Berlin's Response

From the DW:

“COVID response: What the German federal government's new powers mean”

(Medical face masks with the German eagle seal and a German flag patch)

For much of the pandemic, Germany's 16 states have been in charge of coronavirus pandemic regulations. Amid criticism and chaos, Germany's federal government is taking the reins — but will this make a difference? Federalism has presented a challenge to managing the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. At the beginning of March, with coronavirus cases still on the rise in Germany, an agreement was made that seemed to signal a possible way out of lockdown. Each of Germany's 16 states could reopen in slow stages depending on case numbers — but had to pull an "emergency brake" and lock down harder in the event that figures in individual regions exceeded a certain threshold. But the pressure on the states to not backtrack on reopening was too great. The emergency brake was not applied in many places, even while cases rose exponentially. Now, after weeks of further disagreement, the federal and state governments have agreed on an amendment to Germany's Infection Protection Act, which governs control of the pandemic. Under the amendment, the federal government will now be able to unilaterally impose restrictions on regions with high infection rates.

Imposing a central power over state responsibilities is no trifling matter in Germany. After lessons learned from the last time the country was ruled by a single central power — the Nazi party — semi-autonomous federal states were seen as integral to German identity. The postwar constitution granted federalized states wide-reaching powers.  This has become increasingly relevant in measures to fight the pandemic. Although the German constitution or Basic Law makes the federal government responsible for "measures against diseases that are dangerous to the public or transmissible," under the current version of the Infection Protection Act, the states are empowered enact and enforce pandemic protection measures. Even after the most recent amendment to the law in November 2020, uniform federal measures are only something "to be strived for" — nothing more.

Germany: A patchwork of regulation The result is a jumble of measures, complicated by competition among states seeking the best anti-coronavirus policies. While some states have relaxed measures, others have tightened them further. Differences between states include such major points as whether schools are open or not, and details on if hardware stores may open; whether a curfew is in place or not; or even a testing requirement to shop at certain stores. When the number of infections was going down, that competition was sometimes a good thing. State premiers could advertise their policies and say: "Look, our strategy is working!" But since mid-February, infection numbers have been going back up. Citizens are confused, finding many measures illogical and losing track of what is allowed where. Calls for a uniform approach have become ever louder.

Cautionary Merkel Shortly before Easter, German Chancellor Angela Merkel criticized some states on the German TV program Anne Will for not implementing the agreed resolutions to combat the virus. If they didn't come into line "in the foreseeable future," Merkel hinted, the federal government might act to amend the Infection Protection Act. The idea gained further momentum a few days ago when conservative members of parliament Norbert Röttgen, Johann Wadephul and Yvonne Magwas launched an initiative to give the federal government more authority in combating the pandemic and to standardize measures across Germany. Joint action was no longer possible, they said, and urged haste because the harm to Germany was growing.

Disempowerment of states? That the federal government would take more power was, perhaps surprisingly, welcomed by some state leaders. Armin Laschet and Markus Söder, respective premiers of the two powerful states of North Rhine-Westphalia and Bavaria, both backed the idea, agreeing to curtail their own powers. But both men likely have other ambitions in mind. After Merkel steps down this fall, both will seek to become their parties' candidate to succeed her as chancellor. Laschet is the head of Merkel's center-right Christian Democrats; Söder of their Bavarian sister party, the CSU. This is then somehow an audition for the most important office in the federal government.  The latest agreement was preceded by sometimes heated arguments. Carsten Schneider, parliamentary director of the center-left Social Democrats — who rule in coalition with the CDU/CSU in the German federal parliament — called the move by the CDU/CSU members an attempt to disempower the states. Norbert Röttgen, one of the initiators, denied this. It was not about weakening the states, he told the Bild newspaper. "It's about the federal government being able to act at all," he explained. The amendment does not allow the federal government to enforce measures over the states, but rather in addition to and in cooperation with them, some point out.

Election year Typical political fault lines are not necessarily running between government and opposition in this case. While the governing Social Democrats (SPD) in Berlin were skeptical — if not dismissive — until shortly before the agreement, the greatest support for the new rules came from the Greens, currently in an opposition position. This is probably a sign that the Greens want to present themselves as capable of governing and forming a coalition ahead of the election, while coalition-weary SPD is distancing itself from erstwhile ruling partners, the CDU/CSU. While the Greens have seen gains in recent elections, the SPD has seen losses. In the meantime, however, SPD Vice Chancellor Olaf Scholz has sold the planned amendment as progress because it will bring "more clarity and transparency" for citizens. Some state premiers, for their part, are realizing that they could have avoided a relative loss of power. Rhineland-Palatinate's premier, Malu Dreyer (SPD), had warned shortly before the agreement that it was a matter of "making sure that the resolutions that are there are also implemented — and in every federal state." Meanwhile. Daniel Günther (CDU), head of the northern state of Schleswig-Holstein, said of the efforts of his party colleagues to find a uniform solution nationwide: "We already have all the possibilities […] to take all measures in case of high incidence rates. You just have to do it." But that reminder came too late.

^ Germany has a history of a too powerful Federal Government (Nazi Germany and the Communist East Germany) so it is understandable that Germans today are weary about a strong Federal Government ordering them what to do. Clearly things in Germany are not going well with the high numbers of Covid infections, hospitalizations and deaths and the poor and chaotic vaccination program. I understand what a weaker Federal Government is like. The US Federal Government gave the 50 States and 6 Territories the power to deal with Covid themselves and that has led to a patchwork and confusing list of ever-changing restrictions. The only thing the Federal Government has done is give financial aid to the States and the Vaccine supplies. I can understand States (in Germany or the US) not wanting to give the Federal Government more power over them, but I can also understand needing the Federal Government to step-in and being the singular voice of what is and is not allowed. It is a tough decision with pros and cons on both sides. ^

https://www.dw.com/en/covid-response-what-the-german-federal-governments-new-powers-mean/a-57151957