Lincoln
It was the beginning of the Civil War. Abraham Lincoln, newly inaugurated President of the United States, knew that the Confederate target was Washington, DC. If the newly minted Confederacy could capture the Union capital, they could end the war before it had even really started.
The states remaining in the Union were pitching in. Ninety-day recruits from all over the nation were headed to defend the Capital. The main route though, was through Baltimore, Maryland, and Maryland was on the verge of secession. Mr. Lincoln determined that it was more important to protect Washington’s lifeline to the North, than it was to follow the normal Constitutional procedures of due process and habeas corpus.
The Maryland legislators who were speaking out for the Confederacy, found themselves locked in Fort McHenry, the home of the Star Spangled Banner. When they demanded their rights under the Constitution, Roger Taney, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, ruled that only Congress could suspend the writ of habeas corpus. Since Congress was currently not in session, the President could not hold the prisoners. But Taney failed to actually order the President to release them (Ex parte Merryman).
So Lincoln didn’t.
Roosevelt
It was the beginning of World War II. Pearl Harbor had been attacked, and the pride of the US Navy was sitting on the bottom of the harbor. With the realization of the power of air attacks, Americans saw that the west coast was wide open to the Japanese.
Many Americans fell prey to racism. If someone looked “Japanese” then they were seen as a threat to the American way of life. The fact that many of those Nisei, born and raised in America, were loyal to the United States didn’t stop the widespread fear. So President Franklin Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, authorizing the military to “remove any and all persons from designated military areas”. Those areas included most of coastal California, including Los Angeles and San Francisco. 112,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry were taken from their homes and placed in “relocation” camps.
In time of war, American leaders have taken extraordinary actions. Some have proven to be historically accepted, like Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus. Some are widely condemned, such as Roosevelt’s internment camps. But in times of crisis, American executives have acted decisively, right or wrong.
DeWine
It was the week when the reality of COVID-19 reached us all, at least here in Ohio. The Governor, Mike DeWine, was taking step after step, closing down activity in the state to create “social distancing” and prevent the rapid spread of the virus. On Monday, March 16th, he ordered the Tuesday primary election cancelled. His argument: that opening the polls put Ohioans at risk of spreading the virus to the voters and the poll workers both.
A local court declared he didn’t have the power, that only the state legislature could alter the election. So first the election was on, then it was off, then it was on again. Then the Director of Public Health declared the election process itself a health hazard, and the election was off for good.
DeWine, and his Public Health Director Amy Acton may or may not have violated the State Constitution of Ohio. But, like Lincoln and Roosevelt, they did what they thought was right in protecting the health of the citizens of Ohio.
Curves
By now we all know the theory. We could have allowed the COVID-19 virus to simply “burn through” our population. We’ve seen the numbers: 80% of those who caught the virus would get sick, and then get better. The other 20% would get so sick they would need hospitalization. Some 2% of them would die. But if the 20% all hit the hospital in a short period of time, the “surge,” they would overwhelm our healthcare and many more would die from lack of care. By spreading ourselves out, “social distancing,” we could reduce the surge and flatten the curve.
There are some who say we should have just “let it happen”. They cite “the flu” and other illnesses, and say we would reach “herd immunity” when almost everyone would be immune to the virus because they’ve already had it. And those that aren’t immune, well, many of them would already be dead. Our society would survive, scarred by all of the death and suffering, but not destroyed.
In my early college days, I spent a great deal of time studying nuclear war theory. One of the early theorists developed a concept called “acceptable losses”. A country could “win” a nuclear war, as long as the losses weren’t so great that they unalterably destroyed the country’s ability to function. In a United States of 150 million, that “acceptable” number was under 40 million people. It seemed crazy in the 1970’s to read these theorists of the late 1950’s, but their ideas were still “in vogue” among some world leaders. Luckily for all of us, many more had the common sense to realize “acceptable losses” were in fact, unacceptable.
So is the concept of just letting the virus “burn through”. The “acceptable losses,” aren’t.
Wisconsin
They held an election in Wisconsin last night. The Governor attempted to stop it, ordering the polls closed. The Courts claimed he didn’t have the authority, and the state legislature refused to alter the date, or the process. So, in the midst of the COVID-19 epidemic, while the state of Wisconsin is under a “shelter in place” order, folks lined up at their polling places. Many poll workers didn’t show up, and cities that had hundreds of polls could only open five.
It wasn’t a “fair” election. It was one that required folks to take risks, with their health, and some with their lives, to vote. The Governor couldn’t find a way to stop it, and the legislature, for their own reasons, chose to let it happen.
Everyone followed the law, and the state Constitution. On paper, everyone did the right thing. That’s the safe way, the “black and white” rule-follower way. It put the voters of Wisconsin in an impossible bind: vote for your candidates, and take your life in your hands. It required them to become “acceptable losses”.
And it was unacceptable.
