What stood out to me most in the first third of this book was the prevalence of bipartisan cooperation in Washington during LaGuardia’s tenure as a congressman. Of course there was not a total lack of conflict, but the ability of a Republican to collaborate with Democrats, and to even have a second association as a “Progressive” (which could be applied to members of both parties), was quite shocking to my twenty-first century political paradigm.

Perhaps the enabling reason for this flexibility of party lines was the emphasis on economic policy rather than divisive social issues, as is the case today. I also found that the mentality of lawmakers was largely focused on improving the national economic state rather than winning one over on the other party. Even while Democrats (and LaGuardia) remained opposed to Hoover’s recovery plans, they shared the same goals though they differed in views on the proper means.

I also noticed that FDR, in his support for public works and government relief programs, only intended for them to be used in times of national crisis. It struck me that he never outlined what constituted a “crisis” worthy of extensive government involvement. Whether he have considered the recession of 2008 as necessitating government intervention is questionable, as unemployment was never as high as during the Great Depression. It seems that the precedent set by the New Deal dictates that extensive government involvement in the economy is the norm. However, as the New Deal aimed at directly aiding the unemployed and common workers, the recent bailouts have not had much of an impact at the lowest levels but have only saved the well-off. This embraced the spirit of “trickle-down economics” which FDR and LaGuardia viewed with skepticism.