This post was originally published on this site.
—
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) recently acknowledged that his administration’s early COVID-19 restrictions on outdoor dining were “insane.” The admission has drawn predictable attention, yet it changes little about the record.
Those rules, along with prolonged school closures and other sweeping limits, imposed real costs on families, businesses and public health while delivering uncertain benefits.
Newsom’s government treated outdoor seating as a major transmission risk long after evidence showed the virus spread far more readily indoors. Restaurants that invested in heaters, tents and open-air setups still faced shutdowns or severe capacity limits.
The policy reflected a broader preference for centralized control over measured responses that weighed both viral risk and the harm of isolation, lost livelihoods, and disrupted education.
Florida under Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) took a different path. DeSantis moved earlier to reopen schools and keep businesses operating with fewer blanket bans. Florida prioritized protecting the elderly and medically vulnerable while allowing younger, healthier residents to resume normal activity. The approach accepted that COVID-19 would circulate and focused resources where mortality risk was highest rather than attempting to suppress every case through indefinite restrictions.
Outcomes reflected those differences. Multiple analyses of excess deaths and age-adjusted COVID mortality during the pandemic years showed higher rates in several high-restriction blue states than in Florida and other states that reopened sooner. New York under then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo recorded especially heavy losses early on, compounded by the decision to return COVID-positive patients to nursing homes.
California’s prolonged restrictions correlated with significant excess mortality as well, even as the state maintained some of the strictest rules in the country. Florida’s excess death rates compared favorably despite an older population and higher rates of certain comorbidities.
These gaps were not solely the product of demographics or hospital capacity. Policy choices mattered. Extended school closures in California contributed to learning loss and mental-health declines among children, costs that remain measurable years later.
Small businesses that could not survive months of limited or zero revenue closed permanently. Outdoor dining bans exemplified the pattern: highly visible, politically costly measures that later proved hard to defend on scientific grounds.
Newsom’s recent comments concede the outdoor dining rules went too far. That recognition is useful only if it prompts a clearer accounting of the full policy suite. Blanket lockdowns, mask mandates of uncertain value in community settings, and delayed school reopenings extracted a steep price.
States that treated the virus as a serious but manageable threat, rather than an emergency requiring open-ended emergency powers, generally recorded better overall results on excess mortality and economic recovery.
Public health decisions during a novel pathogen involve trade-offs. Suppressing transmission at all costs proved neither sustainable nor optimal. Florida’s model of targeted protection and earlier restoration of normal life avoided some of the excesses visible in California and New York.
Newsom’s admission on one narrow policy does not rewrite the broader record. Voters and future policymakers should examine the comparative data rather than accept late-stage reframing as sufficient accountability.
The pandemic tested governance under uncertainty. Those who kept restrictions calibrated to actual risk and updated them as evidence accumulated served their residents better than those who treated every restriction as a moral imperative. The outdoor dining episode is a small but telling example of the larger pattern.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy RedState’s conservative reporting exposing the radical left and woke media? Support our work so we can keep bringing you the truth.
Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
