The Texas apocalypse that wasn't

The criticism of Governor Abbott’s decision was particularly egregious because, in many cases, those offering it have handled the pandemic with worse results. Governor Newsom’s California shed about 70,000 jobs in January, and the governor is likely facing a recall. Former Minnesota senator Al Franken took to Twitter to mock Abbott’s move; a month later, his home state has a higher rate of new cases per 100,000 residents than Texas despite the former’s restrictions. Proponents of the mask requirement have said that the only reason cases are declining is because major metropolitan areas such as Austin and Houston still require masks. But doesn’t that validate Abbott’s decision even more thoroughly? If cities can design local solutions that address the issue, why should the state have a heavy hand, too? Why punish smaller municipalities with forced policies that make sense in San Antonio but not in San Gabriel? Many on the political left prefer to talk about lockdowns as if they are the only reasonable response to the pandemic, a simple solution that’s merely a barometer of willpower and responsibility. Just wear a mask! Avoid going outside! Must you be so selfish?! To them, Governor Abbott’s decision is childish and political, playing “own the libs” with people’s lives. But we’ve learned along the way that this simply isn’t true. Lockdowns have enormous consequences, from mental health and youth suicide to physical health and economic devastation.