4 ms·

Germany also has a strict Federal structure, but they managed. They called a meeting of all the state governments, together with the Federal government, and agr

Germany also has a strict Federal structure, but they managed. They called a meeting of all the state governments, together with the Federal government, and agreed on a set of procedures. Each state does things a bit differently, but they're largely on the same page now. Why wasn't anything like this attempted in the US?

jandrewrogers 7y ago
The US Federal government is similar to the EU; member States have considerable amounts of absolute sovereignty, their own forms of government, and their own legal systems. Importantly, the Federal government cannot operate in a State except with consent of the State, which is withheld in numerous instances. The Federal government works for the States, not the other way around, and the States are free to ignore requests by the Federal government on most matters. Why wasn't the response coordinated across the EU? Same answer applies to the US. It would be like herding cats. The Federal government can ask nicely but no one is required to listen Externally, the US presents a common negotiating front. Internally, it is 50+ separate countries. Americans interact almost exclusively with their State governments when in the country, not the Federal government. This explains, for example, why there is no "national" ID in the US. Americans are citizens of their States, first and foremost, and each State has their own independent ID systems. What makes the US somewhat unique is that Americans have an absolute right to change their citizenship among the member States at any time. There was a time not that long ago when many Americans more closely identified with their State citizenship than their Federal citizenship.
- DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
  The EU is not at all comparable to the United States. The US is most certainly not composed of 50 sovereign countries, and the US has a powerful central government - something the EU almost entirely lacks. A much better comparison is the Federal Republic of Germany, which has a strongly federal constitution, much like the United States. The Federal government in Germany has very little formal ability to impose quarantine measures on the states, but it effectively managed to do so. The Federal government called a meeting with all of the state governments, which are individually run by different, competing political parties, and managed to have all the states agree to take a similar set of measures. The Federal government in the United States could have done the same, but chose not to. The political reason for that inaction is clear. The President's #1 priority is the economy and, specifically, the stock market. He doesn't like the idea of quarantine measures, because of their impact on the economy. He spent two months downplaying the virus, and has now shifted to blaming the WHO for his own government's failure to contain the outbreak. > There was a time not that long ago when many Americans more closely identified with their State citizenship than their Federal citizenship. That time was over 150 years ago.
  - jandrewrogers 7y ago
    That is a strange but understandable misunderstanding of the relationship between the Federal government and the States in the US, it is not remotely like Germany. German states are much weaker both in theory and practice. The Federal government often cannot intervene unless the States ask them to, and the States control the terms of that intervention. People raise this issue in every major natural disaster under every administration, baffled why the Federal government doesn’t do more, oblivious to the legal and practical structure of the US government. In my own lifetime there have been many cases where States actively restrict Federal operations within their jurisdiction, with full support of the Federal courts. By convention, the States typically allow the Federal government to operate freely within their jurisdiction, but it is not an obligation as it is strictly at the pleasure of the State. When there are strong disagreements between the Federal and State governments, this is a major point of leverage. Many Federal programs have been successfully killed by States prohibiting Federal operation in their States.
    - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
      I'm very familiar with the constitutions of both the United States and Germany. From what you're saying, I strongly suspect that you're only familiar with one of them. The German Federal government is highly constrained in what it can do in many areas of life, because those areas are under the control of the states. This is why there are 16 different high-school diplomas (Abitur) in Germany, for example. Formally, there is a strong division of powers and responsibilities between the federal and state level in both countries. But in both countries, the Federal government wields a great deal of informal power. The Federal government has access to much greater financial resources, which it can wield to coerce states. My personal view is that this Federal power is even greater in the US than in Germany, due to the enormous political power of the President and the greater financial power of the US government (Germany has to deal with the ECB, while as Trump has shown, the President can directly bully the Federal Reserve). If Trump had made strong statements about the need to impose quarantine measures early on, that would have had a big effect. There are many instruments at his disposal that he could have used to coerce recalcitrant state governments with. Instead, he downplayed the virus until mid-March, and has continually argued against the shutdown (see his Twitter thread). In Germany, Merkel met with the state governments, they agreed on a set of common measures, and she gave a televised address explaining those measures. She's been pretty consistent in her messaging, unlike Trump. Maybe that's because she's a physicist, and he's a real-estate mogul, or maybe it says something about what plays well in each country.

