPA

[edit]

The PWA should not be confused with its great rival, the Works Progress Administration (WPA), though both were part of the New Deal. The WPA, headed by Harry Hopkins, engaged in smaller projects in close cooperation with local governments—such as building city halls, sewers, or sidewalks. The PWA projects were much larger in scope, such as giant dams. The WPA hired only people on relief who were paid directly by the federal government, while in contrast, the PWA gave contracts to private firms that hired workers for projects on the private sector job market. The WPA also had youth programs (the National Youth Administration), projects for women, and art projects that the PWA did not have.[24]

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^ "Records of the Public Works Administration". National Archives. August 15, 2016.
  2. ^ Smith, Jason Scott (2006). Building New Deal Liberalism: The Political Economy of Public Works, 1933–1956. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521139939.
  3. ^ George McJimsey, The Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (2000) "PWA (1939)", p 221;
  4. ^ "P.R.R. WILL SPEND $77,000,000 AT ONCE; Atterbury Outlines Projects Under PWA Loan Giving Year's Work to 25,000. TO EXTEND ELECTRIC LINE Sees Buying Power Restored and Industry Stimulated by Wide Building Program", The New York Times, January 31, 1934, retrieved August 8, 2012
  5. ^ Lowry, Charles B. (April 1974). "The PWA in Tampa: A Case Study". The Florida Historical Quarterly. 52 (4). Florida Historical Society: 363–380. JSTOR 30145930.
  6. ^ ""New Deal Work Programs in Central Texas"". March 26, 2015. Retrieved December 13, 2018.
  7. ^ "Pensacola Dam - Grand Lake OK - Living New Deal". March 26, 2015. Archived from the original on March 26, 2015. Retrieved September 26, 2017.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  8. ^ "Tom Miller Dam - Austin TX - Living New Deal". March 26, 2015. Archived from the original on March 26, 2015. Retrieved September 26, 2017.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  9. ^ "Upper Mississippi River Dam - Winona MN - Living New Deal". March 26, 2015. Archived from the original on March 26, 2015. Retrieved September 26, 2017.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  10. ^ "Rivers of Life: History of Transportation, part 3". Cgee.hamline.edu. Archived from the original on May 19, 2016. Retrieved December 9, 2016.
  11. ^ a b c d e f g h i j "New Deal Category: Airports". Living New Deal. Retrieved May 3, 2022.
  12. ^ Perry-Brown, Nena (May 29, 2020). "A brew of advocacy and agency concocted the US public housing system that we know today". ggwash.org. Retrieved April 27, 2022.
  13. ^ a b c Roosevelt, Franklin Delano (1985). Graham, Otis L.; Wander, Meghan Robinson (eds.). Franklin D. Roosevelt: His Life and Times : an Encyclopedic View. G.K. Hall. pp. 336–337. ISBN 9780816186679.
  14. ^ a b c Leuchtenburg, William E. (1963). Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal: 1932-1940. Harper Perennial. pp. 133–134. ISBN 9780061836961. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
  15. ^ Kruman, Marc W. (1975). "Quotas for blacks: The public works administration and the black construction worker". Labor History. 16 (1): 37–51. doi:10.1080/00236567508584321.
  16. ^ Roosevelt, Franklin D. (June 30, 1943). Woolley, John T.; Peters, Gerhard (eds.). "Executive Order 9357 - Transferring the Functions of the Public Works Administration to the Federal Works Agency". The American Presidency Project. University of California.
  17. ^ Olson, James Stuart (2001). Historical Dictionary of the Great Depression, 1929-1940. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 9780313306181.
  18. ^ a b Thompson, Lisa (November 18, 2016). "Public Works Administration (PWA), 1933-1943". The Living New Deal. Retrieved May 11, 2022.
  19. ^ "Public Works Administration (PWA), 1933-1943". Living New Deal. Retrieved April 27, 2022.
  20. ^ "Public Works Administration (PWA), 1933-1943". Living New Deal. Retrieved April 26, 2022.
  21. ^ "United States Mint - San Francisco CA". Living New Deal. Retrieved April 26, 2022.
  22. ^ "Overseas Highway - Florida Keys FL". Living New Deal. November 2, 2014. Retrieved April 27, 2022.
  23. ^ "Public Works Administration (PWA), 1933-1943". Living New Deal. Retrieved April 27, 2022.
  24. ^ Taylor, Nick (2009). American-made: The Enduring Legacy of the WPA : when FDR Put the Nation to Work. Bantam Books. ISBN 9780553381320.

General and cited sources

[edit]
  • Bernstein, Irving Bernstein, A caring society : the New Deal, the worker, and the Great Depression: A history of the American worker, 1933-1941 (1985) online
  • Clarke, Jeanne Nienaber (1996). Roosevelt's Warrior: Harold L. Ickes and the New Deal. Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 9780801850943.
  • Reeves, William D. "PWA and Competition Administration in the New Deal". Journal of American History 60#2: 357–372.
  • Smith, Jason Scott. Building New Deal Liberalism: The Political Economy of Public Works, 1933-1956 (Cambridge University Press, 2005); the main study of PWA; online review of this book

Primary sources

[edit]
  • Ickes, Harold L. (2018). Back to Work: The Story of Pwa. Creative Media Partners, LLC. ISBN 9780344562273.
  • Ickes, Harold L. (May 1935). "The Place of Housing in National Rehabilitation". The Journal of Land & Public Utility. 11 (2). University of Wisconsin Press: 109–116. doi:10.2307/3158654. JSTOR 3158654.
  • America Builds: The Record of P.W.A. Public Works Administration. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. 1939. ISBN 9781978016040. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help); |work= ignored (help)
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Public Works Administration

