Blog No. 253. The Coronavirus and Adventures in Trump’s Parallel Universe

On Saturday, President Trump made the bizarre suggestion that he might quarantine New York, New Jersey, and parts of Connecticut. Such a suggestion was consistent with Trump’s “build a wall” mentality, with which we have become only too familiar. An interstate quarantine, however, is something else again. Quite simply the President has no legal authority to establish such a regime. By the end of the day, Trump appeared to have abandoned the idea. Trump is notoriously untroubled by legal niceties, but perhaps even his nimble and compliant Attorney General, Bill Barr, had convinced him that the idea was a non-starter. In any case, Trump’s performance could only contribute to the general aura of incoherence and uncertainty he has created.

On the bright side, Trump’s suggestion of a quarantine may indicate that he has emerged from his parallel universe to abandon hope for his own version of an Easter miracle: packed churches around the country to mark the end of social distancing and the reopening of the American economy. On Tuesday, he said that he wanted America “opened up and just raring to go by Easter.” He added:

Easter’s a very special day for me. Wouldn’t it be great to have all of the churches full? You’ll have packed churches all over our country. I think it would be a beautiful time.

Easter, of course, is indeed a special day for Trump: it is one of the few occasions (apart from his weddings) when he has ever been observed within a house of worship. But, while the traditional miracle of Easter commands the reverence of many, and deserves the respect of all, it was never likely to fulfill Trump’s earlier prediction that the coronavirus would disappear “like a miracle.” No member of the medical or scientific community had ever admitted to expecting such a miracle, and there was no indication that the vast number of churches now conducting “virtual services” would change their mode of operation.

From the same platform of unreality, Trump has spent weeks steadfastly refusing to accept federal responsibility for assuring that our hospitals and healthcare personnel are adequately equipped to take care of themselves and the rest of us. The need for ventilators has gained the most attention in the media, and a desperate need it is, but equally important is the need for personal protective gear, or PPE—gowns, masks and gloves—all in short supply. Both challenges, Trump has insisted, were primarily for the states to deal with. As a result, states have been forced into a grisly competition, searching the globe for suppliers and bidding against not only each other but even the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It has become a free market system in the style of Lord of the Flies.

Up until Friday, Trump had ignored a growing clamor that he bring order to the chaotic situation by using the authority he has under the Defense Production Act (DPA) to command the manufacture of essential materials. It is not clear whether Trump’s stance derived from corporate lobbying or fear that acting under the DPA would be perceived by his base as an embrace of “socialism.” In either case, it was reinforced by his childish pique against Governors whom he regarded as not sufficiently “appreciative” of whatever assistance the federal government had provided.

On Friday, Trump relented, but only to the limited degree of invoking the DPA with respect to a single company, General Motors, and a single product, ventilators. It is unclear what exactly had prodded Trump into action: General Motors had already agreed to produce ventilators, and had been praised by Trump for doing so. In any case that single action hardly solved the problem. There is no indication of how many ventilators GM will produce and on what timetable. Still less is there any indication of where and from whom the government will obtain the additional ventilators needed to make good on Trump’s impulsive boast of producing 100,000 ventilators in 100 days—a goal that, even if fulfilled, will come too late for many hospitals. Still less, is there any indication of what can and will be done to secure and make available an adequate supply of PPE. One can hardly turn on a news broadcast without watching a poignant interview with a hospital administrator, doctor or nurse pleading, some almost in tears, for the protective gear that they must have in order to stay well and do their jobs. These interviews are not, as White House aide Peter Navarro would have it, “sensationalizing” the situation. Rather they are windows into a reality that Navarro and his boss should not be allowed to ignore.

Unfortunately, Congress remains largely on the sidelines, perhaps believing they did something heroic in reaching bi-partisan agreement on a two trillion dollar relief and stimulus package. That legislative act was a notable achievement, but it was hardly enough. Among other things, Congress needs to conduct immediate and rigorous oversight of the administration’s efforts to combat COVID-19, including hospitals’ critical needs for ventilators and PPE. Congress should demand detailed information as to the administration’s assessment of those needs and how they will be met: from what suppliers, in what quantities, on what time tables and at what costs. And where there is a gap between projected need and projected supply, how will it be filled? Once that vital information is extracted, it should be shared with the public. Only then might the public begin to regain confidence that the government knows what it’s doing or, failing that, to demand corrective action.

Increasingly dire conditions not only in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, but around the country, may have dampened some of the enthusiasm for sacrificing social distancing and public health on the altar of economic restoration. To be sure, the economy has been dealt a staggering blow, and it is essential that we get people back to work as soon as reasonably possible. That desired end, however, must be deferred until COVID-19 has been brought under at least a semblance of control. To act in haste, and against the advice of medical experts, would not only cost lives, but potentially do even more damage to the economy.

An underlying theme of some of the “Back to Business” crowd has been that deaths from COVID-19 fall disproportionately on the elderly, and they are, well, expendable. This thought was expressed most bluntly by Dan Patrick, Lieutenant Governor of Texas, but it has clearly been in the minds of others. As a member of the target group, I have one or two thoughts. Personally, I am in good health, leading an active life and making modest contributions to the community (of which this blog is arguably one.) It is a life I am reluctant to depart, especially by way of the agonies of COVID-19, which I have seen vividly portrayed in first-hand accounts. Still, I and most of my friends, are older than we ever expected to be, and if our incidental passing were required in order to avoid a deep recession or depression, I suppose that might be acceptable. In fact, I am not persuaded so far that our demise is a necessary or sufficient condition to restoring the country’s economic health. There is, however, another perspective. Perhaps my death, and that of my contemporaries, from COVID-19 might be part of a wave of mortality sufficiently shocking to assure that our grossly unfit incumbent is swept from office. In that event, it could be said that we did not die in vain.