Still More Coronavirus Musings
Here we are, still sheltering in
place while a tiny virus wreaks havoc on humanity. What a time we are living in, which will go
down in history as one of the most disruptive events of all time, right there
with the last great global pandemic, the great influenza of 1918, as well as
maybe the Black Death of the 14th century and World War II last century.
Such a moment creates lots of opportunities
to kibbitz about solutions. Here in America,
we hold in tension so many valid opinions, and it has been fascinating to watch
those opinions play out in the public space.
At the risk of wading into such a cacophonous fray, especially on issues
I know very little about, here are some of my stray thoughts.
First, much has been said of
President Trump’s disastrous and ego-driven approach to running the country in
the midst of this crisis. While I
usually consider piling on to be unhelpful and indicative of a preference for
scoring points over making progress, I do want to call out just what I
personally find disappointing and downright dangerous about President Trump’s
leadership. Leaders are forged in crises,
after all, and what makes them leaders is things that we have seen very little
to nothing of from our leader. Taking responsibility,
seeking the counsel of experts, and acknowledging mistakes and being willing to
learn from them. Sublimating ego for the
greater good, and building strong relationships with other leaders in that way
so that when cooperation is needed cooperation happens. Showing empathy, being vulnerable, promising
to help and keeping your word to do so.
We are all learning what we need in a leader when times are dark and
scary, and President Trump has exhibited so little of those characteristics,
and even worse so little indication of a willingness to move in that direction.
Second, what is the role of the
federal government in a time of crisis? Here
I am torn, for while the Constitution is remarkably sparse in what the federal
government is to do, leaving most powers to states, it is clear that in
once-in-a-lifetime disasters some centralized response is appropriate. Believe it or not, I actually have a little
sliver of sympathy for President Trump here; not a lot, but a little. His spat with governors is indicative of his
basest and most venal impulses, of that there is no question. But the relationship goes two ways, and
governors that have consistently baited and insulted the president to score
political points are now finding that that poisoned relationship is impairing a
coordinated state-federal response. I
still think the president is more at fault for this than the governors, and by
a country mile. But it does flag for me
that there is a protocol encoded in our Constitution that requires strong
working relationships to execute, which is that states are given wide berth to
handle their own decisions, and can seek federal assistance if they feel it is
warranted, and so the federal government should by and large hang back and give
states room to play all that out before exercising a heavy hand.
Which is not to say that sometimes
that heavy hand is warranted. I am by
and large fairly libertarian-leaning when it comes to government’s relationship
with business, which is to say that government over-reach often causes more
problems than the business intemperance it purports to remedy. But just as FDR took over the manufacturing
plants so that the war effort could be supported, there are once-in-a-lifetime
situations when the greater good is accomplished through central fiat. Such has been the thought process behind commandeering
business capacity to produce masks and ventilators, and time will likely tell
that that was the right call. Given how
much of a cold-blooded capitalist I am, it is incredible for me to hear myself
saying this.
Lastly, there has been a lot of talk
about health insurance. People have used
the crisis to assert that health care is a basic human right. Which sounds good, and I am all for figuring
out how we can make sure that important services are as equitably distributed
as possible. But what exactly does it mean
that health care is a basic human right?
I recognize that health insurance isn’t like buying T-shirts or tax prep
services, so leaving it to the marketplace will result in lots of
problems. But lots of different parts of
the whole health care enterprise will still require market dynamics to function. Or do you want a centralized government
setting wage levels for nurses, or price levels for thermometers? Capitalism may create inefficiencies, but so
does a centralized approach to dispensing health care. The price mechanism has its inequities, in
that the richer you are the more you can afford. But centralized health care systems also create
their own problems, usually in the form of bad or unequal quality levels and/or
interminably long wait times. I don’t
know what the answer is, and I admit that the current system is broken. But I’m not so sure that the best way forward
is simply to assert that health care is a basic human right and therefore
universal health care will solve all problems.
What a country we live in. Within these broad boundaries we find folks
asserting their freedom to do what they want, and others sublimating those
freedoms with the greater good in mind.
Some have lost their jobs and have no safety net; others work in arduous
and vulnerable settings so that we can heal and eat and shop. All of us pine for gatherings – graduations,
ballgames, and even just a cup of coffee – while we wait anxiously for news as
to when and how things will go back to normal.
What a country we live in, and what a time we are living in.
Comments