Of Puerto Ricans, Flubans And The Latest Pew Hispanic Report

I am fond of footnotes. Too often, though, they are used by writers to bury pesky facts and inconvenient opinions.

The latest Pew Hispanic report contains several top-line findings already covered extensively elsewhere. Some have been labeled "surprising" particularly the poll result that a majority of registered Hispanic voters (53%) support measures such as the RealID Act. 

What I found surprising was a footnote at the bottom of page 4. In it, Roberto Suro who directs the Pew Hispanic Center and authored this study, says "Most of the difference between the CPS [Current Population Survey of the Census Bureau] and the current PHC [Pew Hispanic Center] survey in the share of the native born in the Latino population is explained by different means for dealing with persons born on the island of Puerto Rico.  The CPS counts them as native born. Although they are US citizens by birth, island-born Puerto Ricans are more similar to foreign-born Latinos than the native born in language use, a variety of attitudes and socio-economic characteristics as well as the experience of migration. As such, the Center counts them among the foreign born in survey data."

Essentially, Suro argues that "island-born Puerto Ricans" should be treated as foreign-born Latinos in public opinion polls. Even though, as he acknowledges, Puerto Ricans are US citizens by birth. With all due respect to Mr. Suro and the wonderful work of the Center, that argument does not hold water.  You are either born a US citizen or not. Those who are not are foreign-born. End of story.*** The fact that "island-born Puerto Ricans" are "more simliar to foreign-born Latinos" speaks to the inherent diversity of native born Hispanics.

I was raised in South Florida, an area the Miami Herald's now-defunct Tropic magazine once jokingly referred to as the "Republic of Fluba." (Not quite Florida, not quite Cuba.) I wouldn't be surprised if Fluban-born Latinos are "more similar to foreign-born Latinos" in "language use" and "a variety of attitudes" than say seventh-generation Hispanics in New Mexico.

Lumping "island-born Puerto Ricans" together with foreign-born Latinos likely distorts the poll findings by overstating the differences of opinion between Latino immigrants and their native born counterparts. I say likely because I do not know (or at least could not find in the report) how many of the 679 "foreign born" respondents are actually Puerto Rican.

I do not have a problem with the existence of marked differences of opinion within the Latino community on immigration or any other topic. I mention this to make clear that mine is not an ideological objection. I, for one, believe those differences will grow. I just want to see those differences accurately depicted.

*** I may be an exception to the end of story rule. I was born overseas but my parents were already US citizens. Does this make me foreign born or native born?  The answer doesn´t much matter in comparison to the Puerto Rican dilemma because the number of people in my data set is probably insignificant.