jandrewrogers 7y ago

The US Federal government is similar to the EU; member States have considerable amounts of absolute sovereignty, their own forms of government, and their own legal systems. Importantly, the Federal government cannot operate in a State except with consent of the State, which is withheld in numerous instances. The Federal government works for the States, not the other way around, and the States are free to ignore requests by the Federal government on most matters. Why wasn't the response coordinated across the EU? Same answer applies to the US. It would be like herding cats. The Federal government can ask nicely but no one is required to listen Externally, the US presents a common negotiating front. Internally, it is 50+ separate countries. Americans interact almost exclusively with their State governments when in the country, not the Federal government. This explains, for example, why there is no "national" ID in the US. Americans are citizens of their States, first and foremost, and each State has their own independent ID systems. What makes the US somewhat unique is that Americans have an absolute right to change their citizenship among the member States at any time. There was a time not that long ago when many Americans more closely identified with their State citizenship than their Federal citizenship.

DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
The EU is not at all comparable to the United States. The US is most certainly not composed of 50 sovereign countries, and the US has a powerful central government - something the EU almost entirely lacks. A much better comparison is the Federal Republic of Germany, which has a strongly federal constitution, much like the United States. The Federal government in Germany has very little formal ability to impose quarantine measures on the states, but it effectively managed to do so. The Federal government called a meeting with all of the state governments, which are individually run by different, competing political parties, and managed to have all the states agree to take a similar set of measures. The Federal government in the United States could have done the same, but chose not to. The political reason for that inaction is clear. The President's #1 priority is the economy and, specifically, the stock market. He doesn't like the idea of quarantine measures, because of their impact on the economy. He spent two months downplaying the virus, and has now shifted to blaming the WHO for his own government's failure to contain the outbreak. > There was a time not that long ago when many Americans more closely identified with their State citizenship than their Federal citizenship. That time was over 150 years ago.
- jandrewrogers 7y ago
  That is a strange but understandable misunderstanding of the relationship between the Federal government and the States in the US, it is not remotely like Germany. German states are much weaker both in theory and practice. The Federal government often cannot intervene unless the States ask them to, and the States control the terms of that intervention. People raise this issue in every major natural disaster under every administration, baffled why the Federal government doesn’t do more, oblivious to the legal and practical structure of the US government. In my own lifetime there have been many cases where States actively restrict Federal operations within their jurisdiction, with full support of the Federal courts. By convention, the States typically allow the Federal government to operate freely within their jurisdiction, but it is not an obligation as it is strictly at the pleasure of the State. When there are strong disagreements between the Federal and State governments, this is a major point of leverage. Many Federal programs have been successfully killed by States prohibiting Federal operation in their States.
  - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
    I'm very familiar with the constitutions of both the United States and Germany. From what you're saying, I strongly suspect that you're only familiar with one of them. The German Federal government is highly constrained in what it can do in many areas of life, because those areas are under the control of the states. This is why there are 16 different high-school diplomas (Abitur) in Germany, for example. Formally, there is a strong division of powers and responsibilities between the federal and state level in both countries. But in both countries, the Federal government wields a great deal of informal power. The Federal government has access to much greater financial resources, which it can wield to coerce states. My personal view is that this Federal power is even greater in the US than in Germany, due to the enormous political power of the President and the greater financial power of the US government (Germany has to deal with the ECB, while as Trump has shown, the President can directly bully the Federal Reserve). If Trump had made strong statements about the need to impose quarantine measures early on, that would have had a big effect. There are many instruments at his disposal that he could have used to coerce recalcitrant state governments with. Instead, he downplayed the virus until mid-March, and has continually argued against the shutdown (see his Twitter thread). In Germany, Merkel met with the state governments, they agreed on a set of common measures, and she gave a televised address explaining those measures. She's been pretty consistent in her messaging, unlike Trump. Maybe that's because she's a physicist, and he's a real-estate mogul, or maybe it says something about what plays well in each country.