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Public Works Administration (PWA) was a United States federal agency established in June 1933 under Title II of the National Industrial Recovery Act as part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal response to the Great Depression, authorizing $3.3 billion in expenditures to finance public infrastructure projects intended to generate employment and revive heavy industry through construction activities. Administered by Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes until its termination in 1939, the PWA provided grants and loans primarily to state and local governments and private firms for large-scale endeavors rather than direct relief to individuals, emphasizing durable capital investments over immediate work relief. Key achievements encompassed thousands of projects, including major dams such as Fort Peck in Montana and Bonneville on the Columbia River, which enhanced hydroelectric power and navigation; urban bridges like New York City's Triborough Bridge; public housing developments; and naval vessels including the aircraft carrier USS Yorktown, collectively contributing to expanded infrastructure capacity that supported postwar economic expansion. Despite these tangible outputs, the program's bureaucratic caution under Ickes delayed project startups and limited short-term job creation to around 650,000 at its peak—far below direct-employment initiatives like the Works Progress Administration—and drew criticism for inefficiency and for operating within the broader New Deal framework of wage and price controls that empirical analyses suggest distorted labor markets, elevated production costs, and thereby prolonged the Depression relative to potential freer-market adjustments until wartime spending intervened.

Establishment and Objectives

Legislative Creation and Context

The Public Works Administration (PWA) was established as Title II of the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), signed into law by President on June 16, 1933. This legislation authorized the allocation of $3.3 billion in federal funds for grants and loans to states, municipalities, and qualified private agencies to finance large-scale projects aimed at alleviating . The PWA's creation formed part of the broader NIRA framework, which combined industrial recovery measures under Title I—such as industry codes for fair competition—with direct public spending initiatives to address . Enacted amid the depths of the , which had gripped the since the of October 1929, the PWA responded to acute economic distress characterized by bank failures, , and rates exceeding 25% by early 1933. Roosevelt, inaugurated on March 4, 1933, prioritized rapid federal action through the New Deal's "" legislative push to restore confidence, stabilize banking, and inject demand into the economy via deficit-financed infrastructure investment, diverging from prior reliance on balanced budgets and recovery. Proponents argued that would not only create jobs but also yield enduring assets like roads and , though critics at the time, including some economists, questioned the efficiency of government-led spending amid fears of and displacement of private investment. Administration of the PWA was assigned to , whom Roosevelt had appointed Secretary of the Interior on March 4, 1933, tasking him with overseeing project selection to prioritize noncompetitive bidding and long-term utility over hasty relief. Ickes implemented stringent oversight to curb graft, reflecting Roosevelt's intent to balance expansionary with fiscal prudence, though the program's scale—eventually expending over $6 billion by —drew scrutiny for administrative delays and political favoritism in allocations. The NIRA's passage followed intense congressional debate, passing the 325–56 and the 56–17, underscoring bipartisan support for interventionist measures amid pervasive hardship, despite constitutional concerns that later led to the Supreme Court's invalidation of NIRA's Title I in 1935.

Stated Goals and Economic Theory

The Public Works Administration (PWA) was established under Title II of the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), enacted on , 1933, with the explicit purpose of providing for the construction, reconstruction, alteration, and repair of useful under a federal emergency program. This included authorizing the President to appoint an administrator tasked with developing a comprehensive program of to promote , assist states and localities in meeting obligations, and contribute to national industrial recovery by stabilizing amid widespread exceeding 25% of the workforce. The act appropriated $3.3 billion initially for grants and loans to finance projects such as highways, dams, and buildings, emphasizing socially useful infrastructure over to avoid dependency. The economic theory motivating the PWA centered on "pump priming," a strategy of targeted to inject funds into a stagnant , creating jobs whose wages would circulate as expenditures, thereby stimulating private and production in a virtuous cycle. Proponents, including New Deal architects like , argued this would counter the Depression's deflationary spiral and by increasing without relying solely on , which had proven ineffective post-1929. Unlike later Keynesian formulations emphasizing sustained deficits to achieve , the PWA's approach was more experimental and balanced, as evidenced by subsequent efforts to reduce spending when recovery signs appeared, reflecting skepticism toward indefinite fiscal expansion.

Organizational Framework

Leadership and Administration

The Public Works Administration (PWA) was directed by , who served as its administrator from July 1933 until its dissolution in June 1939. Appointed by President shortly after the PWA's establishment via Title II of the National Industrial Recovery Act on June 16, 1933, Ickes concurrently held the position of Secretary of the Interior, integrating PWA operations within that department. His leadership emphasized centralized federal control over fund allocation, with Ickes personally approving major projects to ensure alignment with national priorities like infrastructure durability and economic stimulus without undue waste. Ickes administered the PWA through a bureaucratic framework that prioritized expertise and fiscal accountability, allocating approximately $4 billion in grants and loans to state, local, and private entities while directing federal agencies such as the Treasury Department for public buildings and the Army Corps of for dams. Known as "Honest Harold" for his rigorous auditing and measures—including mandatory competitive bidding and rejection of politically motivated proposals—he rejected thousands of applications deemed inefficient or speculative, favoring self-liquidating projects like toll bridges that could generate revenue. This approach contrasted with more decentralized agencies, reflecting Ickes' progressive Republican background and insistence on non-partisan, merit-based administration. Under Ickes, the PWA maintained a lean central staff focused on review and oversight rather than direct , delegating execution to recipients while enforcing standards under the National Industrial Recovery Act's codes to prevent undercutting prevailing rates. By 1935, amid tensions with other figures favoring faster spending, Ickes defended slower, quality-oriented disbursements, which averaged $1 billion annually after initial allotments of $3.3 billion in 1933–1934. His tenure ended with the PWA's merger into the Federal Works Agency in 1939, after which remaining functions were absorbed by successor programs.

