Representation, Responsiveness, and COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic affected everyone, but its effects varied dramatically by age, gender, race, ethnicity, and geography. The federal government provided massive funds for COVID relief and most of the aid was distributed to individuals and businesses based on general eligibility criteria. However, little is known about COVID relief distribution and its effects. Did federal aid reach communities most in need? And did the federal government respond effectively and equitably at a time of polarized political parties and massive cross-community economic and socio-economic differences? Political scientists William Bianco, Rachel Blum, and Joshua McCrain will assess the extent to which federal policy efforts affected existing socio-economic inequalities, using changes in the presidency and local representation after the 2020 elections and the differences between the Trump and Biden Administration assistance packages to test hypotheses about political favoritism. The first two COVID assistance packages (CARES Act, March 2020, and the Consolidated Appropriation Act, December 2020) were enacted when Trump and the senate majority were Republican, and the third (American Rescue Act, March 2021), when the federal government was under unified Democratic control. The investigators will first assess how funds from each program were distributed and the extent to which they varied across counties. Then, they will analyze variation in the extent to which individuals, groups, or regions received a disproportionate share of benefits. They hypothesize that political control affects the details of the proposals and post-enactment decisions about implementation.