Will COVID-19 Return After Memorial Day? The Election Will Likely Be Decided Based On The Answer
A few months ago, the prospect of a contagious virus determining the outcome of the 2020 Presidential election would have seemed like an absurd notion....a medieval problem more fitting for a European election in 1620 than a U.S. election in 2020. Yet here we are. And as I write this during the third week of April, I suspect we're fast approaching the most critical crossroads of the nation's COVID-19 response. We're either at the peak or approaching the peak of the current wave of the virus, with chatter about how we reopen an economy that has already atrophied well past the point of crisis. As it almost always does over every issue, the nation is cleaving into separate tribes regarding which problem is bigger between the virus and the economy.
Trump is clearly on Team Economy and has been from the get-go, convinced his re-election prospects are linked to economic performance and willing to take any public health risk necessary to facilitate growth. Most Democrats are elevating the virus risk above the threat to the economy. With an unprecedentedly large $2.3 trillion stimulus package--passed in an extremely rare bipartisan moment by Congress--already effectively drained of its contents earlier this week and a rising tide of protesters rushing state Capitols demanding a return to normalcy, this cage match is really starting to take form. The stakes couldn't be higher for either side of the divide and it's not at all clear who to place bets on for prevailing in terms of the right public policy prescription or ultimate election advantage.
Early polling puts the public overwhelmingly on the side of continued social distancing above and beyond economic stability, but I suspect this is largely because the public doesn't yet get how close to the knife's edge the economy is and that restarting it won't be like flicking a light switch and getting things back to normal. It's entirely possible that the cost versus risk assessment still favors maximal social distancing in most if not all parts of the country, but make no mistake the cost will be tremendous, far beyond anybody's comprehension. The longer the economy is locked down, the more we're likely to see institutions in this country that took generations to build begin to crumble into rubble. Without revenue from advertisers, all forms of media will lose their funding mechanism to keep the public informed. Without sales tax and commercial property tax revenue, state and local governments won't be able to afford to maintain vital services. Supply chains and contracts between all kinds of industries and branches of government will not be able to continue.
And most importantly, America made itself uniquely vulnerable to a health pandemic by refusing for generations to untether health care accessibility with employment. As a result, we're now in the middle of a pandemic that's throwing tens of millions of people out of work while simultaneously taking away their health insurance. If there's any durability at all to the heightened unemployment rates, as there almost certainly will be, the millions of newly uninsured Americans represents a health care crisis likely to be as bad or worse long-term as COVID-19 is today.
The bottom line is I expect public opinion to move in the direction of salvaging the economy as it becomes clear how deep the crisis is, especially after COVID ostensibly starts to fade. But the economy is poised to open up slowly, and some sectors not at all until there's a vaccine. It seems unlikely, for example, that too many concerts, sporting events, or festivals are gonna be held so long as the risk for community spread is live, but particularly in the summer season, the cancellation of those events will by itself keep economic activity depressed, unemployment high, and revenue collection insufficient to match the enormous need. And will the COVID-cautious political leaders call for keeping schools closed next August and September, denying students another full year of in-classroom education based on the possibility of COVID re-emerging?
That's why we can expect a large faction of policymakers, led by Trump, to insist upon a full return to normalcy if the virus goes into summer retreat as most suspect it will. Most Democrats seem likely to proceed with maximal caution on such matters, with Democratic Governors in key battleground states calling for event cancellations and some manner of continued social distancing based on the expectation that a second wave of the virus could be coming at any time. There's obviously way too many moving parts here to predict anything with certainty, but I suspect those will be the fault lines of the 2020 election....all coming down to a gamble on whether COVID returns before November 3rd or not.
If there's a new wave of infections in the early fall, those calling for caution and continued social distancing will be vindicated, and Trump and his backers will be stuck with the injury of another wave of shutdowns with insult of being wrong about its return. But if the virus stays dormant through September and October and voters come to believe the economic hardship brought about by overzealous caution was for nothing, then Trump will be playing a good hand. It'll be hard for the Democrats to run on the "Trump depression" if he's the one who's been calling for opening it up while the Democrats were calling for keeping things locked down out of an abundance of caution.
Of course Trump is such a wild card himself that he usually has to stumble into any political advantage. Earlier this week, for instance, he insisted that the President gets to overrule the governors on when and how to reopen the economy. On top of being constitutionally incorrect, that would also be bad politics as Trump would then accept ownership of any bad outcomes related to the virus and the economy. It only took a few days for Trump to do an aboutface and proclaim the governors entirely responsible for everything post-COVID, which sets him up better politically because he can blame them for the inevitably unfavorable outcomes that will come with whatever choices they make, and then insist he would have done the opposite when it comes to campaign season. Trump operates best politically when he has a foil, and a bunch of Democratic Governors in blue and purple states making polarizing decisions represent exactly the kind of foil he needs.
Every option is a terrible one at this point, but only fate knows which one will prevail. Early polls showing Trump's approval rating falling and Biden with a fairly decisive lead will hold up only if the voting public believes COVID risk still supersedes economic cost. We know what side Trump is gonna come down on, so if COVID flames out in May and hasn't returned before election day, it's a safe bet voters will be most pissed off about an economic depression that Trump will blame on Democrats. It's a massive gamble for both sides....and Americans will lose either way.