Funding Mechanisms and Project Approval

The Public Works Administration (PWA) was funded primarily through an initial appropriation of $3.3 billion under Title II of the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), signed into law on June 16, 1933. This federal funding was allocated for grants and loans to state and local governments, as well as private entities such as utilities, to finance construction projects. Grants covered up to 30 percent of project costs, including labor and materials, for non-self-liquidating proposed by state and local sponsors, while loans were extended for self-liquidating initiatives expected to generate revenue for repayment, such as toll roads or power facilities. Over time, due to pressures from state and local entities, the federal share of funding increased from an average of 60.6 percent in 1933 to 74.4 percent by 1935, reflecting a shift toward greater direct federal support amid fiscal constraints at lower government levels. Project approval was centralized under PWA administrator Harold Ickes, who prioritized over expediency to minimize waste and corruption. Local governments or other sponsors submitted detailed applications, first endorsed by their governing bodies and state PWA offices, outlining project scope, costs, and expected benefits. These underwent a multi-stage federal review process, emphasizing criteria such as long-term economic utility, permanence of , avoidance of competition with private enterprise, and adherence to standards without excessive labor overhead. Self-liquidating projects required demonstrations of potential to justify loans, whereas non-self-liquidating ones, like schools or sewers, needed to prove essential public need without feasible private funding alternatives. Ickes' insistence on thorough vetting, including engineering and economic assessments, resulted in deliberate delays—often months—for approvals, approving over 34,000 projects by 1939 but rejecting many deemed inefficient or politically motivated. This approach aimed to ensure fiscal accountability, though critics noted it slowed relief efforts during acute .

Key Projects and Programs

Infrastructure Developments

The Public Works Administration (PWA) prioritized large-scale infrastructure projects that enhanced national transportation networks, water resource management, and public utilities. These initiatives, funded through grants and loans to federal, state, and local agencies, emphasized durable, self-liquidating investments such as hydroelectric dams and bridges designed to generate revenue or reduce long-term costs. Between 1933 and 1939, PWA allocations supported approximately 34,000 public works projects, many focused on civil engineering feats that addressed Depression-era deficiencies in physical capital. In water infrastructure, PWA financed major dams for flood control, irrigation, and power generation. The Bonneville Dam on the Columbia River, constructed from 1933 to 1937 with a PWA grant of $60 million, generated hydroelectricity serving the Pacific Northwest and facilitated navigation improvements. The Grand Coulee Dam, initiated in 1933 with initial PWA funding, evolved into the largest U.S. hydroelectric facility by capacity upon its 1942 completion, irrigating over 600,000 acres in Washington state. Similarly, Fort Peck Dam in Montana, started under PWA auspices in 1933, formed the world's largest earthfill dam by volume, controlling Missouri River flooding and enabling reservoir-based recreation and power. Transportation developments under PWA included bridges, tunnels, and highways that bolstered interstate connectivity. The Triborough Bridge in New York City, completed in 1936 with $26.5 million in PWA support, linked Manhattan, Queens, and the Bronx, reducing traffic congestion and spurring regional economic integration. The Lincoln Tunnel, begun in 1934 with PWA financing, provided the first vehicular crossing under the Hudson River, opening in 1937 to alleviate ferry dependency between New York and New Jersey. PWA also funded sewer systems, waterworks, and road improvements, contributing to enhanced urban sanitation and rural access, though precise mileage figures for highways remain aggregated with other New Deal efforts.
Major PWA Infrastructure ProjectsTypeLocationCompletion YearKey Impact
Bonneville DamDam/Washington1937Hydroelectric power for 11 million people initially
Grand Coulee DamDamWashington1942 (phased)Irrigation for 670,000 acres; largest U.S. power plant
Fort Peck DamDam1937 (initial)Flood control on
Triborough BridgeBridgeNew York1936Connected three boroughs, easing urban transport
Lincoln TunnelTunnelNew York/1937Sub-river vehicular link

Housing and Urban Initiatives

The Housing Division of the Public Works Administration was established in 1933 as part of the National Industrial Recovery Act to address urban decay through slum clearance and low-rent housing construction. Its primary objectives included demolishing substandard housing in blighted urban areas and building modern accommodations for low-income families, emphasizing sanitary conditions, community amenities, and employment generation during construction. These efforts represented an early federal intervention in urban housing policy, focusing on direct government-built projects rather than subsidies to private developers. From 1934 to 1937, the division sponsored the construction of approximately 21 housing projects, providing around 21,000 dwelling units across major cities. Notable examples included in Atlanta, Georgia—the nation's first federally funded development, completed in 1936 with 649 units after clearing a notorious area—and Williamsburg Houses in , New York, which offered 1,646 apartments designed with modernist architecture to serve working-class residents. Other projects, such as in and the Jane Addams Houses in , integrated green spaces, playgrounds, and cooperative elements to foster community stability amid the Great Depression's housing shortages. Urban initiatives under the PWA extended beyond mere construction to include in densely populated districts, requiring coordination with local governments for land acquisition and resident relocation, though often with limited success in rehousing displaced families. Funding came from PWA allocations, totaling over $100 million for housing by 1937, but high per-unit costs—averaging around $5,000—and debates over federal versus local control constrained expansion. These projects laid groundwork for later programs but highlighted challenges like in tenant selection and maintenance issues in federally managed properties. By 1937, authority shifted to the United States Housing Authority under the Wagner-Steagall Act, marking the end of direct PWA housing construction.

