Perceptions of Media Freedom

 Many posts have dealt with media problems.

Benedict Vigers at Gallup:

Even though most Americans continue to say the U.S. media have a lot of freedom, the percentage saying so has reached a new low this year. Slightly more than two in three Americans (69%) surveyed in May and June say there is a lot of media freedom in the U.S., down six percentage points from the previous low of 75% in 2025.

...

For much of the past 15 years, perceptions of media freedom in the U.S. have outpaced those in other advanced economies. Across 38 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, median perceptions of media freedom have typically hovered around 80%, slightly lower than in the United States. Last year was the first time on record that the two were tied, both at 75%, despite similarities in 2023 and 2015, when the U.S. advantage was smaller. While Gallup has not yet completed data collection in all OECD countries this year, based on available data, the OECD median will be between 70% and 76%. This means that 2026 is the first year on record in which the U.S. ranks below the bloc's median.

Virtually every president has complained about the press. Trump says that reporters who irk him "should be arrested." Can't you see that his instincts are authoritarian? I know a lot of "anti-anti-Trumpers." Can't you see it, my friends? Doesn't it matter? https://t.co/qDyxSZxwfy

— Jay Nordlinger (@jaynordlinger) October 6, 2026

Rose Research, Fall 2026

Watch this clip from The Wire.

It is the best description of research, ever.

The big stuff:

Beware hallucinations and incomplete answers. Always ask for sources and links.

Finding the literature: https://consensus.app/

Great resources at Honnold Library -- which students usually overlook! 

• Nexis Uni: news sources and law journals
• Political science journals
• Dissertation abstracts (search for "California" and "redistricting" in abstracts, and you will see a couple of Rose Institute names)

The Internet Archive—if a link is broken or altered, this site might help you find it. 

California 

• CA.gov
• California ballot measures -- archive going back to 1911
• California bills and laws
• LAO -- Legislative Analyst's Office -- analysis of CA issues
• Public Policy Institute of California -- California surveys and policy analysis
• News sites: CalMatters and Rough & Tumble
• CA elections from the Secretary of State
• California Elections Data Archive -- local elections in CA
• California State Library Digital Collections
• State archives
• California open data

General State Policy and Politics

• NCSL -- National Conference of State Legislatures -- analysis & data on state issues  Partisan composition of legislatures
• Open States -- bill information for all state legislatures
• Urban Institute State Economic Monitor
• Ballotpedia
• Tax Foundation

General Public Policy and Finance

• CRS
• CBO
• GAO
• GovInfo
• Budgets
• Biden White House Archives
• FRED: Federal Reserve Economic Data
  
• Census
• Bureau of Labor Statistics

Crime

• Bureau of Justice Statistics
• Prisoner statistics
• Crime data explorer
• Gun Violence Archive

Health

• Local data
• HealthData.gov
• Kaiser Family Foundation

National Elections, Parties, Campaign Finance

• Precinct-level national maps
• 2016
• 2020
• 2024 
• US Presidential Election Atlas -- just what the title says, great historical data (but note the unusual color scheme: red is D, blue is R)
• US Elections Project -- turnout data
• Open Secrets -- Center for Responsive Politics site for federal campaign finance and lobbying e information
• FEC -- Federal Election Commission
• FCC Public Inspection Files (ad buys on broadcast stations)

Public Opinion

• Polling Report -- an aggregation of national poll data
• Gallup -- the best-known US pollster, delivering new numbers daily
• Pew Research Center
• 2018 exit poll
• 2020 exit poll
• 2024 exit poll

Killing Off Disability Data

"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute."   -- George Orwell, 1984

A number of posts have discussed presidential documents, official data, and government websites.  The Trump administration has killed off or limited access to many such resources, including the CIA World Factbook, State Department X posts, and DOJ press releases about the January 6 insurrection.

The administration is also stopping the collection of key statistics.

