TheEconomistFebruary 6th 2021 191I
f crisis revealscharacter, as the saying
goes, it can also reveal contrast. In Ameri-
ca, the two most populous states—Califor-
nia (the largest Democratic state) and Texas
(its Republican rival)—have adopted strik-
ingly different approaches to managing the
pandemic. How well they have fared is sig-
nificant to the health of the nation, since
one-fifth of Americans live in the two
states. Their relative fortunes also show
how hard it is for states, which are in
charge of America’s response to covid-19, to
get the trade-offs right between lock-
downs, economic damage and the spread
of the virus—and show the limits of public
policy when state borders are porous.
Texas, ever sceptical of government, has
taken a lighter-touch approach to public-
health measures. Last year Greg Abbott, the
governor, was slow to issue a mask man-
date and fought cities and counties that
wanted to implement stricter rules. Texas
did issue a stay-at-home-order, but it was
one of the first states to reopen, doing so
even earlier than Donald Trump’s White
House suggested. Cases spiked.
In Texas the trade-off between publichealth and economic health largely played
out in favour of business interests. Last
year during lockdown, Dan Patrick, the his-
trionic lieutenant-governor, summed up
this philosophy by arguing that “there are
more important things than living” and
claiming “lots of” grandparents were will-
ing to die to save the economy. Underscor-
ing the state’s view of business, on Febru-
ary 1st Mr Abbott used his state-of-the-state
address to declare five “emergency items”.
The only one related to covid-19 had noth-
ing to do with stopping deaths, but instead
was aimed at helping businesses, health-
care providers and individuals to avoid co-
vid-related lawsuits.California, in contrast, has taken a more
activist role in responding to the pandem-
ic, says Jennifer Tolbert of the Kaiser Fam-
ily Foundation, a non-profit. This reflects
the state’s philosophy that government in-
tervention can be a force for good. It was
the first state to impose a shelter-in-place
order last year and still has some of the
strictest guidelines in the country. Until re-
cently, the state banned even outdoor res-
taurant dining as it grappled with a winter
surge of cases, prompting complaints and
lawsuits from businesses. Not until Janu-
ary 25th did Governor Gavin Newsom an-
nounce that the state would lift, again, its
stay-at-home order. Public schools have
mostly remained closed for in-person
learning, while those in Texas have been
open since last autumn—by state decree.
Despite their contrasting approaches,
the results have not been as different as ex-
pected. Texas has a higher death rate per
person—only Arizona and South Carolina
have fared worse, according to the cdc. But
the gap is not as great as you might expect:
Texas has had 127 deaths per 100,000 com-
pared with 104 per 100,000 in California.
“People in California are frustrated be-
cause they feel like they are experiencing
the worst of both worlds,” says Ken Miller
of Claremont McKenna college and author
of the book “Texas vs California”. They have
endured never-ending lockdowns, and yet
deaths are currently higher than ever.
Meanwhile, in Texas, the economic bene-
fits of a more libertarian approach are hard
to discern. The unemployment rate in bothCalifornia v Texas v covid-Life, liberty
DALLAS
America’s two largest states have taken opposite approaches to fighting covid-19.
The results are not as different as might be expectedUnited States
20 Vanishingpupils
21 Unionsandschools
22 Covid-19relief,episode 6
23 OverturningRoe
24 Lexington: Adam KinzingerAlso in this section