Why do people blame local electeds for Covid impact?

[Anonymous]

On small businesses, especially?

Local elected officials - Governors and County Executives - are between a rock and a hard place and they have been all year. They are given the false choice between saving lives and saving the economy, and it never should have been this way. It’s a failure of the FEDERAL government. Every other first world country has paid their citizens and residents to stay the eff home. In some cases, up to 80-100% of their salaries. Not saying other countries did it perfectly, but they are not a toxic cesspool of virus and economic ruin. America’s haphazard patchwork of state and county level restrictions is a miserable failure, and puts undue blame and burden on the people trying to find the least bad option.
Sure. Maybe Larry Hogan shouldn’t have opened Ocean City so quickly. Maybe Marc Elrich should have opened schools and kept bars closed. Maybe the CARES funds should have been distributed more efficiently. I’m not someone who would go to any lengths to defend Elrich OR Hogan (or Bowser, Alsobrooks, or whatever Virginia electeds bear responsibilities), but their issues are nitpicking compared to the fact that Trump punted the issue to them. “I take no responsibility at all”

The UI benefits are convoluted and don’t bring service jobs back. The rent relief is temporary and will require back pay. Everybody is falling behind in school, whether virtual or hybrid. Large corporations walk away with the federal assistance money and small businesses get peanuts. Corporate landlords don’t give a crap if their small business tenants don’t have any revenue. They still owe rent and utilities. And the ICU beds are still filling up, because enough people believe that masks are against freedom (don’t forget, MoCo may have voted 80% for Biden, but that 20% for Trump is still a lot of people).

Elrich, Hogan, the Council, and I assume likewise in other counties are simply finding the least bad way to work with the awful and woefully mismanaged hand the federal government dealt them. No decision they make is going to be popular. No decision they make is going to make you happy. There are two to blame for this and, thankfully, one of them will also face eviction on January 20th. The other resembles a turtle.

[Anonymous]

We have a Federalist system of government. Most of the power in regulating day to day lives of people is reserved to the states.

This structure makes a lot of sense since local situations differ and therefore local politicians are able to make better decisions than remote ones. This decentralization is what allowed Florida to be better managed than New York in terms of Covid response. At an even finer level, rural counties do not have a need for the most strict rules as adopted by urban counties and the best people to make that decision is the local county leadership.

If you don't like it, you can push for a Constitution amendment.

Good luck with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have a Federalist system of government. Most of the power in regulating day to day lives of people is reserved to the states.

This structure makes a lot of sense since local situations differ and therefore local politicians are able to make better decisions than remote ones. This decentralization is what allowed Florida to be better managed than New York in terms of Covid response. At an even finer level, rural counties do not have a need for the most strict rules as adopted by urban counties and the best people to make that decision is the local county leadership.

If you don't like it, you can push for a Constitution amendment.

Good luck with that.

Local officials might have more power in day to day decisions -- and I absolutely blame them for opening up indoor seating at restaurants and bars while keeping schools closed, and Bowser/DCPS did a terrible job getting devices and hotspots to everyone who needed them. But only the federal government is allowed to deficit spend, so they have much more financial flexibility. The feds failed us when they didn't provide more resources for local government to use and by not directly supporting people who lost jobs.

[Anonymous]

The Republicans and most Democrats just hate Erlich because he is super liberal ... but Republicans put Ficker up as their choice and Erlich ended up being the lesser of 2 evils.

If you are following online comments it’s mostly old white males and cops. Cops hate him because when the beat people they get convicted which is new to them. White males hate him because of Hispanics and blacks getting an even playing field.

Their hate has nothing to do with the job he is doing or CoVID. They are deranged from hate. It’s Nirvana fallacy... nothing he does is perfect so they will pick it apart like an old scab.

- did not vote for Erlich but obviously did not vote for Ficker

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Federalist system of government. Most of the power in regulating day to day lives of people is reserved to the states.

This structure makes a lot of sense since local situations differ and therefore local politicians are able to make better decisions than remote ones. This decentralization is what allowed Florida to be better managed than New York in terms of Covid response. At an even finer level, rural counties do not have a need for the most strict rules as adopted by urban counties and the best people to make that decision is the local county leadership.

If you don't like it, you can push for a Constitution amendment.

Good luck with that.

