Public Adm Rev. 2020 May 22; doi: 10.1111/puar.13243. Epub 2020 May 22.
Public administration review
Donald F Kettl
PMID: 32836439 PMCID: PMC7280573 DOI: 10.1111/puar.13243
The explosion of the coronavirus onto the global stage has posed unprecedented challenges for governance. In the United States, the question of how best to respond to these challenges has fractured along intergovernmental lines. The federal government left most of the decisions to the states, and the states went in very different directions. Some of those decisions naturally flowed from the disease's emerging patterns. But to a surprising degree, there were systematic variations in the governors' decisions, and these variations were embedded in a subtle but growing pattern of differences among the states in a host of policy areas, ranging from decisions about embracing the Affordable Care Act to improving their infrastructure. These patterns raise fundamental questions about the role of the federal government's leadership in an issue that was truly national in scope, and whether such varied state reactions were in the public interest. The debate reinforces the emerging reality of an increasingly divided states of America. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
