Lockdowns can be costly − for the lockers That the pandemic still has a course to run is clear from reports of new variants appearing and fears of a third wave emerging in many parts of the world, including North America. Letting down one’s guard now is a fool’s errand. But in dealing with these developments, and until we reach our desired “herd immunity,” what have we learned about the relative values of governing by fear and edict on the one hand, or individual responsibility and educated choice on the other? Reports about intensifying COVID infection surges throughout the U.S. over the past year (which Canadian media enthusiastically magnified) described a varying range of measures applied by state and local governments to try and control the pandemic. The results were mixed, but instructive. California and New York virtually shut down their economies: restaurants, shopping venues, gyms, hair salons, churches and, most significantly, schools. In the process, millions of jobs were eliminated, travel virtually stopped, municipal budgets were savaged, families underwent untold stresses and political reputations shattered. (At the height of a major COVID surge last November, California’s Governor Gavin Newsom was photographed, maskless, dining with 11 senior staff and their families at one of that state’s most expensive restaurants (three stars and a “tasting” menu starting at $350 per diner), while the state was under strict rules prohibiting indoor dining and forbidding more than three households to congregate. Publicity about that indiscretion, and the statewide lockdown that followed, resulted in the governor facing “recall,” a measure that might lead to his removal from office if a sufficient number of petitioners sign on. Those numbers are reported to be getting too close for Newsom’s comfort.) By contrast, governors of Texas, Florida, Arizona and several other states resisted blanket government-mandated shutdowns, relying instead on personal responsibility and individual good sense − bolstered by facial masking, distancing and reasonable occupancy limitations − to control the spread of COVID-19. They remained committed to keeping their economies open, forestalling massive job displacements and encouraging stores, shops and schools to carry on as best they might. They were intent on not making the cure worse than the disease. First, do no harm. They appear to have been vindicated. Recent COVID-19 tracking data from American’s four most populous states indicates that infection rates, hospitalizations and deaths in “free states” − i.e. Florida and Texas − had become at least as favourable or better than that from “lockdown states” − California and New York. Furthermore, Florida, Texas and several other states had avoided the ruinous economic and social consequences that lockdown invites. Said Arizona Governor Greg Ducey: “Unlike other states, we never did a shutdown here in Arizona. We withstood the calls from the extremes on both sides, and we will continue to ignore them. We always knew that fighting this virus would be dependent on the personal responsibility of everyday Arizonans.” When President Joe Biden warned in aMarch 11 national address that further shutdowns may be necessary, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis replied: “To even contemplate doing any kind of lockdown honestly is insane. And so that’s not going to happen in the State of Florida. We like the fact that people are able to work here. We like the fact that we’ve been able to save thousands and thousands of businesses and livelihoods. And we love the fact that parents have the right to send their kids to school in person. We’re going to continue doing what works, but under no circumstances would we entertain doing anything of the sort (a lockdown).” COVID-19 CSANews | SPRING 2021 | 41
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzMzNzMx