Lian Wang ’21 Opinion Editor
Social distancing is one of the easiest and most effective ways of curbing the spread of COVID-19, yet many still forgo it for parties, gatherings, and other forms of entertainment. In spite of universal advice and warnings from medical experts, the federal government has yet to formally order social distancing measures, leaving this decision to state governments. However, considering the soaring death rates in the U.S. and glaring examples from outbreaks in other countries, the U.S. federal government must step in and strictly enforce social distancing in all states.
Everyone is now aware that COVID-19 spreads between people; it takes only one undiagnosed positive case to infect an entire city. But this fact may not resonate with some, who still see themselves in a bubble of immunity against the virus. Data from the New York Times showed residents of states in the Southeast and Southwest still traveling at levels close to normal, during the week of March 23. Most notably, Florida partygoers continued gathering on beaches up until April 1, when Governor Ron DeSantis finally ordered a statewide lockdown. Even since then, citizens have struggled to obey these belated, clear-cut stay-at-home orders.
But, beyond Florida this mindset poses a problem. Still today, even after the U.S. has reported over 400,000 confirmed cases and 19,000 deaths, seven states (Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming) have still not imposed stay-at-home measures. Governors of these states have stated that their number of cases was not high enough to justify government orders. In other words, they do not see themselves as being in an advanced state of the crisis and too few people have died to warrant extreme edicts.
The decision to enforce social distancing measures should not be up to individual states. State governments do not have the same caliber of health and scientific resources as the federal government does. With hundreds of experts advising the White House, the federal government should be expected to make the most informed and rational decisions for its states, especially in a time of national crisis.
The most common argument against federal regulation is, of course, states’ rights and individual liberty. However, for any situation, there exists a delicate balance between liberty and protection; there is no perfect solution to both. When the lives of millions of Americans and the future of the country is at stake, citizens must make sacrifices. In his 1787 Letter of Transmittal to Congress, George Washington stated: “It is obviously impracticable in the Federal Government of these States to secure all rights of independent sovereignty to each, and yet provide for the interest and safety of all. Individuals entering into society must give up a share of liberty to preserve the rest.”
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These three are equally unalienable rights guaranteed to each citizen of the United States. However, the exercise of some rights must be weighed more than others, especially when pitting the liberty to party against the basic right to live. Liberty must be protected until it infringes upon everyone else’s right to health and life. This is the exchange that America is facing today. Every party or social gathering risks expanding the outbreak of COVID-19, affecting cities, states, and the entire country.
To every individual, please stay at home. Sacrifice those few hours of enjoyment for the wellbeing of millions. To the federal government, please enforce social distancing and protect the nation from its own destruction.