Despite the importance of effective disaster policy, governments typically fail to produce it.
The main explanation offered by political scientists is that voters strongly support post-disaster
relief but not policies that seek to prevent or prepare for disaster. This study challenges that
view. We develop novel measures of preferences for disaster prevention and post-disaster relief.
We find strong support for prevention policies and candidates who pursue them, even
among the subgroups that are the most opposed. Support for prevention has the hallmarks
of “real” attitudes: consistency across wordings and response formats, including open ended
probes; steadfastness in the face of arguments; and willingness to make trade-offs against disaster
relief, increased taxes, and reduced spending on other programs. Neither cognitive biases
for the here and now nor partisan polarization prevent robust majority support for disaster prevention.
We validate these survey findings with election results, which suggest voters act on
these preferences.