The Fiscal Hangover of the Pandemic
Were federal programs like the CARES Act and ARPA a good thing for local communities? It's a mixed record.
In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government's massive fiscal response, while well-intentioned, has left many small communities, grappling with unforeseen consequences. The influx of CARES Act and ARPA funds, meant to be a lifeline, has instead become a double-edged sword, exposing the perils of short-term thinking in long-term governance.
Even in our own town, when news of floating tents purchased with federal aid money reaches the public ear, it's easy to scoff. But such seemingly frivolous expenditures are merely symptoms of a larger problem: the misalignment between crisis response and sustainable fiscal policy. Small towns across America found themselves flush with cash and faced with a use-it-or-lose-it ultimatum. The result? A spending spree that often prioritized immediate gratification over long-term community needs.
The tragedy here isn't just in the potential misuse of funds in many communities, but in the missed opportunities. Instead of investing in those activities that would lay the groundwork for economic resilience, many communities opted for quick fixes and budget patches. Even after the obscene amounts of federal dollars that found their ways to local city halls, coming up with potential solutions on issues such as child care, transportation and housing seem just as elusive as they were before the pandemic.
The entire fiscal situation exposes a fundamental flaw in how we approach crisis management at the federal level. The knee-jerk reaction to throw money at the problem, while politically expedient, often fails to consider the long-term implications for local economies. It's a band-aid solution that risks creating a dependency on federal bailouts, undermining the very fiscal independence it aims to protect.
Moreover, the ripple effects of state-level decisions, such as ill-timed tax cuts, compound the challenges faced by small towns. As states grapple with self-inflicted budget shortfalls, communities all over the country may find themselves bearing the brunt of reduced state support, forced to make tough choices between maintaining services and fiscal solvency. That is a common story in Ohio - just ask any local government leader about the Local Government Fund.
The irony is palpable. Programs, such as the CARES and ARPA, designed to prevent economic catastrophe has, in many cases, sown the seeds for future financial strife. It's a cautionary tale of good intentions gone awry, a reminder that even in times of crisis, prudence must not be abandoned.
Looking forward, it's clear that we need a more nuanced approach to federal aid. One that encourages strategic thinking and long-term planning at the local level. Small communities must resist the temptation of quick fixes and instead focus on building true fiscal resilience. This means making tough choices, prioritizing investments that offer lasting benefits, and perhaps most importantly, maintaining a healthy skepticism towards temporary windfalls.
The experience of small communities throughout the country across America should serve as a wake-up call. It's time to rethink how we approach crisis management and federal aid distribution. We need mechanisms that respond to economic realities rather than political pressures, that encourage fiscal responsibility rather than reckless spending.
As the federal funds dry up and the true cost of this fiscal experiment becomes apparent, communities will be forced to reckon with their choices. Some may find themselves struggling to maintain services they can no longer afford, while others face the prospect of tax hikes to fill budget gaps. The coming years will likely be a period of painful adjustment for many small towns.
Yet, there's hope in this cautionary tale. The communities that weather this storm will be those that learn from this experience, that use it as an opportunity to reassess priorities and build stronger, more resilient local economies. They'll be the ones who recognize that true community strength comes not from federal handouts, but from sound fiscal management, strategic investment, and a commitment to long-term sustainability.
In the end, the fiscal story of the pandemic may not be more than just a footnote in the history books. However, the story is a stark reminder of the complexities of governance, the pitfalls of short-term thinking, and the urgent need for a more thoughtful approach to federal aid. As we move forward, let's hope that policymakers at all levels heed these lessons, working towards a future where crisis response strengthens, rather than undermines, the fiscal health of our communities.
What do you think? Were federal programs like the CARES Act and ARPA a positive development for our local communities? Our paid subscribers are more than welcome to leave their ideas and insights in the comment thread!
A New Way to Support This Work
Our readers and subscribers have been asking for a new way to support the work being done here at Civic Capacity! Some of our readers do not like the idea of having to sign up for another subscription service. Some of our subscribers occasionally want to give more support through a one-time transaction.
Civic Capacity is partnering with “Buy Me A Coffee” to give our readers, subscribers and friends an opportunity to give one-time support to Civic Capacity. Personally, I don’t like coffee, but I will never turn down a nice iced tea. If you feel compelled to support this effort, just click the button below.
Today’s Cold Beverage is thanks to reader Stewart Hill, who recently clicked the button above to support his work! Thank you Stewart!
Thanks for reading today’s Civic Capacity Newsletter! Please feel free to share this information with your friends and neighbors.
Also, please consider subscribing to our work. If you are a free subscriber, please consider becoming a paid subscriber. For less than $1 a week, you can get timely and conversational updates about the decisions that are impacting you and your community!
I’m not sure that our county, local communities, non profits, etc who received $ as a result of CARES act or ARPA used the $ wisely- hopefully they did. I’m not aware of any entity turning down the $ because these organizations weren’t sure that they could use it wisely or strategically. My personal opinion is that it was a bit hypocritical to take and use this money, when overwhelmingly the Miami County voting citizens did not vote for the President who pushed for these Acts, and that I believe our elected local and state Federal legislators voted against the Act's( most likely with the exception of Senator Brown, who I’m sure citizens in this county didn’t vote for either.) - But we took it and spent it, with smiles on our faces and many “pats on the back”. Now if we did spend it unwisely, who’s to blame?. Will our politicians will try to shift any blame for unwise spending back on those who endorsed/voted for these Acts, or the local administrators of the $? My vote is that for the most part the $ was spent wisely and was good for our communities. Sorry for tirade.