03-11-2021, 09:16 PM
More seriously:
Associations Between Governor Political Affiliation and COVID-19 Cases, Deaths, and Testing in the U.S.
Introduction: The response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic became increasingly politicized in the U.S. and political affiliation of state leaders may contribute to policies affecting the spread of the disease. This study examines differences in COVID-19 infection, death, and testing by governor party affiliation across 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
Methods: A longitudinal analysis was conducted in December 2020 examining COVID-19 incidence, death, testing, and test positivity rates from March 15 through December 15, 2020. A Bayesian negative binomial model was fit to estimate daily RRs and posterior intervals (PIs) comparing rates by gubernatorial party affiliation. The analyses adjusted for state population density, rurality, Census region, age, race, ethnicity, poverty, number of physicians, obesity, cardiovascular disease, asthma, smoking, and presidential voting in 2020.
Results: From March to early June, Republican-led states had lower COVID-19 incidence rates compared with Democratic-led states. On June 3, the association reversed, and Republican-led states had higher incidence (RR=1.10, 95% PI=1.01, 1.18). This trend persisted through early December. For death rates, Republican-led states had lower rates early in the pandemic, but higher rates from July 4 (RR=1.18, 95% PI=1.02, 1.31) through mid-December. Republican-led states had higher test positivity rates starting on May 30 (RR=1.70, 95% PI=1.66, 1.73) and lower testing rates by September 30 (RR=0.95, 95% PI=0.90, 0.98).
Conclusion: Gubernatorial party affiliation may drive policy decisions that impact COVID-19 infections and deaths across the U.S. Future policy decisions should be guided by public health considerations rather than political ideology.
INTRODUCTION
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in a global public health crisis. As of December 15, 2020, there have been >16 million confirmed COVID-19 cases and 300,000 deaths in the US.1 In response to the pandemic, the governors of all 50 states declared states of emergency. Shortly thereafter, states began enacting policies to help stop the spread of the virus. However, these policies vary and are guided, in part, by decisions from state governors.
Through state constitutions and laws, governors have the authority to take action in public health emergencies. In early 2020, nearly all state governors issued stay-at-home executive orders that advised or required residents to shelter in place.2 Recent studies found that Republican governors, however, were slower to adopt stay-at-home orders, if they did so at all.3,4 Moreover, another study found that Democratic governors had longer durations of stay-at-home orders.5 Further, researchers identified governor Democratic political party affiliation as the most important predictor of state mandates to wear face masks.6
Although recent studies have examined individual state policies, such as mandates to socially distance, wear masks, and close schools and parks,3,4,6–8 multiple policies may act together to impact the spread of COVID-19. Additionally, the pandemic response has become increasingly politicized.7,9,10 As such, political affiliation of state leaders, and specifically governors, might best capture the omnibus impact of state policies. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to quantify differences in incidence, death, testing, and test positivity rates over time, stratified by governors’ political affiliation among the 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Much more at the source (check the link).
I am going to give credit to Republican governors who chose to do lockdowns and mask mandates. Without those governors (including those of Indiana and Ohio) the numbers would be even uglier. The numbers for Indiana and Ohio probably look more like those of Michigan, Illinois, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania (yes, Kentucy has a Democratic Governor) than like those of Iowa, Missouri, or Georgia.
Associations Between Governor Political Affiliation and COVID-19 Cases, Deaths, and Testing in the U.S.
Introduction: The response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic became increasingly politicized in the U.S. and political affiliation of state leaders may contribute to policies affecting the spread of the disease. This study examines differences in COVID-19 infection, death, and testing by governor party affiliation across 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
Methods: A longitudinal analysis was conducted in December 2020 examining COVID-19 incidence, death, testing, and test positivity rates from March 15 through December 15, 2020. A Bayesian negative binomial model was fit to estimate daily RRs and posterior intervals (PIs) comparing rates by gubernatorial party affiliation. The analyses adjusted for state population density, rurality, Census region, age, race, ethnicity, poverty, number of physicians, obesity, cardiovascular disease, asthma, smoking, and presidential voting in 2020.
Results: From March to early June, Republican-led states had lower COVID-19 incidence rates compared with Democratic-led states. On June 3, the association reversed, and Republican-led states had higher incidence (RR=1.10, 95% PI=1.01, 1.18). This trend persisted through early December. For death rates, Republican-led states had lower rates early in the pandemic, but higher rates from July 4 (RR=1.18, 95% PI=1.02, 1.31) through mid-December. Republican-led states had higher test positivity rates starting on May 30 (RR=1.70, 95% PI=1.66, 1.73) and lower testing rates by September 30 (RR=0.95, 95% PI=0.90, 0.98).
Conclusion: Gubernatorial party affiliation may drive policy decisions that impact COVID-19 infections and deaths across the U.S. Future policy decisions should be guided by public health considerations rather than political ideology.
INTRODUCTION
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in a global public health crisis. As of December 15, 2020, there have been >16 million confirmed COVID-19 cases and 300,000 deaths in the US.1 In response to the pandemic, the governors of all 50 states declared states of emergency. Shortly thereafter, states began enacting policies to help stop the spread of the virus. However, these policies vary and are guided, in part, by decisions from state governors.
Through state constitutions and laws, governors have the authority to take action in public health emergencies. In early 2020, nearly all state governors issued stay-at-home executive orders that advised or required residents to shelter in place.2 Recent studies found that Republican governors, however, were slower to adopt stay-at-home orders, if they did so at all.3,4 Moreover, another study found that Democratic governors had longer durations of stay-at-home orders.5 Further, researchers identified governor Democratic political party affiliation as the most important predictor of state mandates to wear face masks.6
Although recent studies have examined individual state policies, such as mandates to socially distance, wear masks, and close schools and parks,3,4,6–8 multiple policies may act together to impact the spread of COVID-19. Additionally, the pandemic response has become increasingly politicized.7,9,10 As such, political affiliation of state leaders, and specifically governors, might best capture the omnibus impact of state policies. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to quantify differences in incidence, death, testing, and test positivity rates over time, stratified by governors’ political affiliation among the 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Much more at the source (check the link).
I am going to give credit to Republican governors who chose to do lockdowns and mask mandates. Without those governors (including those of Indiana and Ohio) the numbers would be even uglier. The numbers for Indiana and Ohio probably look more like those of Michigan, Illinois, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania (yes, Kentucy has a Democratic Governor) than like those of Iowa, Missouri, or Georgia.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.