Caught off-guard by the onslaught of the coronavirus, the United States has been forced to adopt an aggressive social distancing strategy as a last resort to slow the spread. We have been broadly supportive of this strategy while recognizing that all measures should be balanced against basic liberties.
The most effective officials are reluctant to place restrictions on people’s lives and do so only when there’s a legitimate justification. The stewardship of Michigan by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, however, is an example of the worst of both worlds. One of the rumored candidates to be Joe Biden’s vice presidential pick has managed to impose draconian measures on residents of the state without any conceivable public health benefit.
Facing one of the worst outbreaks in the country, Whitmer is understandably concerned about doing whatever she can to keep residents safe. But her most recent series of restrictions make no sense, nor do her subsequent explanations. Her latest executive order bans the sale of “carpeting, flooring, furniture, garden centers, plant nurseries, or paint” and prohibits travel to and from other homes, as well as the use of motorized boats. These restrictions have very little scientific value, since activities such as gardening, traveling, and boating do not necessarily violate health officials’ social distancing guidelines. Some of these activities can even provide sustenance and make social distancing more sustainable.
It is worth noting that very few Michiganders objected to Whitmer’s handling of the coronavirus before this order. There were murmurs of discontent, as there have been in most parts of the country, but for the most part, the consensus was positive. Whitmer’s odds of becoming Biden’s running mate spiked, and “that woman from Michigan” (in President Trump’s words) became a Democratic icon seemingly overnight.
All of that changed when Whitmer decided to take advantage of her citizens’ goodwill and restrict their rights even further. A petition to recall Whitmer became a viral sensation. Thousands of protesters flooded Lansing, and members of both political parties urged Whitmer to reconsider.
But she has refused to listen and has instead doubled down over the course of her weeklong media tour. She first argued the rights to garden or boat or travel freely are weather-dependent, and then that the Lansing protests proved that additional enforcement was necessary. This isn’t governance — it’s a power grab and an obvious one at that.
We have argued that the common good and the health of the nation warrants a collective, temporary sacrifice. But there must be a balance so that short-term restrictions do not become unreasonable or permanent. Whitmer has yet to find that balance, and the result has been disastrous. Michiganders are now less likely to support any kind of social distancing, which is necessary if the state hopes to flatten the curve and reopen within the next few months.
The economist Frederic Bastiat once wrote that “the safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable.” The opposite is also true: The best way to lose the public’s respect for the law is to create laws that do not warrant it. Michigan’s social distancing restrictions were widely respected until Whitmer took them too far.
This is a principle the rest of our governing officials would do well to keep in mind. The citizenry is often willing and able to give of themselves and their rights for the sake of the common good — but only if the common good is actually being served.