Trump is clearly on Team Economy and has been from the get-go, convinced his re-election prospects are linked to economic performance and willing to take any public health risk necessary to facilitate growth. Most Democrats are elevating the virus risk above the threat to the economy. With an unprecedentedly large $2.3 trillion stimulus package--passed in an extremely rare bipartisan moment by Congress--already effectively drained of its contents earlier this week and a rising tide of protesters rushing state Capitols demanding a return to normalcy, this cage match is really starting to take form. The stakes couldn't be higher for either side of the divide and it's not at all clear who to place bets on for prevailing in terms of the right public policy prescription or ultimate election advantage.
Early polling puts the public overwhelmingly on the side of continued social distancing above and beyond economic stability, but I suspect this is largely because the public doesn't yet get how close to the knife's edge the economy is and that restarting it won't be like flicking a light switch and getting things back to normal. It's entirely possible that the cost versus risk assessment still favors maximal social distancing in most if not all parts of the country, but make no mistake the cost will be tremendous, far beyond anybody's comprehension. The longer the economy is locked down, the more we're likely to see institutions in this country that took generations to build begin to crumble into rubble. Without revenue from advertisers, all forms of media will lose their funding mechanism to keep the public informed. Without sales tax and commercial property tax revenue, state and local governments won't be able to afford to maintain vital services. Supply chains and contracts between all kinds of industries and branches of government will not be able to continue.
And most importantly, America made itself uniquely vulnerable to a health pandemic by refusing for generations to untether health care accessibility with employment. As a result, we're now in the middle of a pandemic that's throwing tens of millions of people out of work while simultaneously taking away their health insurance. If there's any durability at all to the heightened unemployment rates, as there almost certainly will be, the millions of newly uninsured Americans represents a health care crisis likely to be as bad or worse long-term as COVID-19 is today.
The bottom line is I expect public opinion to move in the direction of salvaging the economy as it becomes clear how deep the crisis is, especially after COVID ostensibly starts to fade. But the economy is poised to open up slowly, and some sectors not at all until there's a vaccine. It seems unlikely, for example, that too many concerts, sporting events, or festivals are gonna be held so long as the risk for community spread is live, but particularly in the summer season, the cancellation of those events will by itself keep economic activity depressed, unemployment high, and revenue collection insufficient to match the enormous need. And will the COVID-cautious political leaders call for keeping schools closed next August and September, denying students another full year of in-classroom education based on the possibility of COVID re-emerging?
That's why we can expect a large faction of policymakers, led by Trump, to insist upon a full return to normalcy if the virus goes into summer retreat as most suspect it will. Most Democrats seem likely to proceed with maximal caution on such matters, with Democratic Governors in key battleground states calling for event cancellations and some manner of continued social distancing based on the expectation that a second wave of the virus could be coming at any time. There's obviously way too many moving parts here to predict anything with certainty, but I suspect those will be the fault lines of the 2020 election....all coming down to a gamble on whether COVID returns before November 3rd or not.
If there's a new wave of infections in the early fall, those calling for caution and continued social distancing will be vindicated, and Trump and his backers will be stuck with the injury of another wave of shutdowns with insult of being wrong about its return. But if the virus stays dormant through September and October and voters come to believe the economic hardship brought about by overzealous caution was for nothing, then Trump will be playing a good hand. It'll be hard for the Democrats to run on the "Trump depression" if he's the one who's been calling for opening it up while the Democrats were calling for keeping things locked down out of an abundance of caution.
Of course Trump is such a wild card himself that he usually has to stumble into any political advantage. Earlier this week, for instance, he insisted that the President gets to overrule the governors on when and how to reopen the economy. On top of being constitutionally incorrect, that would also be bad politics as Trump would then accept ownership of any bad outcomes related to the virus and the economy. It only took a few days for Trump to do an aboutface and proclaim the governors entirely responsible for everything post-COVID, which sets him up better politically because he can blame them for the inevitably unfavorable outcomes that will come with whatever choices they make, and then insist he would have done the opposite when it comes to campaign season. Trump operates best politically when he has a foil, and a bunch of Democratic Governors in blue and purple states making polarizing decisions represent exactly the kind of foil he needs.
Every option is a terrible one at this point, but only fate knows which one will prevail. Early polls showing Trump's approval rating falling and Biden with a fairly decisive lead will hold up only if the voting public believes COVID risk still supersedes economic cost. We know what side Trump is gonna come down on, so if COVID flames out in May and hasn't returned before election day, it's a safe bet voters will be most pissed off about an economic depression that Trump will blame on Democrats. It's a massive gamble for both sides....and Americans will lose either way.
posted by Mark at 6:50 PM
2 Comments:
Well said. Given how many Americans insist on congregating (e.g. Florida beaches), I don't see the virus dying down unless it has a hard time in the summer heat. Americans in particular don't like to be locked down, so I think the U.S. is going to be in for a long summer. And as you said, a lot of people won't go out regardless even if the economy is open until they're a vaccine, so reopening the economy can only do so much. There's so much nuance here that it's too bad that we have a reality tv buffoon instead of smart and steady leadership capable of fact-finding and conversing across a broad spectrum.
One thing that's chilling to consider is that if Hillary Clinton was President right now and running for re-election rather than Donald Trump, I suspect there would be zero cooperation from Republicans on any sort of stimulus whatsoever just as was the case in 2009 when almost no Republicans signed on for Obama's stimulus. Republicans in Congress would calculate that doing nothing and forcing economic calamity would ultimately hurt an incumbent President Hillary and that the GOP would likely be rewarded for it in the end. And given what happened to Obama in both of his disastrous midterm cycles (2010, 2014), there's a good chance the hypothetical Republican calculation would be right. As we saw with the Merrick Garland Supreme Court nomination, Congressional Republicans are willing to do absolutely anything to curry partisan advantage.
Post a Comment
<< Home