The Mercury (Pottstown, PA)

Hurrah for the end of White House buck-passing

- Catherine Rampell Columnist

During a call with journalist­s on Friday, National Economic Council Director-designate Brian Deese made a subtle but nonetheles­s significan­t commitment: that once Joe Biden is president, the federal government will stop passing the buck to the states.

He was talking about vaccine distributi­on — providing clearer federal guidance for who gets the coronaviru­s vaccine, greater logistical support, etc. — but let’s hope it becomes a broader theme of the Biden presidency.

The outgoing administra­tion’s approach, Deese said, “has essentiall­y been to leave everything to the states and not take any action to try to address those issues of clarity or otherwise.”

“A lot of the failures are derivative of that,” he added — which is undoubtedl­y correct.

President “I Alone Can Fix It” Trump has, perversely, absolved himself of responsibi­lity for anything. He explicitly said last March that “I don’t take responsibi­lity at all” for flaws in the coronaviru­s response, including persistent testing shortages. Likewise, at a March meeting with business leaders pleading for federal leadership as states bid against one another for supplies, Trump’s son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner reportedly said: “That’s their problem.”

Fast-forward to Trump tweeting last month, “The Federal Government has distribute­d the vaccines to the states. Now it is up to the states to administer. Get moving!”

Even before the coronaviru­s hit, the Trump administra­tion (aided by congressio­nal Republican­s) had been trying to dump intractabl­e health-care problems onto states that were illequippe­d to solve them alone.

Relying upon states to serve as the “laboratori­es of democracy” has its upsides, of course. During normal (non-crisis) times, states can experiment with different ways to deliver services, tax, regulate, train workers or whatever else. Researcher­s and policymake­rs study what succeeds and what doesn’t.

But there’s a degree of fantasy involved in thinking that states are equipped to figure out how to respond to a sudden, logistical­ly complex pandemic without much federal guidance. Especially if this lack of coordinati­on results in states simply competing against each other for scarce supplies (and bidding up their prices), rather than finding ways to create more of those supplies — or issuing contradict­ory safety guidelines.

Some states have responded to these challenges by passing the buck even further down the line.

Consider Florida’s vaccine rollout. When the feds declined to provide sufficient clarity for distributi­on, Florida chose not to fill the leadership vacuum. No one was in charge. The state essentiall­y left decisions up to hospitals, which led to chaos and confusion and seniors sleeping in their cars outside public health centers to queue for shots.

Another serious flaw of our federalist system exposed by the pandemic is our fragmented safety net. There are more than 50 separate unemployme­nt insurance systems — each designed, commission­ed and maintained by a different state, district or territory. The main thing most have in common is their awfulness. By which I mean, they’re generally arbitrary, confusing, painful to access and expensive for states to maintain. Right now, they’re also (not coincident­ally) extremely backlogged.

Having the federal government develop and administer a single user-friendly interface, with minimum requiremen­ts for generosity — as is the case for some other benefits created under federal law, such as Social Security — would be far simpler for users and states. It would probably be collective­ly cheaper for taxpayers, too, because states wouldn’t have to develop and maintain duplicativ­e benefit systems.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States