GIVE THE NATION TIME TO HEAL FROM THE PANDEMIC

 What do education, college football, voting and patronizing restaurants all have in common?  Each of these activities is at the center of a raging debate on how quickly we should return to normalizing our lives in the face of a pandemic. Proposals that made sense in June are now difficult to implement in August.  Attempts at “opening up” have caused new outbreaks of the virus to erupt around the country.  

Whether to return students to their public school classrooms before there is adequate testing or a vaccine for the virus is a quandary for administrators.  It seems that the virus is always several steps ahead of the planning.

On the one hand, pediatricians recognize the developmental delays that will occur if students must endure a prolonged period without in-classroom learning.  This is particularly true in the early primary grades.  On the other hand, opening up a large school district could be catastrophic at a time when 40% of adults remain at risk for a bad outcome if they contract COVID-19.

With college football it is television executives, athletic directors, coaches and players with their families facing off against university presidents, trustees and their lawyers. The first group wants to preserve the hours of television, many millions in cash payments to universities and the gigantic NFL minor league football machine that fills the dreams of young men.

Supported by the second group, the Big Ten and Pac-12 football conferences arrived at a different conclusion. When they reviewed all the possible scenarios of young student athletes behaving like young students, there were few favorable outcomes would allow for a safe football season.  Moreover, the Penn State pedophile scandal in which a football program was given priority over the safety of student athletes is fresh in many memories. These schools decided to concentrate on academics for the pandemic year, a herculean task in itself, and hope for a return to athletics in 2021.

How the nation votes in a highly volatile presidential election year that includes a pandemic could not avoid being wrapped in political intrigue. Democrats want to expand mail-in voting to limit person-to-person contact. Republicans want to discourage mail-in voting, arguing that a trip to the polling place is no different from a trip to the grocery store.

Each political party has a hidden agenda behind their position.  Democrats are sure that mail-in voting will increase the turnout in poor communities with many citizens of color.  Republicans think they are right.  Lawsuits brought by the Trump campaign against state voting laws are now common and the Post Office is under attack, to slow down the mail.  The red herring in the affair is the Republican claim of voter fraud when citizens vote by mail, a fact that is not supported by any historical evidence.

An overview of recent voting law in Pennsylvania is instructive on this issue.  The state Election Reform Bill was passed with bipartisan Republican support long before the pandemic.  The new law permits all voters, without any excuse, to vote by mail 50 days prior to each election.  During the Pennsylvania May primary election officials relied on dedicated drop boxes to allow voters to hand-deliver their mail ballots.  The Trump campaign is suing these officials to prohibit the use of drop boxes. The claim is that they encourage fraud and that the procedure is unconstitutional.

Lastly, there is the restaurant dilemma where ten percent of the nation’s work force is employed.  Restaurants and bars have been identified by public health officials as a major source of viral spread.  In Pennsylvania, the Governor has mandated that indoor dining be limited to 25% occupancy with bar service only with meals.  Restaurant owners are furious at these limitations, which threaten their livelihood.

I have two personal observations on restaurants. First, I have dined out in both Pittsburgh and Washington on several occassions since the March ban was lifted. The sedate, well-controlled dining experience in Washington is much different from the crowds of young people who congregate to socialize and drink in the South Side of Pittsburgh.  The same public health mandate does not make sense for both situations. 

Second, I have compared notes with many older patrons who dined out 3 to 4 times a week prior to the pandemic. Many of these deep-pocket customers will not return to restaurants until there is no longer any health risk.

What is one to make of all this confusion, disparate views and hostility? Remember the often quoted wisdom that it is a fool’s errand to “fight city hall” or for investors to “fight the fed”.  Similarly, it is not wise to fight COVID-19.  Efforts to “out think” the virus in order to gain some economic advantage have failed and left the nation in worse economic shape with increased spread and death.

It is time to take a different view and stand down to permit our country to heal. Attempts to open up within most environments have proven to involve significant risk.  Recent efforts to hold classes at UNC, Notre Dame and other universities, only to close a week later, are further evidence of our limited options.

The pandemic will eventually become more manageable with new testing techniques and effective vaccines.  In the interim, nothing will be normal and we must show some acceptance and make the best of it.