Local officials might have more power in day to day decisions -- and I absolutely blame them for opening up indoor seating at restaurants and bars while keeping schools closed, and Bowser/DCPS did a terrible job getting devices and hotspots to everyone who needed them. But only the federal government is allowed to deficit spend, so they have much more financial flexibility. The feds failed us when they didn't provide more resources for local government to use and by not directly supporting people who lost jobs.

You talk as if the Federal government's spending power is some magic wand - wave it and all our economic stress/problems go away. It doesn't work like that. There has to be real actual economic activity backing the spending. To have economic activity means businesses have to operate to produce and deliver the products and services that people demand. The Federal government *DID* provide substantial support to the economy through significant deficit spending. Whether the amount of support given is enough is up for debate, but the US has fared better than other western advanced economies with the most similar cultural backgrounds, including Canada and Australia. The current US unemployment rate is only 6.7 percent, which is a "healthy" level of unemployment in a historical context. So at least on the economics front, the Federal government certainly has not failed us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Federalist system of government. Most of the power in regulating day to day lives of people is reserved to the states.

This structure makes a lot of sense since local situations differ and therefore local politicians are able to make better decisions than remote ones. This decentralization is what allowed Florida to be better managed than New York in terms of Covid response. At an even finer level, rural counties do not have a need for the most strict rules as adopted by urban counties and the best people to make that decision is the local county leadership.

If you don't like it, you can push for a Constitution amendment.

Good luck with that.

Local officials might have more power in day to day decisions -- and I absolutely blame them for opening up indoor seating at restaurants and bars while keeping schools closed, and Bowser/DCPS did a terrible job getting devices and hotspots to everyone who needed them. But only the federal government is allowed to deficit spend, so they have much more financial flexibility. The feds failed us when they didn't provide more resources for local government to use and by not directly supporting people who lost jobs.

What did local officials ask for that the Fed did not give them as far as COVID is concerned?

DC, MD, VA have not been short a single ventilator.

What was the request that was filed with the Fed that went unfulfilled?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Federalist system of government. Most of the power in regulating day to day lives of people is reserved to the states.

This structure makes a lot of sense since local situations differ and therefore local politicians are able to make better decisions than remote ones. This decentralization is what allowed Florida to be better managed than New York in terms of Covid response. At an even finer level, rural counties do not have a need for the most strict rules as adopted by urban counties and the best people to make that decision is the local county leadership.

If you don't like it, you can push for a Constitution amendment.

Good luck with that.

Local officials might have more power in day to day decisions -- and I absolutely blame them for opening up indoor seating at restaurants and bars while keeping schools closed, and Bowser/DCPS did a terrible job getting devices and hotspots to everyone who needed them. But only the federal government is allowed to deficit spend, so they have much more financial flexibility. The feds failed us when they didn't provide more resources for local government to use and by not directly supporting people who lost jobs.

You talk as if the Federal government's spending power is some magic wand - wave it and all our economic stress/problems go away. It doesn't work like that. There has to be real actual economic activity backing the spending. To have economic activity means businesses have to operate to produce and deliver the products and services that people demand. The Federal government *DID* provide substantial support to the economy through significant deficit spending. Whether the amount of support given is enough is up for debate, but the US has fared better than other western advanced economies with the most similar cultural backgrounds, including Canada and Australia. The current US unemployment rate is only 6.7 percent, which is a "healthy" level of unemployment in a historical context. So at least on the economics front, the Federal government certainly has not failed us.

The poverty rate actually declined when people were getting the extra $600 in unemployment. When that ended, poverty and food insecurity sky rocketed. People can't spend money if they don't have it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Federalist system of government. Most of the power in regulating day to day lives of people is reserved to the states.

This structure makes a lot of sense since local situations differ and therefore local politicians are able to make better decisions than remote ones. This decentralization is what allowed Florida to be better managed than New York in terms of Covid response. At an even finer level, rural counties do not have a need for the most strict rules as adopted by urban counties and the best people to make that decision is the local county leadership.

If you don't like it, you can push for a Constitution amendment.

Good luck with that.

Local officials might have more power in day to day decisions -- and I absolutely blame them for opening up indoor seating at restaurants and bars while keeping schools closed, and Bowser/DCPS did a terrible job getting devices and hotspots to everyone who needed them. But only the federal government is allowed to deficit spend, so they have much more financial flexibility. The feds failed us when they didn't provide more resources for local government to use and by not directly supporting people who lost jobs.

