Do Americans Know that Puerto Ricans are U.S. Citizens? Analyzing the Results of the Newest Economist/YouGov Poll

For the last week, U.S. media outlets have paid closer attention to Puerto Rico’s recovery efforts. The main issue of controversy has been the publication of a Harvard-funded study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, that challenged the Government of Puerto Rico’s official death toll, which currently stands at 64. It claimed that hurricane-related deaths could be as low as 793 and as high as 8,498.

It seems that this increasing media coverage convinced the people who conduct the weekly Economist/YouGov Poll to include several questions related to the death toll controversy and the federal government’s response to Puerto Rico’s recovery efforts.

This is not the first time that the Economist/YouGov Poll has asked Americans their opinions on issues related Puerto Rico. In May 2016, as Congress debated the PROMESA bill, its survey included several questions on the island’s financial crisis. In October 2017, the polling firm asked respondents’ to rate the federal government’s response to Hurricane Maria.

In these different iterations, the Economist/YouGov Poll asked the following question:

“What is the national citizenship of a person born in Puerto Rico whose parents were both also born in Puerto Rico?”.

The next bar graph summarizes respondents’ answers to this questions.

chart (49)

The results of the most recent poll are not too encouraging. The number of people who were “not sure” about Puerto Ricans’ citizenship status has increased in the last two years. Even though it seems that the increased media coverage of Hurricane Maria helped many Americans realize that Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens, the newest survey shows a substantial decrease in the number of Americans who understand this reality.

How accurate are these figures? Although I think that the question is poorly worded, the fact that the Economist/YouGov Poll has used the same wording in the three survey instruments allow us to compare and contrast respondents’ knowledge of Puerto Ricans’ citizenship status as well as their views on the island’s constitutional status.

It is difficult to explain why Americans’ opinions have fluctuated so much since May 2016. If anything, we should expect that Americans’ opinions of island-born Puerto Ricans’ citizenship status to be more accurate, given all the media coverage Puerto Rico’s slow recovery after Hurricane Maria has received in the last nine months.

How does partisanship affect people’s opinions? In other words, are Democrats’ views more informed that Republicans? What are independent voters’ opinions and how do they compare with Americans’ registered in one of the main political parties?

chart (53)chart (52)chart (51)

While not too surprising, the surveys show that independents know less about Puerto Ricans’ citizenship status than registered Democrats or registered Republicans. In May 2016, 55% of independent voters were either “not sure” or believed that island-born Puerto Ricans were not U.S. citizens. This number slightly increases to 56% in October 2017 and goes up to 62% in June 2018.

Democrats by in large tend to be more informed than Republicans on this issue. But it is important to highlight that the numbers of Democrats who correctly answered the question in October 2017 declined by 11% in June 2018. We see a similar drop with Republicans who believe that island-born Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens.

A close reading of the survey’s findings also demonstrates that knowledge about Puerto Ricans’ citizenship status also got worse among African-Americans, Hispanics and Whites. The same holds true for respondents in all the income categories as well as among men and women.

The survey’s silver lining can be found in the results under the age category. The next bar graphs summarize the findings.

chart (56)chart (57)chart (55)chart (54)

Younger respondents’ answers have become more accurate over time. And their knowledge rivals Baby Boomers’ understanding of this issue.

The Economist/YouGov Poll also asked other questions connected to federal government’s response to Puerto Rico’s recovery efforts post-Hurricane Maria. I will analyzed those numbers in another post. But for now it is interesting to see how increasing media coverage of Puerto Rico does not necessarily improve Americans’ understanding of the island’s constitutional status or Puerto Ricans’ citizenship status.

Technical note: The Economist/YouGov Poll surveys YouGov’s “opt-in internet panel”. In the May 2016, 2000 respondents completed the questionnaire and the survey’s margin of error was 3%. In October 2017, 1500 respondents took the survey and its margin of error was 3.1%. The June 2018 survey also polled 1500 respondents and its margin of error was 3.2. 

