The 21st century has seen the emergence of two novel coronaviruses, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and COVID-19 (coronavirus infectious disease of 2019). In the wake of the 9/11 attacks in 2001, Republicans and Democrats were united in their concerns regarding SARS and the potential threat of biological weapons. That united front was not to be seen during the 2016 debate over supplemental funding for Zika. The primary focus of this study is whether the perception of partisanship in the public health emergency preparedness (PHEP) area affects attitudes about policy options regarding PHEP. To investigate these issues, a Qualtrics online survey of members of hospital preparedness coalitions was conducted. The survey questions covered issues such as the level of governmental priority placed on fighting infectious disease, respondents' level of confidence that the essential functions of government are being managed, the role of partisanship in PHEP decision making, and support for proposals to reform the government's infectious disease response. A statistically significant association was found between respondents' reporting that partisanship in PHEP presents a risk of injury or death and support for all the proposed reforms, indicating a desire to decentralize PHEP activities and a need to reinvigorate PHEP bipartisanship.

中文翻译：

---

党派、政策选择和风险：政治党派对卫生应急准备的影响

21 世纪出现了两种新型冠状病毒，即严重急性呼吸系统综合症 (SARS) 和 COVID-19（2019 年冠状病毒传染病）。2001 年 9/11 袭击事件发生后，共和党人和民主党人在对 SARS 和生物武器潜在威胁的关注上团结一致。在 2016 年关于为寨卡提供补充资金的辩论中，没有看到这种统一战线。本研究的主要重点是对公共卫生应急准备 (PHEP) 领域的党派偏见的看法是否会影响人们对有关 PHEP 的政策选择的态度。为了调查这些问题，对医院准备联盟成员进行了 Qualtrics 在线调查。调查问题涵盖了政府对抗击传染病的重视程度、受访者的 政府基本职能得到管理的信心水平，党派在 PHEP 决策中的作用，以及对改革政府传染病应对措施的建议的支持。在受访者报告的 PHEP 党派存在受伤或死亡风险和支持所有提议的改革之间发现了统计上显着的关联，表明希望分散 PHEP 活动和重振 PHEP 两党合作的需要。