Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Am J Prev Med. 2022 Jul;63(1):77-84. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2022.01.013. Epub 2022 Feb 18.
U.S. residents had varying experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic and social safety net policy in 2020. Past research has suggested that partisanship, ideology, racial attitudes, and personal experience may each influence policy attitudes. In this study, we explore whether variation in support for social safety net policy in 2020 is predicted by negative experiences of the pandemic when controlling for racial attitudes, partisanship, and ideology.
Support for 12 social safety net policies in 2020 was estimated using data from a nationally representative panel survey of U.S. adults conducted in 2020 (n=1,222). Logistic regression was used to examine differences in the predicted probability of supporting a majority of social safety net policies related to health, housing, and employment by partisanship, ideology, racial attitudes, and negative experiences of the pandemic. Analyses were conducted in 2021.
Higher levels of symbolic racism was a consistently strong predictor of lower social safety net policy support across health, housing, and employment policies; as was identifying as either Conservative or Republican. Negative experiences of the pandemic were generally unpredictive of support for the social safety net policy.
Despite the pandemic's consequences as well as the potential for social safety net policy to address these consequences, negative experiences of the pandemic failed to predict policy support, even as racial attitudes, partisanship, and ideology strongly predicted these preferences in 2020. Building public support for social safety net policy requires communication strategies that identify the shared benefits of these policies.
2020 年，美国居民对 COVID-19 大流行和社会安全网政策有着不同的体验。过去的研究表明，党派立场、意识形态、种族态度和个人经历都可能影响政策态度。在这项研究中，我们探讨了在控制种族态度、党派立场和意识形态的情况下，2020 年对社会安全网政策的支持是否因对大流行的负面体验而有所不同。
使用 2020 年对美国成年人进行的全国代表性小组调查的数据，估计了 2020 年 12 项社会安全网政策的支持情况（n=1,222）。使用逻辑回归检验了党派立场、意识形态、种族态度和对大流行的负面体验对与健康、住房和就业相关的大多数社会安全网政策的支持的预测概率差异。分析于 2021 年进行。
象征性种族主义程度越高，对健康、住房和就业政策的社会安全网政策支持率越低；认同保守派或共和党人的比例也越高。大流行的负面经历通常无法预测对社会安全网政策的支持。
尽管大流行造成了后果，而且社会安全网政策有可能解决这些后果，但大流行的负面经历未能预测政策支持，尽管种族态度、党派立场和意识形态在 2020 年强烈预测了这些偏好。要建立对社会安全网政策的公众支持，需要制定沟通策略，以确定这些政策的共同利益。
