Bryan McDonald

Public Perceptions of Traumatic Events and Policy Preferences During the George W. Bush Administration: A Portrait of America in Turbulent Times

The American policy landscape during the George W. Bush administration was shaped by a series of traumatic events that confronted the nation and people of the United States. These included the terrorist attacks of 9/11 in 2001, the anthrax attacks in the fall of 2001, military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the threat of a flu pandemic in 2005 and 2006, the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports, and the financial collapse of 2008. The results of the 2008 presidential election appear to be a rejection of the Bush administrations major policy responses to these events, but the variation in type and level of public support among different groups suggests a much more varied and dynamic portrait of America in turbulent times. Using a multiyear panel survey, an interdisciplinary team of political scientists and psychologists analyzed the behavior and political responses to the events by the American public. The findings suggest that even seven years after the events of 11 September 2001, people with higher levels of post-traumatic stress symptomatology related to 9/11 have significantly different interpretations of the threat of terrorism and the appropriate policy responses to it than do others. Perceptions of threat, the political salience of terrorism and other traumatic events, the level of support for political leaders and assessments of the governments actions vary over time and across different groups within society based on the psychological, political and social, and personal characteristics of the respondent. These results help to open the black box of aggregate public opinion by providing a detailed portrait of how psychological, social, political, and personal factors affected perceptions and political behavior during the George W. Bush administration.

Cities Under Siege: Urban Planning and the Threat of Infectious Disease

Abstract Many analysts argue that the potential for a natural, accidental, or nefarious infectious disease event to have a dramatic impact on urban areas in the United States and abroad is growing. After reviewing the justification for this position, this article considers what cities should do to prepare for a major disease event. Recognizing that prevention and preparation receive insufficient attention, we recommend that planners seek out and work with both public and private sector groups with roles in disaster planning; design land and transportation planning information systems to aid and support decision makers during crises; encourage greater self-sufficiency in food production and consumption; assist in the design of humane, realistic evacuation strategies and routes; and consider the effects of their day-to-day recommendations on disease risk and response.