https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020941700 American Review of Public Administration 2020, Vol. 50(6-7) 551–559 © The Author(s) 2020 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/0275074020941700 journals.sagepub.com/home/arp Testing the Size, Scope, Capabilities, Capacities, & Limits of State and Local Governments A pandemic is global, crossing international boundaries and affecting a large number of people (Porta, 2014, p. 209). Despite its global reach, the responsibility for managing a pandemic rests with individual nations. In countries that operate with a federal system in which power is shared between a national government and regional governments, management responsibilities are not always explicit. In 2020, the highly contagious novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pan- demic generated a series of disruptions in the federal system in the United States. This article explores the roles played by state govern- ments, and particularly governors, in dealing with COVID- 19. Governors occupy an increasingly important leadership and management role in the intergovernmental system and effective performance in office has been shown to bolster gubernatorial approval among a state’s citizenry (Fording & Patton, 2019). The inquiry focuses on a specific period of time—March and April 2020—a period of tremendous pol- icy change as evidenced by the large number of executive orders promulgated by governors. During this 2-month time frame, as the number of cases and deaths rose, Americans were told to stay at home, hospital workers risked their lives caring for coronavirus patients, many businesses were shut- tered and their employees furloughed. The situation—the virus itself and the concomitant impact—was often described as unprecedented (Brown, 2020). Most Americans looked to the public sector for ameliorative action. Initially President Donald Trump eschewed a leading role for the national government, leaving much policy space in which governors could act. Although he created the White House Coronavirus Task Force to oversee the nation’s response to the virus and later installed Vice-President Michael Pence as its chair, most assessments conclude that the president minimized the seriousness of COVID-19, often claiming that it was “under control” as the number of cases increased (Lipton et al., 2020). At one point, for exam- ple, he told governors it was their job to find personal pro- tective equipment (PPE) for their health care workers, not his, saying that the federal government was not a shipping clerk (Forgey, 2020). However, some federal actions were useful to governors as they sought to manage the crisis. For instance, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s social distancing guidelines published in mid-March were regularly cited by state governors as models for their own executive orders. Also, later in March, the president announced that the Federal Emergency Management Agency would fund the activation of U.S. National Guard units in California, New York, and Washington to assist with coronavirus response. Still, intergovernmental tensions arose, many of them with a partisan cast as the president criticized the Democratic governors of Washington, New York, and Michigan for their handling of COVID-19, while praising Florida’s Republican governor (Montanaro, 2020). In April, when groups showed 941700ARP XX X 10.1177/0275074020941700The American Review of Public AdministrationBowman and McKenzie research-article 2020 1 Texas A&M University, College Station, USA Corresponding Author: Ann O’M. Bowman, Bush School of Government and Public Service, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA. Email: annbowman@tamu.edu Managing a Pandemic at a Less Than Global Scale: Governors Take the Lead Ann O’M. Bowman 1 and James H. McKenzie 1 Abstract This article explores the roles played by state governments, and particularly governors, in dealing with an extremely disruptive event—the coronavirus global pandemic. The inquiry focuses on March and April 2020, a period characterized by significant public health challenges and severe economic stress. The coronavirus pandemic did not affect states at the same time or with the same intensity and as a consequence, governors varied somewhat in terms of when they acted and which policies they adopted. As shown in the article, gubernatorial interactions with other states were at times cooperative, in other instances they were competitive. Two states—Texas and Pennsylvania—are singled out for an examination of within-state dynamics. The article ends with brief reflections on the lessons of the coronavirus for public sector management in a federal system of government. Keywords pandemic, federalism, states, governors, policy adoption