This essay is the third in a five-part series.
Political Considerations
In the hyper-partisan political world that we live in, there was little reason to doubt that once the initial panic subsided, dealing with the COVID-19 virus would devolve into political battles.
Many decisions have been driven by the political philosophies of those making the decisions.
The first inkling of a partisan divide occurred when President Trump mentioned the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of the virus.
The words were barely out of his mouth before he was soundly chastised in the press, even though no one knew how to spell the word, much less had knowledge of treatment protocol.
This, in spite of treatment information that was coming out of various European countries. As we would later learn, this was just the beginning.
Meanwhile, mayors, boards of supervisors, and governors issued “shelter-in-place” orders. The American public was informed that this far-reaching quarantine was imperative in order to “flatten the curve” and not overwhelm the American medical systems, which had happened in Italy and contributed to a high percentage of death from the virus.
Americans went along with this assessment and stayed home.
However, as Time pointed out, the curve was flattened by the end of April. We have subsequently learned that even in the hardest-hit areas, the medical system was never in danger of collapsing.
So, why were the restrictions not lifted when the goal had been reached?
The answer, to use a well-worn cliché, is because the politicians began to “move the goalposts.” They informed the citizens that just flattening the curve was no longer good enough, though they were all over the map trying to explain what they felt were sufficient actions to be taken by the public.
While individual politicians (especially governors) had no coherent strategy or end game, many came out with a variety of untenable solutions.
Thus, some governors informed their constituents that they would be required to stay “locked down” until a vaccine was developed or until science had found a way to defeat the virus (whatever that meant).
Most Americans learned that it can take years to develop a vaccine. Since even the vaccine for the yearly flu is frequently not effective, they were not going to sit home waiting for what may never happen. Americans began to rebel.
Two governors in particular felt the need to push hard against their recalcitrant constituents: Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan and Gavin Newsom of California.
Whitmer was particularly over the top with decrees that were not based in science. In fact, many of her draconian decrees lacked common sense and produced a widespread mistrust of her judgement.
Among her most tyrannical:
- Stores must rope off aisles not containing groceries
- Michigan residents cannot travel from one home to another that they own
- Stores cannot sell paint or plants
- Stores with garden centers must shut them down
- Michigan residents may use kayaks, but motorboats are illegal
- In her 118 executive orders, Whitmer locked down the population and then did everything in her power to ensure their confinement was neither pleasant nor productive.
As time passed, it soon became clear that Newsom’s ambiguities about reopening allowed him to delay the process as he saw fit.
Upon seeing a television newscast of beachgoers in Orange County (a traditionally Republican County), Newsom immediately ordered the closing of all beaches in the county.
This overreach had the effect of creating a backlash, especially among the politicians of Orange County who failed to enforce the governor’s mandates.
Meanwhile, in the North State, Newsom was greeted with open rebellion.
The counties of Modoc, Yuba, and Sutter reopened without adhering to the governor's 37-step (yes, 37 steps) reopening plan. Each of these counties--which were experiencing a very low number of COVID-19 cases--decided to put the welfare of their citizens above Newsome's one-size-fits-all plan.
The governor’s initial reaction was typical of a tyrant: anger. Eventually he saw the futility of pushing the issue and acquiesced to the reopening of those counties.
Perhaps the greatest impact COVID-19 will have on the political scene is yet to occur: the upcoming presidential election. As Joe Biden stays locked in his home and President Trump resumes campaigning, there is little doubt that COVID-19 will change the business of presidential politics this year.
As Professor Katherine Barbieri points out, “There is no question that politicians, media pundits, and many others have seized on the opportunity to exploit the pandemic for political gain.”
One all-important question remains. At what level will the American ruling class exercise their tyrannical privilege, and how will the American citizens respond?
Sources
1. Time Magazine, April 27, 2020.
2. Comments in the Daily Herald On Line.
3. Issuesandinsights.com/2020/05/05.
4. Professor Katherine Barbieri.