What did local officials ask for that the Fed did not give them as far as COVID is concerned?

DC, MD, VA have not been short a single ventilator.

What was the request that was filed with the Fed that went unfulfilled?

Money to improve school ventilation systems so that schools could open more safely.

Money to individuals so that restaurants can afford to stay closed.

Money to local food banks so that families facing food insecurity can eat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Federalist system of government. Most of the power in regulating day to day lives of people is reserved to the states.

This structure makes a lot of sense since local situations differ and therefore local politicians are able to make better decisions than remote ones. This decentralization is what allowed Florida to be better managed than New York in terms of Covid response. At an even finer level, rural counties do not have a need for the most strict rules as adopted by urban counties and the best people to make that decision is the local county leadership.

If you don't like it, you can push for a Constitution amendment.

Good luck with that.

Local officials might have more power in day to day decisions -- and I absolutely blame them for opening up indoor seating at restaurants and bars while keeping schools closed, and Bowser/DCPS did a terrible job getting devices and hotspots to everyone who needed them. But only the federal government is allowed to deficit spend, so they have much more financial flexibility. The feds failed us when they didn't provide more resources for local government to use and by not directly supporting people who lost jobs.

What did local officials ask for that the Fed did not give them as far as COVID is concerned?

DC, MD, VA have not been short a single ventilator.

What was the request that was filed with the Fed that went unfulfilled?

Money to improve school ventilation systems so that schools could open more safely.

Money to individuals so that restaurants can afford to stay closed.

Money to local food banks so that families facing food insecurity can eat.

Ahhh...so money.

Why should the Fed spend money when at a local level DC has not spent a penny from its $1.5B rainy day fund. Nor has DC asked the Fed for money to improve school ventilators or your other suggestions. Are you recommending that Bets DeVos tell Mayor Bowser how to spend her budget in DCPS and what type of HVAC's to upgrade to?

That just is not how the system works.

Locals have to identify the issues, identify gaps and if there is a shortfall, request Fed support. But the Fed cannot swing in and tell the Mayor that these restaurants must close and these must stay open.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Federalist system of government. Most of the power in regulating day to day lives of people is reserved to the states.

This structure makes a lot of sense since local situations differ and therefore local politicians are able to make better decisions than remote ones. This decentralization is what allowed Florida to be better managed than New York in terms of Covid response. At an even finer level, rural counties do not have a need for the most strict rules as adopted by urban counties and the best people to make that decision is the local county leadership.

If you don't like it, you can push for a Constitution amendment.

Good luck with that.

Local officials might have more power in day to day decisions -- and I absolutely blame them for opening up indoor seating at restaurants and bars while keeping schools closed, and Bowser/DCPS did a terrible job getting devices and hotspots to everyone who needed them. But only the federal government is allowed to deficit spend, so they have much more financial flexibility. The feds failed us when they didn't provide more resources for local government to use and by not directly supporting people who lost jobs.

You talk as if the Federal government's spending power is some magic wand - wave it and all our economic stress/problems go away. It doesn't work like that. There has to be real actual economic activity backing the spending. To have economic activity means businesses have to operate to produce and deliver the products and services that people demand. The Federal government *DID* provide substantial support to the economy through significant deficit spending. Whether the amount of support given is enough is up for debate, but the US has fared better than other western advanced economies with the most similar cultural backgrounds, including Canada and Australia. The current US unemployment rate is only 6.7 percent, which is a "healthy" level of unemployment in a historical context. So at least on the economics front, the Federal government certainly has not failed us.

The poverty rate actually declined when people were getting the extra $600 in unemployment. When that ended, poverty and food insecurity sky rocketed. People can't spend money if they don't have it.

So go out there get a job and earn money. There are 120+ million people with a full-time job in the US, over 93% of people who want a job, has a job. Clearly, the lack of money to spend is best solved by getting employment, and not by waiting for government handouts. The boost in unemployment benefits was temporary. It worked as intended. The ending of this temporary boost is also working as intended by encouraging people to get back to work.

[Anonymous]

The Fed is never going to write a blank check for a local governments general operating funds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Federalist system of government. Most of the power in regulating day to day lives of people is reserved to the states.

