Do you notice a pattern here?

Every day, the Washington Post publishes on their main page graphs of the seven-day average of new Covid cases per capita, starting in February; they do this for the top six states, although if you click on the article you can see the graph for every state and territory, highest to lowest. I was struck by today’s graphs, which show the top six states of North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Wyoming, Wisconsin and Nebraska. In the last seven days, these states had the highest new cases per 100,000 residents, ranging from 109 in Nebraska to 171 in North Dakota.

By contrast, the national figure is 43 (which of course is a huge jump from just a couple weeks ago). And the six lowest states range from Hawaii at 8 to DC at 18. To be fair, all of these numbers are increasing now, but of course the absolute numbers of daily new cases are far below the top six states. That’s how exponential growth works.

Hmm, what difference is there between these two groups of six states? Could it possibly be that the top six are all firmly controlled by Republican governors and legislatures (Wisconsin has a Democratic governor, but the legislature – which hasn’t met in person since April, despite being one of nine full-time state legislatures in the country – convinced the state Supreme Court to rule that the governor has no power to enact directives for public health. He’s reduced to pleading with people, which obviously isn’t working too well)?  While the bottom five states and DC all have Democratic governors/mayor, with the exception of Vermont, which has an overwhelmingly Democratic legislature, and whose Republican governor cooperates very well with them.

Of course, the governors/legislatures of all of the top six states have openly questioned the need to do anything about the coronavirus, and none of the states have universal mask mandates, even today. Whereas the reverse is the case with the bottom six, especially when it comes to mask mandates.

When I started writing this blog in March, I thought I would just be discussing technical measures that were needed to deal with the pandemic. It never even occurred to me that politics might actually influence how the US responded. Even when Trump and Pence made it clear they didn’t intend to do anything about the pandemic, I thought it would only be a matter of weeks (if that) before they were forced (by their own party) to turn over the whole coronavirus response to a competent, politically neutral person – as South Korea’s president did early on, with spectacular results.

I guess I got that one wrong…

I would love to hear any comments or questions you have on this post. Drop me an email at tom@tomalrich.com.

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The tragedy in India

For a great account of what’s going on in India, read this WaPo article. And read this Atlantic article for a good commentary on how India’s wealthier class ignored the lessons of the 1984 Bhopal disaster and let the health care system stagnate, leaving the country unable to handle this sudden surge in the virus. Although it's wrong to say the system stagnated. For the wealthy, it became (and remains) world-class. Does this remind you of another health care system that, at least in the early days of the pandemic, was overwhelmed?  Both articles call attention to the Modi government’s failures, but they both try to spread the blame around. Yes, others are responsible, but the fact that – after a terrible response to the first wave of the virus – the government got lulled into thinking they’d beaten it, so they could open up completely (including holding big political rallies and allowing the annual Kumbh Mela to take place – this year in Haridwar, which I’ve visited and can ...
Read more

The Indian variant

The numbers keep improving every week. Both new cases and deaths grew at the same 0.7% rate in the past week, vs. 0.9% for both cases and deaths the previous week. And average daily deaths in the past week were 573. For perspective, the last time deaths were this low was March 31, 2020. But given that daily deaths hadn’t gone above 10 until March 15, the fact that they’d accelerated to 468 on March 31 was a bad sign (at the time, my big concern was that total deaths would end up in the low tens of thousands. In fact, they passed 600,000 last week). This morning, WaPo ran a story on the new Indian variant’s arrival in Britain, where it passed 2,000 cases recently. It seems to be at least 50% more transmissible than what we used to call the UK variant, but which is now the dominant variant in both the US and Britain. And that variant in turn easily displaced what had been the previous dominant variant in both countries, since the beginning of the pandemic (in fact, I remember a lot o...
Read more

Deaths and Recoveries

I’m not bothering with my usual Numbers section today, since the 1-day and 7-day rates of increase in deaths and cases haven’t changed at all, and the ratio of deaths to closed cases remains at 17%. The projected deaths numbers are close to what they were yesterday. I haven’t discussed the ratio of deaths to closed cases for a while, although I’ve been reporting it. To refresh your memory, this is the ratio of total Covid-19 deaths so far to “closed cases”; closed cases is the sum of deaths so far and “recoveries” so far. The fact that the US rate is 17% means that, of all closed cases so far in the pandemic, 17% of them have resulted in death. This is down substantially from the initial value of 41%, in late March, when Worldometers started reporting recoveries. But it is still quite high – it seems to mean that, if you’re determined to have a “case” of Covid-19, the odds are close to 1 in 5 that you will die. I’ve been periodically comparing the US performance in this ar...
Read more