Explaining Governors’ Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States

• DOI: 10.1177/1532673X20973453
• Published date: 01 March 2021
• Date: 01 March 2021
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X20973453

American Politics Research

2021, Vol. 49(2) 215 –220

© The Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1532673X20973453

journals.sagepub.com/home/apr

Article

The COVID-19 pandemic is the most serious and severe

threat that countries have faced since World War II. The first

outbreak of the virus took place at Wuhan City in the Hubei

Province of China in December 2019. The virus then spread

to Asia, Europe, and North America between January and

March 2020. As of March 30, there were more than 700,000

confirmed cases of COVID-19 around the world and more

than 34,000 people had died of causes related to the virus

(Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Resource Center,

2020). In addition to human losses, the COVID-19 pandemic

has caused massive economic damage, which threatens con-

sequences worse than those created by the 2008 global finan-

cial crisis (Ilzetzki, 2020).

In the midst of this unprecedented health crisis, govern-

ment responses in Asia and Europe were to implement lock-

downs of parts of the country or of the entire country. A

lockdown implies that all travel into and out the area is pro-

hibited and people’s movements within the area are severely

restricted. For instance, the Chinese government locked

down Wuhan City on January 23, 2020. The Italian govern-

ment was the first to lock down the entire country—on March

11—followed by Spain, France, and many other European

countries. The evidence has so far suggested that locking

down is one of only a few instruments available to halt the

spread of COVID-19, absent a vaccine. Indeed, the number

of new COVID-19 cases in Wuhan City has been zero over

the past few days, and the city has been now reopened as of

March 30. However, these measures come with sizeable eco-

nomic costs and with unusual limitations of civil rights,

especially for liberal democracies.

Given this international context, what was the response

of U.S. governors in the early stage of the COVID-19

pandemic? This question is particularly important for two

reasons. First, the United States is now the country with the

largest number of COVID-19 cases, having overtaken China

and Italy. Second, different U.S. states responded differently

to the outbreak. As of March 30, 28 states had issued a state-

wide order urging their citizens to stay home, whereas 14

states had issued orders in part of the state. In this research

note, we explored the determinants of issuing stay-at-home

orders, focusing on governors’characteristics. In particular,

we focused on their ideology, on whether they face reelection

(i.e., whether the governor is a lame duck), and on their gen-

der and age.

After controlling for deaths related to COVID-19 and

other socioeconomic variables, we found that Democratic

governors were significantly more likely to implement a

statewide order. In our most conservative estimate, being a

Democratic governor increased the probability of implement-

ing a stay-at-home order by more than 50%. Furthermore,

states with Democratic governors were quicker to implement

statewide orders than states with Republican governors.

Moreover, we found that the probability of implementing a

statewide stay-at-home order was about 40% more likely for

governors without term limits and that governors without

term limits were faster to implement stay-at-home measures

than governors with term limits. However, both effects were

973453APRXXX10.1177/1532673X20973453American Politics ResearchBaccini and Brodeur

research-article2020

1McGill University & CIREQ, Montreal, QC, Canada

2University of Ottawa, ON, Canada

Corresponding Author:

Leonardo Baccini, McGill University & CIREQ, Leacock Builiding, 432, 855

Sherbrooke West, Montreal, QC H3A 0G4, Canada.

Email: leonardo.baccini@mcgill.ca

Explaining Governors’ Response to the

COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States

Leonardo Baccini1 and Abel Brodeur2

Abstract

What has been the response of U.S. governors to the COVID-19 pandemic? In this research note, we explore the determinants

of implementing stay-at-home orders, focusing on governors’ characteristics in the early stage of the pandemic. In our most

conservative estimate, being a Democratic governor increased the probability of implementing a stay-at-home order by more

than 50%. Moreover, we found that the probability of implementing a statewide stay-at-home order was about 40% more

likely for governors without term limits than governors with term limits. We also found that Democratic governors and

governors without term limits were significantly faster to adopt statewide orders than Republican governors and governors

with term limits. There is evidence of politics as usual in these unusual times.

Keywords

COVID-19, pandemic, ideology, governors, United States