  State governments in the U.S. have been facing difficult decisions involving
tradeoffs between economic and health-related outcomes during the COVID-19
pandemic. Despite evidence of the effectiveness of government-mandated
restrictions mitigating the spread of contagion, these orders are stigmatized
due to undesirable economic consequences. This tradeoff resulted in state
governments employing mandates in widely different ways. We compare the
different policies states implemented during periods of restriction (lockdown)
and reopening with indicators of COVID-19 spread and consumer card spending at
each state during the first wave of the pandemic in the U.S. between March and
August 2020. We find that while some states enacted reopening decisions when
the incidence rate of COVID-19 was minimal or sustained in its relative
decline, other states relaxed socioeconomic restrictions near their highest
incidence and prevalence rates experienced so far. Nevertheless, all states
experienced similar trends in consumer card spending recovery, which was
strongly correlated with reopening policies following the lockdowns and
relatively independent from COVID-19 incidence rates at the time. Our findings
suggest that consumer card spending patterns can be attributed to government
mandates rather than COVID-19 incidence in the states. We estimate the recovery
in states that reopened in late April was more than the recovery in states that
did not reopen in the same period - 15% for consumer card spending and 18% for
spending by high income households. This result highlights the important role
of state policies in minimizing health impacts while promoting economic
recovery and helps planning effective interventions in subsequent waves and
immunization efforts.