Advertisements

U.S. Television News Networks’ Coverage of Puerto Rico of Harvard-Funded Study on Mortality Rates after Hurricane Maria

On May 29, 2018, the New England Journal of Medicine published an article that estimated that 4,645 Puerto Ricans died because of Hurricane Maria. Although the study’s authors do not claim that 4,645 died because of the hurricane, the media, by in large, reported it this way. As I noted in a previous post, because of their survey’s margin of error, the authors estimate that deaths connected to Hurricane Maria could be as low as 793 and as high as 8,498. Thus, the 4,645 is the median between these two estimates.

The study, which was funded by Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, reopened a long-standing debate on the Government of Puerto Rico’s inability to account for all the deaths associated with Hurricane Maria. The fact that the study’s estimates were higher than the official death count or other estimates shocked many Puerto Ricans.

In social media, people have adopted different avatars that make reference to the 4,645 estimated deaths. Many Puerto Ricans have used Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to share their stories of loved ones who died as a consequence of Hurricane Maria. In what NPR’s Adrian Florido described as an “impromptu memorial” , thousands of pairs of shoes were placed in front of Puerto Rico’s capitol building, symbolizing the number of people who have not been accounted in the government’s official tally, which today stands at 64. During the weekend, many Puerto Ricans visited the building to honor those who lost their lives and to protest the Rosselló administration’s lack of transparency and its mishandling of this controversy.

Even though the Harvard-funded study’s effects on the island’s politics was covered by many U.S. news organizations, some critics find that the issue did not receive the coverage it deserved. For instance, James Downie writing in the Washington Post’s Post Partisan blog noted that the story was not discussed in the Sunday news shows. Similarly, Kate Sullivan and Lis Power of Media Matters showed that the Harvard-funded study received less airtime than Roseanne Barr’s racist tweet, which led ABC to cancel her show.

While the critics are correct, it is important to highlight that many news networks did mobilize their resources to cover the fallout of the Harvard-study in the island. For example, CBS News sent David Begnaud to Puerto Rico, while CNN sent John Sutter and Leyla Santiago and NBC deployed Gabe Gutierrez. These journalists have covered the humanitarian crisis caused by Hurricane Maria, visiting the island several times in the last eight months.

So how much media coverage did Puerto Rico earn in the past two weeks? Which U.S. news network devoted the most airtime to any issue connected to Puerto Rico?

To answer these questions, I used the GDELT Project’s TV Explorer application (version 2.0) to measure how much airtime the major U.S. TV news networks devoted to issues connected to Puerto Rico. The application aggregates data from the Internet Archive’s Television News Archive. My analysis covers the period between May 21, 2018 and June 3, 2018. I decided to explore a period of two weeks to get a rough idea of how much coverage Puerto Rico issues earn in U.S. TV news networks.

The image included with this post is a wordcloud of the top words associated with this coverage. It clearly shows that these words are connected to the fallout of the Harvard-funded study.

The next bar graph compares the overall coverage of news connected to Puerto Rico across the main U.S. news networks.

chart (43)

On average, Univision devoted the most airtime to Puerto Rico in this time period, followed by CNN, MSNC and PBS. Not surprisingly, the story did not earn too much interest from FoxNews.

The next charts help us visualize each news network’s coverage of stories connected to Puerto Rico for the two weeks period. For ease of reading, I have divided these networks into three subgroups. The first subgroup includes CNN, MSNBC and FoxNews, which are the main U.S. cable news networks. The second one looks at the affiliated TV stations news networks that broadcast in English, which include: ABC News, CBS News and NBC News. I also added PBS to this subgroup. The final subgroup represent the country’s main Spanish news networks, Univision and Telemundo.

chart (45)

This line graph clearly shows the impact the Harvard-funded study had on the coverage of news stories connected to Puerto Rico. And while MSNBC devoted more airtime to the story early on, CNN’s coverage increased over time. This may be connected to Anderson Cooper’s interview of Governor Ricardo Rosselló regarding this controversy – an issue a I covered in my last post.

The next line graph shows that PBS devoted the most airtime to the Harvard-funded study among the non-cable news networks. However, its coverage, like MSNBC’s decreased quickly. CBS News, on the other hand, had the most consistent coverage in the days following the publication of the Harvard-funded study.

chart (46)

Surprisingly, ABC’s news coverage was pretty low. Could this be connected to the fallout of Roseanne Barr’s racist tweet or is this part of a trend that could be observed over a longer period of time? This is an interesting question, but for now I will give ABC the benefit of the doubt. After all, Barr’s sitcom aired in ABC.

