One of the ironies of the current pandemic is that the President and his supporters continue to attack the very experts and institutions that they actually depend on to solve the public health problems associated with the pandemic. The case of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, is illustrative in this regard.
As the director of NIAID since 1984, he has advised six Presidents about urgent matters of public health. President George W. Bush was so appreciative of Dr. Fauci’s work on AIDS that he awarded him the Presidential Medal of Honor in July 2008.
As the public face of the medical establishment, Dr. Fauci has often been placed in a position where he feels compelled to qualify or contradict some of the President’s public statements (e.g., the efficacy of chloroquine as a therapeutic with the Corona virus). Quite predictably, he has been the object of much ridicule and vitriol from the President’s allies.
Ever eager to display his Trump support bona fides, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul upbraided Fauci during recent Senate testimony: “Dr Fauci, I don’t think you’re the end all, I don’t think you’re the one person that gets to make a decision.” Fauci’s transgression that drew Paul’s ire? Statingt that caution was needed in setting a date for sending children back to schools.
People want experts and leadership, not political attacks
Though it may be a popular thing to berate experts and institutions in some periods (the routine script of the Trump political machine), such attacks do not gain much traction in the midst of the uncertainty of a pandemic. During a crisis, accurate information from experts and authorities is the primary thing that people desire. Credibility is everything.
Not surprisingly, recent surveys have identified Dr. Fauci as the most trustworthy source of information on the coronavirus, while Donald Trump lagged far behind. The current attack on experts and institutions is a losing game. Political progressives should take this to heart, and not be distracted by the noise.
A recent survey found that governors are also rated much higher than national officials in terms of approval of how they have handled the crisis. This is not surprising, since governors have taken the most decisive actions to protect public health during this period, in part because the federal government failed to provide national leadership in responding to the pandemic.
Regardless of political affiliation, the governors who took more forceful actions to protect public health were uniformly given higher approval ratings, with KY Governor Andy Beshear given the highest ratings of all (See full poll report here). In contrast, governors who were late in enacting public measures to contain the virus received lower approval ratings.
In the midst of crisis, trust returns
In short, a crisis reminds citizens what experts and our institutions, including government, actually do for us. In this light, the results of a recent multinational survey by the Edelman Public Relations Firm about trust in government are quite instructive.
- Between January and May of this year, trust in government in eleven nations had surged by 11% points.
- By May of 2020, overall trust in government as measured by this periodic survey was at its highest level in more than 20 years.
- Trust in traditional media in the 11 nations surveyed also increased by an average of 7%.
- And confidence in business increased about 4% during the same period.
So, what does this all mean for the upcoming elections, and for governance going forth? A related finding in the poll shows that the pandemic has increased the salience and perceived importance of issues related to social inequality.
- Two-thirds of the respondents agreed with the statement that “Those with less education, less money, and fewer resources are being unfairly burdened with most of the suffering, risk of illness, and need to sacrifice due to the pandemic.”
- Moreover, 64% agreed that action was needed: “The pandemic has made me realize how big the gap is in our country between the rich and the working class, and that something must be done to more fairly distribute our country’s wealth and prosperity.”
In other words, this is an auspicious time for political leaders to discuss how they would plan to address problems of social inequality and social justice (e.g., universal basic income).
At another level, one can observe that leaders can only accomplish what the public gives them consent to accomplish. In other words, in the wake of the pandemic, there will be an opportunity to do more, to accomplish more on behalf of the public good.
To make the most of this opportunity, we should follow the example of many of our governors who have built credibility with timely, relevant, and accurate information. This includes conducting public business by being accessible, responsive, and transparent. The road to a better future begins with better communication by our leaders and our public institutions. If we do that, we may build enough trust to tackle even harder problems as we come out of this crisis.
–30–