Preserving Public Health Legitimacy: State Responses to the Politicization of Federal Expertise During the Covid-19 Pandemic

• In Event: Crisis and Disaster: Public Policies for Response, Resilience, and Transformation

Abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic exposed deep tensions between public health science and politics in the United States, with federal expert agencies like the CDC and FDA facing unprecedented political attacks. The Trump administration repeatedly undermined the authority of key federal agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). President Trump’s refusal to defer to regulatory experts—whom he associated with the so-called “deep state”—set a precedent for disregarding scientific expertise in public health decision-making. While much of the literature has focused on the erosion of trust in federal institutions during the pandemic, less attention has been paid to how state authorities responded to these dynamics. This study employs a comparative case study approach to examine the responses of two clusters of states that sought to preserve the legitimacy of their public health agencies while implementing their Covid-19 vaccine strategies. Specifically, the analysis focuses on a coalition of Western states which coordinated their vaccine strategy early in the crisis. The second case focuses on a small New England state known for its proactive public health policies. The study also employs elite interviews conducted with public health officials, policymakers, and other key stakeholders, in-depth primary and secondary document analysis, as well as process tracing. The paper highlights how these states worked to safeguard public trust in regulatory science amid growing politicization at the federal level.

Author

• Sarah Denise Rozenblum, Cornell University
  Presenting Author