In terms of the Spanish news networks, it is not clear why Univision dedicated more airtime to the Harvard-funded study than Telemundo. But it is interesting to see that Telemundo’s coverage spiked during the weekend, as Univision’s coverage declined. Could it be that Telemundo was interested in the “impromptu memorial” created by Puerto Ricans in front of the island’s capitol building.

chart (47)In the next days, I will look at how the U.S. print and online media covered news connected to Puerto Rico during this time period. This will help us make sense how much coverage the Harvard-funded study received in the U.S. mainland. For now, it is interesting to see how U.S. TV news networks covered the fallout of the Harvard-funded study on Puerto Rico’s excess mortality following Hurricane Maria.

 

“Hell to Pay”: One of Governor Ricardo Rossello’s Favorite Phrases

On May 31, 2018, Puerto Rico’s Governor Ricardo Rosselló announced, with much fanfare, to his 500,000+ Facebook followers:

“In few minutes watch my interview with Anderson Cooper CNN talking about Puerto Rico recovery efforts.”

It is interesting that his post mentioned that he was invited to talk about “recovery efforts” rather than the Harvard University-funded study – “Mortality in Puerto Rico After Hurricane Maria” – which was undoubtedly the main news story regarding Puerto Rico’s recovery efforts in both Puerto Rico and in the United States.

Cooper asked Rosselló about the Harvard-funded study and why his government failed to share its mortality data with the study’s authors. Although Rosselló said he welcomed the study and noted that he had commissioned George Washington University to study the matter, Rosselló said he was surprised to hear that officials in his government had refused to share its data with the researchers.

Unconvinced by Rosselló’s remarks, Cooper asked him again why his government fail to grant the authors’ request and the governor promised to further investigate the issue, noting that “there will be hell to pay” if he finds out that government officials decided not to cooperate with researchers.

An hour after the interview, CNN shared a video of the interview, using the following headline: “Rossello: Hell to Pay if Data Not Available”. In Twitter, the “Hell to Pay” phrase has been widely used to describe the governor’s interview with Cooper.

I have been researching Puerto Rico’s recovery efforts for a long time and I have listened to countless of hours of Governor Rosselló’s answers to questions from reporters, lawmakers in Capitol Hill or Trump administration officials. And this phrase – “hell to pay” – is one that Rosselló has used in the past, anytime journalists question his or his government’s credibility or ability to manage a crisis. Every time he has used the phrase, it has been followed by a promise to hold wrongdoers accountable for their actions.

The following table provides a short summary of Rosselló’s use of the phrase since Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico. This list is not meant to be exhaustive, but representative of a pattern in Governor Rosselló’s behavior. Links to each story are provided too.

Date Source Headline Context
10/9/2017 Reuters Hell to pay’ over water, food deliveries, Puerto Rico governor warns Questions regarding the Puerto Rican government’s and federal authorities’ mishandling of the distribution of water and other supplies to hurricane victims.
10/12/2017 PBS News Hour White House is committed to long-term Puerto Rico recovery despite Trump tweets, says Gov. Rosselló Allegations that local Puerto Rican officials are not distributing supplies to hurricane victims.
10/19/2017 CSPAN President Trump Meeting with Governor of Puerto Rico In question and answer session with press, President Trump and Governor Rossello are asked about allegations that supplies have been hoarded by local Puerto Rican officials and not distributed to hurricane victims.
10/27/2018 ABC News PR Governor Threatens “Hell to Pay” As Probes of Whitefish Contract Begin A reaction to questions regarding PREPA’s award of the Whitefish Energy contract to restore Puerto Rico’s power grid after Hurricane Maria.

Why does this matter? Democracy works when the government and its leaders are transparent and accountable. Puerto Ricans know that their government and elected leaders are not perfect. What they want are responsive institutions and leaders, who are working on behalf of the public good and are willing to put society’s collective needs over their own wants.