Economic Impacts

Employment and Output Effects

The Public Works Administration (PWA) generated approximately 1.7 billion man-hours of direct on project sites between mid-1933 and March 1939, equivalent to an average of 183,000 direct jobs at any given time, based on prevailing workweek limits of 30 to 40 hours. These jobs were primarily allocated through contracts to private firms and state or local governments, rather than direct federal hiring, which limited the program's reach compared to direct-relief efforts like the . Indirect employment effects added an estimated 300,000 jobs from purchases of materials such as and , yielding a total impact of around 485,000 positions, or roughly 0.9% of the U.S. labor force at the time. PWA expenditures, totaling about $6 billion by 1939, funded over 34,000 projects, including highways, bridges, , and public buildings, which enhanced the nation's capital stock and . Empirical analyses of local economic activity indicate that each additional dollar of PWA grants increased retail sales by approximately 44 cents in recipient counties (using instrumental variables to address endogeneity), suggesting a short-term multiplier of around 0.83 after for retail-to-income ratios. However, ordinary estimates yield lower effects (about 2 cents per dollar), highlighting potential crowding out of private investment or leakages to non-local suppliers. Long-term output effects stemmed from durable assets like the Triborough Bridge and , which facilitated commerce and power generation, though these benefits accrued gradually and were not immediate stimuli during the Depression's depths. Wage payments under PWA averaged 70 cents per hour (about $10.59 in dollars), with roughly $1.79 spent on materials per dollar on labor, amplifying supply-chain activity but prioritizing capital-intensive projects over labor-intensive relief. Overall program multipliers for expenditures were estimated at 1.5, though such figures depend on assumptions about fiscal leakages and displacement. The PWA's emphasis on quality and anti-corruption oversight, under administrator Harold Ickes, slowed rollout and capped employment scale, achieving less relief than anticipated amid 25% national in 1933.

Fiscal Costs and Opportunity Costs

The Public Works Administration (PWA) received an initial appropriation of $3.3 billion through Title II of the National Industrial Recovery Act, signed into law on June 16, 1933. Subsequent legislation, including the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935, provided additional authorizations, elevating total funding authority to roughly $6 billion by the agency's effective wind-down in 1939. Federal grants and direct expenditures under the PWA, which covered approximately 45% of approved project costs with the remainder financed by state, local, or private , amounted to about $4 billion in actual outlays from 1933 to 1939. These costs were predominantly financed via , as federal revenues failed to cover expanded outlays amid the ; the national debt rose from $22.5 billion at the end of fiscal year 1933 to $40.4 billion by 1939, with PWA contributing to this accumulation alongside other programs. Administrative expenses, including salaries and planning, added further fiscal burdens, though they constituted a small fraction of total spending. Opportunity costs of PWA expenditures included the diversion of scarce resources—labor, materials, and —from potential private-sector uses during a period of economic slack. Economic analyses of spending indicate partial crowding out, where federal grants stimulated local activity but reduced private retail sales and charitable contributions by 10-30 cents per dollar spent, as recipients substituted public funds for private alternatives. Infrastructure-focused PWA projects, while yielding long-term assets like and bridges, tied up funds in government-directed allocations that empirical multipliers suggest generated only $1.00 to $1.50 in aggregate output per dollar expended, implying limited net stimulus relative to the fiscal commitment. Critics, drawing on causal assessments of , argue that deficit-financed public works exacerbated uncertainty and elevated borrowing costs, suppressing private —which remained below 1929 levels through —and prolonging recovery by distorting market signals compared to policies favoring tax relief or . The overhang from such spending imposed intergenerational burdens, as higher future taxes or eroded private savings and , with studies estimating that sustained deficits reduced long-term growth by redirecting resources toward public rather than productively allocated private endeavors.

Criticisms and Controversies

Bureaucratic Inefficiencies

The Public Works Administration (PWA), established on June 16, 1933, under the National Industrial Recovery Act, faced significant bureaucratic hurdles due to administrator Harold Ickes's emphasis on rigorous oversight to prevent and waste. Ickes implemented a multi-layered review process for project proposals, requiring detailed engineering assessments, cost verifications, and compliance checks, which often extended approval timelines from weeks to months. This approach, while reducing graft—earning Ickes the moniker "Honest Harold"—prioritized procedural integrity over speed, resulting in minimal activity in the program's initial phase despite allocations exceeding $3 billion by mid-1934. Delays were exacerbated by inter-agency rivalries and local resistance to federal requirements. Federal Emergency Relief Administrator publicly criticized the PWA's pace, noting in September 1935 that it had yet to employ anyone despite $4 billion in authorized funds, as projects languished in planning stages. Mayors and local officials decried "" in September 1933, with Ickes himself urging cities to expedite submissions amid obstacles like incomplete bids and legal hurdles that stalled even approved loans and grants. By late 1933, only a fraction of obligated funds had translated into on-site work, contrasting sharply with the rapid rollout of direct relief programs like the . These inefficiencies undermined the PWA's role in immediate economic recovery, as the focus on long-term, capital-intensive projects—such as dams and bridges—clashed with urgent needs during the Depression's depths. Critics, including contemporaries and later historians, argued that the bureaucratic caution, though well-intentioned, amplified opportunity costs by deferring wage disbursements and multiplier effects from spending. The program's slowness contributed to the launch of the in 1935, which adopted a less stringent model to accelerate employment.

