Publisher's note: The author of this post is Mitch Kokai for the John Locke Foundation.
John Daniel Davidson
of the Federalist offers a warning
to those who want the federal government to take a larger role in fighting the coronavirus pandemic.
- Watching the media react to federal and state government responses to the Wuhan coronavirus over the past few days, you would think they secretly wished we had an executive branch with unlimited powers-their hatred of President Trump notwithstanding. You would also think they have only a vague idea of what federalism is and how it's supposed to work.
- Many reporters and pundits, for example, seem to think states are almost entirely dependent on the federal government in emergency situations like this. ...
- ... For as much as we might think of the federal government as all-powerful, it really isn't. The founders wisely chose a federal republic for our form of government, which means sovereignty is divided between states and the federal government.
- The powers of the federal government are limited and enumerated, while all powers not granted to the feds are reserved for the states, including emergency police powers of the kind we're seeing states and localities use now. Local governments, as creations of the states, can exercise state police powers as well.
- Much of the media seems wholly unaware of this basic feature of our system of government. ...
- ... As the coronavirus get worse, we're going to see a lot more actions being taken by cities, counties, and states-many more than we'll see from the feds, in fact. That's as it should be. We should expect the government power that's closest to affected communities to be the most active, while Washington, D.C., concern itself with larger problems, like developing a vaccine and controlling our borders and ports of entry.