I imagine in terms of medical care access and affordability or welfare stimulus, practically negligible, but in terms of CDC funding, science literacy, public policy, and general preparedness, it would be a whole lot better put together.
So I'd say... 10% fewer deaths? 200K vs. 220K deaths sounds about right.
I think you could have 10% of the deaths you have. Look at many European countries that didn't get hit by COVID when it was still new, but later. Any response then would have had the same effects in the US than here, but Trump literally didn't do anything for a month, when everyone else was preparing. Well, he banned chinese people from entering the country at the time where banning europeans would be useful instead.
I would even argue that just 10% fewer deaths is highly unlikely (both numbers too close) due to its exponential spread.