Political Favoritism and Corruption

The Public Works Administration encountered allegations of political favoritism in project allocations, with critics contending that funds were disproportionately directed toward Democratic strongholds or initiatives aligned with political objectives, though systematic evidence of partisan skewing remains limited. Administrator resisted direct by emphasizing merit-based approvals and federal oversight of grants and loans to state, local, and private entities, rather than direct employment programs that could facilitate job spoils. However, local implementing agencies occasionally engaged in , as PWA funding passed through political structures prone to influence peddling. Corruption risks arose from the scale of expenditures—over $6 billion in grants and loans by —but Ickes implemented stringent controls, including an investigative division and detailed audits, earning him the moniker "Honest Harold" for personally scrutinizing contracts to avert graft. Congressional inquiries, including those by the Special Committee on Investigations, identified only minor fraud instances amid thousands of projects; for example, by early 1934, just three PWA-related cases were referred for prosecution, contrasting sharply with higher incidences in relief-oriented agencies like the . These measures curtailed systemic abuse, though isolated local scandals persisted, such as kickbacks in subcontractor awards on sites. Opponents, including business groups and fiscal conservatives, charged that PWA loans to private firms—totaling hundreds of millions for railroads and utilities—constituted favoritism toward corporate interests with administration ties, potentially distorting competitive bidding despite requirements that benefited unionized labor. Ickes countered such claims by prioritizing long-term over short-term political gain, yet the opacity of some deal-making fueled perceptions of insider advantages. Overall, the agency's record reflected effective central deterrence against widespread , though decentralized execution amplified vulnerabilities at the level.

Market Distortions and Long-term Effects

The Public Works Administration's requirement for contractors to pay prevailing wages under the Davis-Bacon Act inflated costs on federally funded projects, distorting labor markets by enforcing rates often 20-30% above free-market levels during the Depression, which reduced employment opportunities and increased taxpayer burdens per job created. This policy, applied to PWA grants and loans totaling approximately $6 billion by 1939, prioritized union-scale compensation over cost efficiency, leading to higher overall project expenses and potentially fewer total projects undertaken compared to market-driven pricing. PWA expenditures also induced partial crowding out of activity, as federal grants for competed with private investments in areas like utilities and transportation; for instance, PWA funding enabled public entities to duplicate private power systems, devaluing existing assets and deterring private , with econometric analyses estimating that up to 50% of employment gains offset private job creation in affected locales. In regions receiving PWA grants, retail sales increases were moderated by this displacement effect, as resources—labor, materials, and financing—shifted from consumer-driven private endeavors to government-directed capital projects, exacerbating fiscal deficits without fully compensating through multiplier effects amid regulatory constraints like National Industrial Recovery Act codes that fixed prices and wages. Over the long term, PWA's intervention established a for federal dominance in allocation, fostering expectations of that may have dampened private and risk-taking; while assets like and bridges endured, providing ongoing utility, the politically influenced project selection—favoring large-scale endeavors over smaller, market-responsive ones—imposed opportunity costs estimated in subsequent analyses as diverting resources from sectors with higher private returns, contributing to sustained high into the late . The program's deficit financing, adding billions to the national debt without corresponding tax adjustments, elevated interest rates marginally and signaled enduring expansion, influencing post-Depression policy toward greater reliance on federal stimuli rather than market recovery mechanisms. Empirical reassessments indicate these distortions prolonged structural rigidities, with private investment lagging until wartime mobilization, underscoring causal links between interventionist spending and delayed rebound.

Dissolution and Transition

The dissolution of the Public Works Administration (PWA) was primarily enacted through executive reorganization authority granted by the Reorganization Act of 1939, which permitted the President to propose plans for restructuring federal agencies to eliminate duplication and enhance administrative efficiency, subject to congressional veto within 60 days. On April 25, 1939, President submitted Reorganization Plan No. 1, which abolished the PWA as an independent entity effective July 1, 1939, and transferred its remaining functions, personnel, and appropriations to the newly created Federal Works Agency (FWA), alongside other public works bodies such as the and the Bureau of Public Roads. This legal mechanism built on the PWA's earlier independence following the Supreme Court's invalidation of the National Industrial Recovery Act in Schechter Poultry Corp. v. (295 U.S. 495, 1935), which had originally authorized the agency but did not preclude its continuation via subsequent appropriations and . Politically, the Reorganization Act emerged from bipartisan negotiations after Roosevelt's unsuccessful 1937 court-packing proposal, which had alienated moderate Democrats and Republicans wary of expanding executive power amid the proliferation of agencies; the Act represented a compromise allowing limited presidential initiative while retaining to curb perceived bureaucratic excess. Conservative critics, including figures like Senator Harry Byrd, argued that the 's alphabet soup of relief programs fostered inefficiency and dependency, pressuring Roosevelt to consolidate operations as unemployment began easing from pre-1939 levels and European tensions escalated, redirecting fiscal priorities toward defense preparedness under acts like the Neutrality Acts and early preparations. Harold Ickes, PWA administrator since , reluctantly oversaw the transition, viewing it as a dilution of the agency's grant-based model in favor of the FWA's centralized oversight, though he retained influence within the Interior Department. The process culminated on June 30, 1943, with 9357, which fully liquidated the PWA by vesting all lingering powers and uncompleted projects in the FWA amid wartime mobilization that reduced civilian to under 2 percent through defense contracts and , obviating the need for Depression-era stimulus. This order reflected broader political consensus on phasing out relief programs as private sector absorption via war production—exemplified by the War Production Board's directives—rendered federal job creation redundant, though it drew limited opposition from labor unions concerned about transitions. The shift underscored a causal pivot from Keynesian-style on to prioritized military outlays, with PWA's $6 billion in cumulative grants (as of 1939) largely expended by then, minimizing fiscal drag on war financing.