This structure makes a lot of sense since local situations differ and therefore local politicians are able to make better decisions than remote ones. This decentralization is what allowed Florida to be better managed than New York in terms of Covid response. At an even finer level, rural counties do not have a need for the most strict rules as adopted by urban counties and the best people to make that decision is the local county leadership.

If you don't like it, you can push for a Constitution amendment.

Good luck with that.

Local officials might have more power in day to day decisions -- and I absolutely blame them for opening up indoor seating at restaurants and bars while keeping schools closed, and Bowser/DCPS did a terrible job getting devices and hotspots to everyone who needed them. But only the federal government is allowed to deficit spend, so they have much more financial flexibility. The feds failed us when they didn't provide more resources for local government to use and by not directly supporting people who lost jobs.

You talk as if the Federal government's spending power is some magic wand - wave it and all our economic stress/problems go away. It doesn't work like that. There has to be real actual economic activity backing the spending. To have economic activity means businesses have to operate to produce and deliver the products and services that people demand. The Federal government *DID* provide substantial support to the economy through significant deficit spending. Whether the amount of support given is enough is up for debate, but the US has fared better than other western advanced economies with the most similar cultural backgrounds, including Canada and Australia. The current US unemployment rate is only 6.7 percent, which is a "healthy" level of unemployment in a historical context. So at least on the economics front, the Federal government certainly has not failed us.

The poverty rate actually declined when people were getting the extra $600 in unemployment. When that ended, poverty and food insecurity sky rocketed. People can't spend money if they don't have it.

So go out there get a job and earn money. There are 120+ million people with a full-time job in the US, over 93% of people who want a job, has a job. Clearly, the lack of money to spend is best solved by getting employment, and not by waiting for government handouts. The boost in unemployment benefits was temporary. It worked as intended. The ending of this temporary boost is also working as intended by encouraging people to get back to work.

But if we want to get COVID under control, we want people to stay home, not be going to work. We want restaurants and bars to close, which they can only afford to do if that revenue is replaced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Republicans and most Democrats just hate Erlich because he is super liberal ... but Republicans put Ficker up as their choice and Erlich ended up being the lesser of 2 evils.

If you are following online comments it’s mostly old white males and cops. Cops hate him because when the beat people they get convicted which is new to them. White males hate him because of Hispanics and blacks getting an even playing field.

Their hate has nothing to do with the job he is doing or CoVID. They are deranged from hate. It’s Nirvana fallacy... nothing he does is perfect so they will pick it apart like an old scab.

- did not vote for Erlich but obviously did not vote for Ficker

No, it's not new. This county has a very ethical police force, and if they know about wrongdoing, they hold the officers accountable.

What's "new" is that people are suddenly paying attention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a Federalist system of government. Most of the power in regulating day to day lives of people is reserved to the states.

This structure makes a lot of sense since local situations differ and therefore local politicians are able to make better decisions than remote ones. This decentralization is what allowed Florida to be better managed than New York in terms of Covid response. At an even finer level, rural counties do not have a need for the most strict rules as adopted by urban counties and the best people to make that decision is the local county leadership.

If you don't like it, you can push for a Constitution amendment.

Good luck with that.

Local officials might have more power in day to day decisions -- and I absolutely blame them for opening up indoor seating at restaurants and bars while keeping schools closed, and Bowser/DCPS did a terrible job getting devices and hotspots to everyone who needed them. But only the federal government is allowed to deficit spend, so they have much more financial flexibility. The feds failed us when they didn't provide more resources for local government to use and by not directly supporting people who lost jobs.

You talk as if the Federal government's spending power is some magic wand - wave it and all our economic stress/problems go away. It doesn't work like that. There has to be real actual economic activity backing the spending. To have economic activity means businesses have to operate to produce and deliver the products and services that people demand. The Federal government *DID* provide substantial support to the economy through significant deficit spending. Whether the amount of support given is enough is up for debate, but the US has fared better than other western advanced economies with the most similar cultural backgrounds, including Canada and Australia. The current US unemployment rate is only 6.7 percent, which is a "healthy" level of unemployment in a historical context. So at least on the economics front, the Federal government certainly has not failed us.

+1. Finally, someone on here who knows the truth. Thank you for clearly articulating.

[Anonymous]

Because Hogan is scum, and mis-spent $7m of state money on faulty defective tests, paid to a buddy of his Korean wife.

No impropriety there at all, right? Nah.