To Reopen, Or Not To Reopen? That Is The Question
/A few days ago — after initially seeming to say that he had absolute authority to determine when and how the economy could reopen — President Trump instead issued a set of guidelines and then left it up to the various governors to make their own determinations. Since then, different governors have gone different directions on the issue. As with most everything else in our crazy world, there is a clear red/blue divide on the decisions being taken.
Before looking at some of the announcements that have come from various governors, let’s first go to the house organ of progressive groupthink, the New York Times, to get the official talking points on the correct strategy. Here is a very lengthy piece from April 18 by Donald McNeil, headline “The Coronavirus in America: The Year Ahead.” Before giving you some substantial excerpts, I suggest that you consider whether anybody there at Pravda really believes this stuff, or alternatively, whether the narrative has been selected with the sole criterion of going with whatever is most likely to damage President Trump and thereby rid the nation of this scourge (not the virus, the President) and return political power to its rightful holders. Anyway, the gist of the Times piece is, all the “experts” say that no sane person would even consider getting back to normal any time soon, and therefore we’re in for month after month of economic devastation and pain, extending (of course) at least until after the next election. Some excerpts:
The coronavirus is spreading from America’s biggest cities to its suburbs, and has begun encroaching on the nation’s rural regions. . . . Yet President Trump this week proposed guidelines for reopening the economy and suggested that a swath of the United States would soon resume something resembling normalcy. For weeks now, the administration’s view of the crisis and our future has been rosier than that of its own medical advisers, and of scientists generally. . . . Still, it was impossible to avoid gloomy forecasts for the next year. The scenario that Mr. Trump has been unrolling at his daily press briefings . . . is a fantasy, most experts said. “We face a doleful future,” said Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg, a former president of the National Academy of Medicine. He and others foresaw an unhappy population trapped indoors for months, with the most vulnerable possibly quarantined for far longer.
Note that explicit warning to the authorities out there in the red states: the virus “has begun encroaching on the nation’s rural regions.” The prompt reopening strategy “is a fantasy.” “Most experts” agree. In other words, if you red state guys start reopening now, the disease will surely surge, and you will have blood on your hands!
But somehow, the Republican governors of the big red states don’t seem to be listening to Pravda this time. For starters, Governor Greg Abbott of Texas announced late last week the easing of restrictions starting today and continuing over the next several days. From NBC/DFW today, “‘Reopening’ of Texas Starts Monday Morning [today]”:
Abbott said that on April 22 that current restrictions on elective surgeries will be removed. . . . Beginning next Friday, April 24, Abbott said he believes that retail stores should be able to offer services “to go” . . . . Abbott expected to announce on April 27 what other types of businesses can reopen. . . .”
Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida also is looking to have his state be one of the fastest to reopen. From The Washington Post today:
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) is in a hurry to open the state for business and gave a specially appointed committee five days to come up with ways to do it. DeSantis on Monday announced a “Re-Open Florida Task Force” as a stay-at-home order due to the novel coronavirus is set to expire.
Also joining the group of fast reopeners today were the governors of Georgia and Tennessee, both also Republicans. From Fox News today:
Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp said certain businesses, including gyms and hair salons, can reopen beginning this Friday. Meanwhile, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee confirmed his state's stay-at-home order, previously extended to April 30, will end that day.
New York? Of course, with Democrats Cuomo and de Blasio calling the shots, here we follow the official Pravda program. Maybe, just maybe, we can be allowed some beginning of easing of restrictions in late May, or more likely, June. From Politico, April 9:
New York City could begin to ease some coronavirus restrictions in late May or June . . . . “[W]e are far from out of the woods,” [Mayor] de Blasio said, citing hopeful signs like a stabilization in hospitalizations. “If we really work hard, we have a chance of seeing change in May or June.”
California? The “stay-at-home” order is in place for the indefinite future. From the LA Times, April 15:
This week, a number of local health officers across California voiced agreement with the governor: Now is not the time to loosen up the coronavirus stay-at-home orders. It could be sometime in May before state and local officials begin to seriously contemplate how they might start to gradually ease the stay-at-home order.
Now, who is right here on the fundamental question of whether the easing of economic lockdown restrictions will lead to a resurgence of cases and deaths? I don’t know the answer to that question. By the way, the so-called “experts” don’t know either. The available data are woefully inadequate. However, with each passing day, the available data become more and more inconsistent with the concept that economic lockdowns make any meaningful difference in infections or deaths from this disease. Consider:
In New York, Governor Cuomo issued his “stay at home” order, at the high end of the scale in terms of restrictions, effective March 20. As of this evening, New York has some 18,929 deaths, which is 965 deaths per million population (worldometers data) — far higher than any other state, and almost half of all deaths in the U.S. It’s extremely difficult to conclude that the economic shutdown in New York has accomplished anything at all in controlling the disease.
Compare Florida, which is the state closest to New York in population and demographic characteristics. Florida’s governor instituted a much milder form of economic restrictions, and only did it on April 2. But Florida has only 823 deaths, which is 40 per million population — only about 4% of the death rate of New York. And Florida reports that its number of cases and deaths is trending down.
Other red states have rates of infections and deaths nowhere near the levels in New York. Texas has had 505 deaths, or 18 per million; in Tennessee it’s 152 deaths, or 23 per million; in Georgia it’s 775 deaths, or 75 per million.
And we haven’t even gotten to the seriously red states that never put any meaningful mandatory economic restrictions in place. Best example: South Dakota. So far, 7 deaths, which is less than 9 per million — and that number of deaths hasn’t gone up by even one person in several days.
Every state with a death rate over 200 per million population has a strong version of lockdown: New Jersey (493), Connecticut (372), Louisiana (285), Massachusetts (265), and Michigan (248). All but one of these (Massachusetts) has a Democratic governor.
As far as I can determine by studying the data, all of the states — whether they have imposed a strict version of mandatory economic lockdown, or a mild version, or essentially nothing at all (South Dakota) — have seen the number of infections and deaths crest and begin to decline. The correlation between strictness of lockdown and rates of infection and death is very strongly negative.
I don’t claim to know everything that is going on here. One plausible hypothesis that density of population has something to do with the rate of infections and deaths. Use of mass transit or crowded elevators may have something to do with it. There could be many other factors that we are just not yet aware of.
But economic lockdowns? I think that the Republican governors are absolutely right to start reopening ASAP. Millions of people need to get back to work.
UPDATE, April 21:
In case you have bought into the theory that New York’s problem must be the subways, you might want to look at a map of New York City Covid-19 cases by zip code. This one was produced by Alon Levy at Pedestrian Observations, with cases through April 13:
The areas with the highest density of population, and the most subways (Southern Manhattan and the close-in parts of Brooklyn and Queens) turn out to have the lowest concentration of cases. The highest concentrations are in places with few to no subways, like Eastern Queens, the Northeast Bronx, and Staten Island. Next hypothesis please.