To this day, it is not clear whether some local officials failed to distribute supplies to hurricane victims. Although Ricardo Ramos, resigned as the CEO of the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority,  we are still waiting for the governor to commission an investigation into the Whitefish Energy contract. The pattern continues now with the government’s accounting (or lack thereof) of the increased mortality rate after Hurricane Maria.

As noted above, Rosselló told Cooper that he was “shocked” to learn that his government denied access to its mortality data to the Harvard-funded research team. And there are two problems with this statement. First, although he has publicly stated that he welcomes the Harvard-funded study, he has not read it. After all, the study notes:

Although the government of Puerto Rico stopped sharing mortality data with the public in December 2017 (our request for these data was also denied), in April 2018 the Institute of Statistics of Puerto Rico, an autonomous government entity, adopted a resolution to improve the counting of disaster-related deaths and publish all mortality data online without further delay.

This is troubling. If Rosselló did not take the time to read the study everybody has been talking about in Puerto Rico and in Washington, D.C. for the last days, how committed is he to making sure that this problem is not repeated in the future?

Second, and probably more worrying, Rosselló is either lying or lives in a bubble, where his advisors are trying to shield him from reality. As NPR’s Adrian Florido recently tweeted:

Gov. told CNN that “there will be hell to pay” if he finds that his govt. has refused to release mortality data.  [Centro de Periodismo Investigativo] sued them for the data. I was in a courtroom last week in which his govt’s lawyers were defending withholding it. How does he not know that?

This is not the first time that Governor Rosselló or his political allies have stretched the truth to protect their own interests.

Will things change thanks to the Harvard-funded report or Andersen Cooper’s tough questions? Unfortunately, I think I know the answer to this question.

 

 

 

How Many Puerto Rican Lives Did Hurricane Maria Claim?

A few weeks ago, Governor Ricardo Rosselló traveled to Washington, D.C. to testify in Congress and to ask federal authorities for $94.4 billion to rebuild Puerto Rico’s infrastructure. In his testimony before the U.S. House of Representative’s Natural Resources Committee, Rosselló promised the “most transparent” recovery effort in U.S. history. But for all the promises, the Puerto Rican government’s response to Hurricane Maria’s impact has been marred in controversy.

One of the biggest controversies has been the Rosselló administration’s accounting of all the deaths associated with Hurricane Maria. We can trace this debate to the early days of the recovery efforts. In an interview on September 26, 2017, conducted by David Begnaud of CBS News, Carmen Yulín Cruz, the mayor of San Juan, noted:

“Every moment we spend planning in a meeting or every moment we spend just not getting the help we’re supposed to get, people are starting to die. This is not painting a picture. This is just the reality that we live in, the crude aftermath of a storm, a hurricane, that has left us technically paralyzed.”

On that same day Cruz told MSNBC‘s Rachel Maddow: “We need our hospitals not to become death traps” – a reference to two patients in life support who Cruz knew had died when their hospital had lost electrical power.  And although some questioned her claims, a few days later, the government’s figures did prove her assertions correct.

The controversy on the death toll took another turn during President Donald Trump’s visit to the island on October 3, 2017. Many of Trump’s strongest critics hoped that Hurricane Maria’s destruction would sink his presidency just as the Bush administration’s slow response to Hurricane Katrina had ruined George W. Bush’s standing with the American people. In an effort to show that his administration’s reaction to the disaster was adequate, Trump argued that Puerto Rico had not experienced a “real catastrophe” like New Orleans faced after Hurricane Katrina. In a meeting covered by the press, Trump stated:

“We’ve saved a lot of lives. If you look at the — every death is a horror. But if you look at a real catastrophe like Katrina, and you look at the tremendous — hundred and hundred and hundreds of people that [sic] died. And you look at what happened here with really a storm that was totally overpowering. Nobody’s ever seen anything like this. And what is your death count at this point, 17?”

Governor Rosselló interjected that 16 people were certified as dead. And Trump, in a reference to the 1,833 lives claimed by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, congratulated Rosselló, federal officials, U.S. troops and other Puerto Rican leaders for preventing a Katrina-like catastrophe.

Needless to say reactions to President Trump’s comments were varied, but mostly negative. But the debate over the Rosselló administration’s accounting of hurricane-related deaths intensified a few hours after Trump left the island when Rosselló divulged that death toll had increased to 34.

