Who's Driving? July 2, 2020

 Copyright © 2020                               John F. Oyler 

 July 2, 2020

Who’s Driving?

 

The events of recent months have been of great interest to us amateur political scientists (a category that includes almost all of us) as “government” has been forced into taking the most active role in our lives since World War II. Who would have foreseen lockdowns, mandatory use of masks, and the general disruption to everyday life we have experienced?

 

I think most of us will agree that it was necessary for someone to at least consider each of the measures have been imposed on us. The surprising thing to me is the general confusion regarding the level of government that should do this consideration and then act upon the conclusions reached.

 

I watched the daily Covid 19 White House press conferences with great interest, mostly so I could understand what was happening and partly because of the entertainment value observing the confusion.

 

At one point the President clearly stated that it was his responsibility to make the decision regarding putting the entire nation under quarantine and emphasized the fact that this was one of the most significant decisions he would ever make. At this point one of the journalists in the audience, citing the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, reminded him that such a decision was the function of the individual states by default.

 

The President appeared to reject this idea, but, two days later in another press conference, announced that this decision was indeed up to the governors of each of states. This abrupt turnaround surprised most observers and still is the subject of controversy.

 

Our current political system can be simplified as consisting of four hierarchical tiers – the federal government, the state governments, counties, and municipalities. For purpose of this discussion I have elected to combine local municipal governments and school districts into one category, although I realize jointures involve more than one municipality. Consequently, we citizens (taxpayers) find ourselves beholden to four levels of government for benefits and for taxes to pay for the benefits.  

 

So, who decides if I can get a haircut, or eat in a restaurant, or attend a Symphony concert, or shop in a grocery store without a mask? It turns out, much to my surprise, that it is the Governor of our state, mostly by default. There certainly isn’t anything specific that I can find in the State Constitution to justify this.

 

However, for example, the State is responsible for licensing barbers, so it is easy for the Governor to control them. The same can be said for the State Liquor stores. Restaurants, beer distributors, and grocery stores also are licensed by the State Department of Agriculture. Concerts may be an exception; apparently their permits come from the local municipality.

 

On March 6, 2020, Governor Wolf issued a Proclamation of Disaster Emergency, which referenced the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Services Code as justification for initiating action by the appropriate state agencies – Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency, State Police, Department of Health, Department of Education, Department of Transportation, etc. – to respond to the emergency. The Proclamation also urged officials of all political subdivisions in the state to support this effort.

 

On March 19, Governor Wolf announced that all “non-essential” businesses should be closed until further notice. This was followed by the Governor’s stay-at-home order for the entire state on April 1. Regardless of the questionable legal justification for this action, it was clear he was in charge. Despite opposition from certain counties and from the Republican-dominated State Legislature, he has maintained this role and gone a long way in establishing a precedent for power of the state.

 

It is interesting to compare this result with the process followed by other major democracies in this crisis. Modern Germany is subdivided into sixteen states; their “lockdown” policy is decided at the state level, like ours. On the other hand, in Italy, subdivided into sixteen districts, the quarantine decision was made at the federal level by the Prime Minister.

 

The United Kingdom is a special case. Parliament passed legislation permitting Prime Minister Boris Johnson to shut down the entire nation. However, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland have their own legislatures and currently are relaxing requirements at their own level. The final member of the United Kingdom, England, relies on Parliament to function as its legislature.

 

Other major democracies in which the lockdown decision was made at the federal level include France, Spain, India, and Poland. In contrast, state or district level responsibility was granted in Brazil, Mexico, and Indonesia. Sweden, South Korea, and Japan elected to avoid a formal lockdown, instead appealing to their citizens to adopt social distancing measures voluntarily.

 

How did the United States get to the point where such a critical crisis would be handled at the level of the states, supplemented by federal advice and aid? The subject of states’ rights has been controversial from the earliest days of our country, finally exploding into the Civil War in 1861.  

 

The topic surfaced again during the Civil Rights Movement with the general consensus being that national interests were destined to prevail over local ones. It is interesting that it has made a comeback at a time when the federal government is dominated by two widely disparate political parties.

 

The states’ rights concept was a natural consequence of the way our nation was formed. Imagine the difficulty of convincing tiny states like Rhode Island and Delaware to join with powerhouses like New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia into a union that ensured them any influence at all.  

 

I have always been sympathetic to advocates of states’ rights, mostly because of the historical origin of the concept. However, I suspect that the handling of a crisis of the type in which we currently are involved should have been done at the federal level. The absurd example of a Pittsburgher driving to Wheeling for a haircut because West Virginia was not locked down reinforces that suspicion.