Shift to Successor Programs

In 1939, the Public Works Administration's operations were integrated into the newly established Federal Works Agency (FWA) as part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Reorganization Plan No. 1, submitted under the Reorganization Act of 1939 and effective July 1, 1939. This consolidation placed the PWA alongside the Works Progress Administration (renamed the Work Projects Administration that year), the Public Roads Administration, and other entities under a single administrative umbrella to coordinate federal public works, reduce administrative overlap, and allocate $1.77 billion in remaining appropriations more efficiently amid fiscal pressures. The FWA, headed by an administrator reporting directly to the president, shifted emphasis from PWA's grant-and-loan model for large-scale infrastructure—such as dams and bridges—to a broader portfolio that included direct employment programs, though PWA-funded projects like waterways and electrification continued under FWA oversight with diminished new funding. The transition reflected evolving priorities, as the Second World War's onset in redirected federal resources toward defense production; PWA's annual expenditures dropped from $1.4 billion in 1936 to under $300 million by 1941, with successor FWA programs prioritizing military-related like airfields and shipyards over civilian relief. Attribution of this shift to causal factors includes declining —from 19% in to 14% by —reducing demand for relief-oriented works, alongside congressional scrutiny of PWA's slow project rollout and high per-job costs averaging $52,000 compared to WPA's $1,000. While FWA maintained PWA's focus on non-federal contractors for efficiency, it incorporated WPA's labor-intensive approach for smaller projects, employing over 2 million workers across agencies by 1940 but facing internal tensions between PWA administrator Harold Ickes' emphasis on quality engineering and WPA head ' push for rapid job creation. By June 30, 1943, with U.S. entry into accelerating industrial mobilization and unemployment falling below 2%, 9357 fully transferred PWA's remaining functions—including oversight of 34,000 ongoing contracts valued at $6 billion—to the FWA administrator, effectively dissolving the PWA as wartime agencies like the absorbed priorities. This marked the end of PWA's independent role, with FWA itself later subsumed into the General Services Administration in 1949, though legacy projects persisted under state and local management; empirical assessments note that while the shift streamlined bureaucracy, it contributed to uneven completion rates, with only 70% of PWA-initiated dams and highways finalized by 1945 due to material shortages.

Comparative Perspectives

Versus Works Progress Administration

The Public Works Administration (PWA), established on June 16, 1933, under the National Industrial Recovery Act, differed fundamentally from the (WPA), authorized on May 6, 1935, by 7034, in its operational model and objectives. The PWA operated primarily as a funding mechanism, disbursing grants and loans to state, local, and private entities for major initiatives, relying on private contractors to execute projects and thereby integrating with existing market structures rather than directly supplanting them. In opposition, the WPA functioned as a direct-employment agency, assigning federal payrolls to millions of relief-eligible workers for a wider array of tasks, often emphasizing manual labor over heavy machinery to maximize headcount absorption. This divergence stemmed from causal priorities: PWA targeted to revive industrial capacity, while WPA prioritized short-term alleviation amid persistent relief demands. In terms of fiscal scale, the PWA allocated roughly $6 billion from 1933 to 1939, financing 34,508 projects such as , bridges, and systems that enhanced long-term productive assets. The WPA, by contrast, disbursed over $11 billion through 1943, supporting 1.4 million projects with a heavier emphasis on immediate labor deployment, resulting in direct employment for 8.5 million individuals at various points, though average monthly rolls peaked at about 3.3 million in 1938. PWA outlays generated indirect employment—estimated at up to 650,000 workers on-site at peak through contractor hiring—while stimulating upstream industries via procurement of , , and equipment, yielding a potentially exceeding 1.5 in state-level income effects during . WPA's direct-wage model, however, directed 75-80% of funds to labor costs, fostering quicker consumption boosts but with administrative overhead consuming up to 15% of budgets and less emphasis on durable outputs. Project scopes highlighted these contrasts: PWA concentrated on capital-intensive endeavors like the Triborough Bridge and , which required expertise and private-sector coordination, contributing to industrial recovery by without broadly undercutting wage norms in competitive markets. WPA initiatives, including road grading, park development, and arts programs, were more decentralized and labor-heavy, producing extensive but often ephemeral improvements like 650,000 miles of roadways, yet exposing vulnerabilities to inefficiencies such as seasonal idling and skill mismatches. Economic analyses indicate PWA grants elevated private-sector earnings and hours worked in recipient areas, suggesting reduced crowding-out compared to WPA's federal hiring, which occasionally displaced local private opportunities amid slack demand. Politically, the WPA's —workers directly attributing jobs to federal intervention—bolstered Democratic vote shares in affected counties by up to 2-3 percentage points in elections, per county-level regressions, whereas PWA subsidies, diffused through private channels, yielded negligible partisan feedback due to attenuated beneficiary attribution. This dynamic underscores causal realism in policy design: direct provision amplified electoral rewards but heightened risks of favoritism, as evidenced by WPA project allocations correlating with congressional influence, while PWA's arm's-length structure mitigated such distortions at the cost of slower rollout. Overall, PWA's approach aligned more closely with first-principles efficiency in for sustained growth, though both programs' aggregate impact on national output remained modest until wartime , with hovering above 14% in 1937 despite cumulative expenditures.