Since Trump’s visit, many Puerto Rican journalists and U.S.-based reporters have questioned the Puerto Rican government’s official count of the deaths associated with Hurricane Maria. The San Juan Mayor, who also is vice president of the island’s opposition party – Partido Popular Democratico (PPD) – and who many expect will challenge Rosselló in the 2020 gubernatorial elections, has relentlessly challenged the figures, demanding more transparency in how the Rosselló administration is accounting for these deaths. In an interview with CNN‘s Jake Tapper on November 3, Cruz did not only claim that the death toll was higher, but she also added that many of these fatlities were probably “related to the lack of electricity.”

Cruz’s criticisms followed the news that the Rosselló administration approved the cremation of 911 bodies. Nidhi Prakash of Buzzfeed News noted that the authorities’ approvals were granted without analyzing whether or not these deaths were associated with the hurricane. Prakash’s interviews with funeral home owners and crematorium directors in the western  side of the island indicated that many of these deaths should be added to the government’s official death tally.

Even though Cruz’s comments echoed all these news stories, Rosselló’s supporters painted her comments as irresponsible. But a report conducted by Puerto Rico’s Centro de Periodismo Investigativo (CPI), published on November 16, 2017, proved correct many of Cruz’s claims. It also added that the government’s methodology was not in line with best practices, while documenting at least 47 deaths that should be added to the official tally. Reacting to this CPI’s reporting, Governor Rosselló expressed confidence on his government’s figures and on his Secretary of Public Safety, Héctor Pesquera, who is responsible for these accounting efforts.

On November 20, 2017, CNN‘s John D. Sutter, Leyla Santiago and Khushbu Shah published a comprehensive investigation that interviewed the owners of 112 funeral homes in Puerto Rico. Based on these interviews, they argued that the death toll between September 20 and October 19, 2017 should stand at more than 500. At the time, the certified figures stood at 55. In comparison to Rosselló’s reaction to the CPI’s report, the governor did not dismiss the findings of the CNN story and he asked Pesquera to investigate CNN‘s claims.

On November 21, 2017, Alexis Santos of Penn State University and Jeffrey T. Howard, and independent researcher, concluded in a working paper that death toll should be much higher. Using unofficial death statisitics provided by the Puerto Rican Department of Public Safety to the CPI and comparing these figures to official death statistics for 2010 through 2016, they estimate that the death counts for September and October 2017 is higher by an estimated 500 “excess deaths” for each month.

Will we ever find out how many Puerto Ricans died as direct or indirect reaction to Hurricane Maria? Why should we care about this issue? There are at least five reasons.

First, the controversy reveals the ugliest side of our politics. In times of crisis, our elected leaders’ first reaction is to protect or to enhance their political standings. This criticisms does not only apply to President Trump, but also to Governor Rosselló.

Second, an inaccurate accounting of the fatalities minimizes the need for a full fledge investigation to determine if some of these deaths could have been prevented or whether the island’s medical facilities were negligent in terms of providing treatment to their most vulnerable patients.

Third, given current meteorological trends, Hurricane Maria will not be the last category 4+ storm to hit the island. Accounting for all the deaths associated with Hurricane Maria will help the government learn how to best react to these storms in the future.

Fourth, there is a financial aspect to this controversy. The Federal Emergency Management Agency provides financial compensation to families who’s loved ones died because of the storm. Failure to include many of these fatalities in the official tally will burden these families’ finances.

Finally, this controversy raises serious questions about the serious lack of empathy expressed by  government officials to the hundreds of people who have lost a friend or a family member to Hurricane Maria.

If the Rosselló administration is interested in transparency, it should start by taking seriously allegations that the Puerto Rican government has undercounted the number of fatalities associated with Hurricane Maria. It is not only morally necessary, but also politically wise. Congressional leaders from both sides of the aisle have questioned the Rosselló administration’s credibility and its ability to lead the island’s recovery efforts. Not only will this affect the Puerto Rican government’s efforts to secure the necessary resources to rebuild the island’s infrastructure. It will also be an issue that will further weaken Puerto Ricans’ trust on their government and their elected officials.

.