I can't believe the Ebola thread has turned political.
If past decisions on spending are having a direct effect on this current situation, then they need to be addressed. Is there anyone who disagrees with me that the federal government should spend whatever it has to, without limitation, to either contain or solve this problem?
I think a good hard look has to be taken at how the CDC and other health-related government organs spent the money they were given.
I've seen stories about all sorts of research funded by CDC that had nothing to do with what I believe their core mission is: responding to the threat of infectious disease. Lesbian obesity, fighting the privatization of liquor stores, etc. I haven't read into it heavily, but I am not shocked that the CDC has bloated and suffered from mission creep over the years. Their move into obesity - while not utterly ridiculous - is an obvious example.
I've also seen a story detailing how money was given no-bid to a company (Siga, now bankrupt) run by political allies rather than to a company (Chimerix - Brincidofovir) currently at the forefront of anti-viral research. Siga even got a troublesome goverment lead negotiator removed during the process. Think of a viral version of Solyndra.