Versus Private Sector Responses

During the Great Depression, private sector investment in nonresidential fixed assets, which includes much infrastructure-related construction, declined sharply by 68.6% from 1929 to 1933, reflecting a broader collapse in business confidence, credit availability, and demand that curtailed firms' capacity for large-scale projects. This downturn persisted, with net private domestic investment averaging near zero annually from 1930 to 1940 amid ongoing economic uncertainty and deflationary pressures. Private responses were limited to smaller-scale efforts, such as corporate belt-tightening or localized philanthropy, but lacked the capital for ambitious infrastructure like dams or bridges due to bank failures and restricted lending; for instance, residential construction—a proxy for private building activity—plummeted 92.5% over the same period. The PWA, by contrast, allocated over $6 billion in grants and loans from 1933 to 1939 to fund 34,000 projects, primarily executed by private contractors hired by state and local governments, thereby injecting demand into the construction industry without direct federal . This model sustained private firms' operations; PWA contracts revived idled capacity in sectors like and , with the agency explicitly aiming to stimulate complementary private through stabilized markets and demonstrated project viability. Empirical analyses of contemporaneous programs, including those under the , found no significant crowding out of private , as primarily shifted workers from rolls to paid labor without depressing private wages or hiring. Critics, however, contend that PWA's ties to the National Industrial Recovery Act imposed wage and price controls that heightened regulatory uncertainty, potentially deterring private initiative more than fiscal outlays alone; econometric studies estimate such policies extended the Depression by up to seven years by maintaining artificially high costs and suppressing market signals. Local-level evidence suggests modest displacement in some areas, where federal spending bid up resource prices, though aggregate data indicate PWA's multiplier effects supported rather than supplanted private recovery, with construction employment rising post-1933 alongside program expenditures. Ultimately, private sector constraints—exacerbated by monetary contraction and banking panics—necessitated PWA-scale intervention for infrastructure revival, though its bureaucratic oversight introduced inefficiencies absent in unfettered markets.

Historical Legacy

Enduring Contributions

The Public Works Administration's most tangible enduring contributions consist of durable infrastructure projects that remain integral to American transportation, energy production, and urban development nearly a century later. Among these, the Triborough Bridge in , financed by a $35 million PWA grant and completed in 1936, facilitated connectivity across , , and , handling millions of vehicles annually and serving as a foundational element of the region's highway system. Similarly, the agency's support for hydroelectric dams, such as the on the —dedicated in 1937 after PWA funding of over $60 million—continues to generate approximately 1,000 megawatts of clean power, supporting , flood control, and electricity for the . These projects not only addressed immediate Depression-era needs but also laid groundwork for wartime industrial expansion and post-war economic booms by enhancing resource distribution and mobility. PWA-backed housing initiatives, including the Williamsburg Houses in —built between 1936 and 1938 with $13.5 million in federal loans and grants—provided model low-income residences that influenced mid-century and remain occupied, demonstrating the agency's role in pioneering subsidized multifamily developments with amenities like green spaces and community facilities. In naval construction, PWA allocations exceeding $200 million enabled the building of aircraft carriers like the , launched in 1937, which bolstered U.S. naval capacity during and underscored the program's indirect contributions to national defense readiness. Collectively, these efforts encompassed over 34,000 projects nationwide, from sewage systems to courthouses, many of which persist due to the PWA's emphasis on standards and local input in project selection. The long-term economic effects of PWA infrastructure include sustained gains in regions with enhanced connectivity and , as evidenced by expanded agricultural output in the West from dam-enabled and reduced transportation costs via bridges and highways. Unlike more ephemeral programs, the PWA's capital-intensive approach yielded assets with multi-decade utility, averting through robust design, though maintenance burdens have shifted to state and local governments post-dissolution. Scholarly analyses attribute to these investments a multiplier effect on , with hydroelectric facilities alone powering industrial clusters that endured beyond the 1940s.

Scholarly Reassessments

Empirical studies using county-level data from have reassessed the Public Works Administration's (PWA) local economic stimulus, finding modest multipliers. Research by Price Fishback and colleagues indicates that an additional dollar of grants, including PWA funds, was associated with approximately a 44-cent increase in retail by 1939, with effects spilling over to neighboring counties. Subsequent analyses estimate multipliers for and spending at around 1.0 to 1.67, suggesting positive short-term boosts to consumption and activity but no significant enhancement of private investment or . These findings highlight PWA's role in sustaining local demand through contracts with private firms, though the program's capital-intensive focus yielded fewer direct jobs per dollar expended compared to efforts. Critiques emphasize inefficiencies and opportunity costs. Under administrator Harold Ickes, PWA's deliberate approval processes—aimed at curbing waste and corruption—resulted in slow project rollout, with major grants disbursed unevenly and often influenced by electoral considerations in competitive districts rather than pure economic distress. Economists and Lee Ohanian argue that broader interventions, including PWA's fiscal expansions, prolonged the Depression by raising real wages above market-clearing levels and distorting resource allocation, estimating recovery delayed by 5-7 years absent such policies. While PWA avoided the overt of some programs, its high administrative costs and preference for large-scale projects—totaling over $6 billion in grants and loans by 1939—likely crowded out alternatives, yielding benefits at the expense of faster market-driven recovery. Long-term evaluations credit PWA with durable assets like and bridges but question its macroeconomic efficacy. Quantitative reassessments attribute limited national output gains to multipliers below unity in some models, attributing fuller recovery to wartime mobilization rather than spending. These studies, drawing on archival grant data and variables like political margins, underscore that while PWA mitigated localized downturns, its design prioritized permanence over rapid employment, reflecting trade-offs between quality control and countercyclical speed.

References

  1. https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/national-industrial-recovery-act
  2. https://northcarolinahistory.org/encyclopedia/public-works-administration/
  3. https://livingnewdeal.org/new-deal-agencies/public-works-funding/public-works-administration/
  4. https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry?entry=PU003
  5. https://www.cato.org/commentary/government-jobs-dont-cure-depression
  6. https://guides.loc.gov/national-recovery-administration
  7. https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/new-deal/national-industrial-recovery-act-of-1933/
  8. https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/135.html
  9. https://www.fdrlibrary.org/great-depression-facts
  10. https://eh.net/book_reviews/building-new-deal-liberalism-the-political-economy-of-public-works-1933-1956/
  11. https://www.nps.gov/people/harold-ickes.htm
  12. https://constitutionallawreporter.com/2018/01/30/national-industrial-recovery-act-1933/
  13. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pump-priming.asp
  14. https://www.cato.org/blog/new-deal-recovery-part-15-keynesian-myth
  15. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Harold-L-Ickes
  16. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Public-Works-Administration
  17. https://constitutionallawreporter.com/great-american-biographies/harold-leclaire-ickes/
  18. https://www.cato.org/blog/new-deal-recovery-part-8-nra
  19. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/public-works-administration-6281/
  20. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c4903/c4903.pdf
  21. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2936780
  22. https://www.masoncity.net/pview.aspx?id=48834&catid=0
  23. https://livingnewdeal.org/tag/public-works-administration/
  24. https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/069.html
  25. https://www.cato.org/downsizing-government-essay/department-housing-urban-development-timeline
  26. https://nlihc.org/resource/public-housing-history
  27. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/Public-Housing.pdf
  28. https://www.roosevelt.edu/centers/new-deal-studies/history-fair/public-housing
  29. https://njfac.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/The-New-Deals-Direct-Job-Creation-Strategy-Providing-Employment-Assurance-for-American-Workers-2013.pdf
  30. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/statement-pwa-projects
  31. https://en.citizendium.org/wiki/PWA
  32. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w8108/w8108.pdf
  33. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3443
  34. https://www.pbs.org/wnet/blueprintamerica/reports/by-topic/growth-development/profiles-from-the-recession-report-bridge-to-somewhere-public-works-administration/693/
  35. https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=506
  36. https://www.nytimes.com/1935/09/06/archives/work-relief-jobs-given-to-873563-hopkins-listing-nations-total-puts.html
  37. https://www.nytimes.com/1933/09/24/archives/ickes-prods-cities-on-works-delays-government-stands-ready-to-lend.html
  38. https://www.nytimes.com/1933/10/25/archives/many-obstacles-delay-public-works-program.html
  39. https://time.com/archive/6864661/recovery-billion-pumped/
  40. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c10006/c10006.pdf
  41. https://time.com/archive/6862899/relief-2-to-all/
  42. https://nevadapolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/20110419_Who_Really_Prevails_Under_Prevailing_Wage.pdf
  43. https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/77th2013/Exhibits/Assembly/GA/AGA640E.pdf
  44. https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/jel.20161054
  45. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-economic-history/article/did-new-deal-grant-programs-stimulate-local-economies-a-study-of-federal-grants-and-retail-sales-during-the-great-depression/29F92724812442D55169C84593F5DEBD
  46. https://www.aeaweb.org/conference/2017/preliminary/paper/2tHhb5hK
  47. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28442/m2/1/high_res_d/thesis.pdf
  48. https://www.independent.org/article/2008/11/21/what-do-the-new-deal-and-world-war-ii-tell-us-about-the-prospects-for-a-stimulus-package/
  49. https://www.ssa.gov/history/reports/fdrindepen.html
  50. https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/interior/timeline
  51. https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/ATO/USGM/FWA.html
  52. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GOVPUB-FW-8e162d17f4aa7fe1859dc84e4f0b4feb/pdf/GOVPUB-FW-8e162d17f4aa7fe1859dc84e4f0b4feb.pdf
  53. https://millercenter.org/president/fdroosevelt/domestic-affairs
  54. https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/historic-preservation/historic-building-stewardship/architecture-and-government/timeline
  55. https://eh.net/encyclopedia/the-works-progress-administration/
  56. https://heritage.ky.gov/Documents/NewDealBuilds.pdf
  57. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/surviving-the-dust-bowl-works-progress-administration-wpa/
  58. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w16561/w16561.pdf
  59. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228303913_The_Multiplier_for_Federal_Spending_in_the_States_During_the_Great_Depression
  60. https://livingnewdeal.org/history-of-the-new-deal/programs/
  61. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/traceability-and-mass-policy-feedback-effects/18ED5F25FBA302F97413899FAFD50A26
  62. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/18ED5F25FBA302F97413899FAFD50A26/S0003055424000704a.pdf/div-class-title-traceability-and-mass-policy-feedback-effects-div.pdf
  63. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c12794/revisions/c12794.rev1.pdf
  64. https://fee.org/articles/fdr-s-new-deal-worsened-and-prolonged-the-great-depression/
  65. https://nationalpovertyplan.org/timeline/the-new-deal/
  66. https://www.law.georgetown.edu/denny-center/blog/great-once-more/
  67. http://www.econweb.umd.edu/~wallis/MyPapers/Wallis&Benjamin_JEH_1981.pdf
  68. https://www.cato.org/commentary/unraveling-secular-stagnation-story
  69. https://www.nber.org/digest/may11/multiplier-federal-spending-during-new-deal
  70. https://www.nas.org/articles/Ask_a_Scholar_Did_the_New_Deal_End_the_Great_Depression
  71. https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_581.pdf
  72. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w16561/revisions/w16561.rev0.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.