 Michelle Diament at Disability Scoop:

A proposed revamp of a key federal survey could lead to a drastic undercount of Americans with developmental disabilities, advocates warn.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is calling for major changes to the 2028 version of the National Health Interview Survey. The annual questionnaire asks about 27,000 adults about their experiences with illness, chronic conditions, injuries, health access and more.

The current iteration includes 49 questions related to disabilities and functioning, according to Lindsay DuBois, a research associate at the nonprofit Human Services Research Institute, which published guidance for disability organizations and other stakeholders on the proposal. Under the new plan, she said that number would drop to 15.

Importantly, advocates say the revisions would leave out a question about whether a person’s difficulties with cognition, communication, mobility or other issues originated before the age of 22 as well as questions about challenges learning or completing everyday tasks, all of which were specifically designed to improve identification of people with developmental disabilities.

“The bottom line: The proposed revisions will make it harder to identify in the data people with disabilities — especially people with intellectual and developmental disabilities,” DuBois said.

Tariffs and Capital Investment

 Many posts have dealt with tariffs and trade. 

Kyle Pomerleau, Thomas Brosy, Robert McClelland, et al. "The Impact of Tariffs on the Cost of Capital in the US, AEI, September 30, 2026

Since 2025, the second Trump administration has imposed significant levies on most imports. Although tariffs are routinely discussed as a consumption tax, 36 percent of all imports are capital assets used to produce goods and services. As a result, tariffs place a meaningful burden on new investment in the United States.

We estimate that Trump’s tariffs (before the Supreme Court’s decision) raised the cost of capital by as much as 2.7 percent. This is equivalent to raising the METR [marginal effective tax rate] on new investment by 4.2 percentage points. The burden varies significantly by asset, industry, and legal form of organization, placing the largest burden on equipment. A 4.2 percentage point increase in the METR roughly offsets the OBBBA’s tax cut on investment. The burden that tariffs place on investment is an underappreciated effect of these taxes that has important implications for tax reform, the macroeconomy, and the distribution of the tax burden.

Leaners

Many posts have discussed partisan polarization and aversive or negative partisanship

Steven Shepard at Pew:

A majority of Americans consider themselves either Republicans or Democrats. Most say they identify this way because they view their own party’s policies as good for the country and the other party’s policies as harmful.

But many Americans don’t consider themselves Republicans or Democrats. Instead, these Americans identify as independents (or with some other party) and many “lean” toward one of the two major parties. For these Americans, opposition to the other party’s policies is more of a motivating factor than support for the policies of the party they lean toward.About this research

This Pew Research Center analysis examines the reasons partisans – U.S. adults who identify as Republicans and Democrats – give for their party affiliation. It also looks at “leaners” – people who don’t identify with one of the two major parties but say they lean toward one of the parties – and the reasons they lean toward the party they choose, and the reasons they decline to identify with that party.

A Pew Research Center survey of 9,750 U.S. adults, conducted from May 26 to June 1, finds:

• 72% of Republicans say a major reason they identify with the GOP is that its policies are good for the country. A nearly identical share (73%) say a major reason is that the Democratic Party’s policies are harmful for the country.
• Two-thirds of Democrats say a major reason they identify with the Democratic Party is that its policies are good for the country. A larger share (75%) say a major reason is that the Republican Party’s policies are bad for the country.
• Majorities of Republican leaners (56%) and Democratic leaners (64%) say a major reason they lean toward their preferred party is that the other party’s policies are harmful.
• Relatively few Republican leaners (34%) and Democratic leaners (27%) say a major reason they lean toward their preferred party is the perceived good of its policies.

While most Americans identify with one of the two major political parties, a sizeable share say they are independent.

Still, most independents lean to a party – and they tend to have more in common with those partisans than with the other side’s leaners. For more on political independents, read our 2019 report.

The survey also highlights why leaners do not affiliate with their party. Roughly four-in-ten Republican leaners, and about the same share of Democratic leaners, point to frustration with the leadership of the party they lean toward – or disagreement on some issues – as reasons for rejecting the partisan label.

Dining Alone

Many posts have discussed social capital, volunteering and civic virtue.

Derek Thompson at The Atlantic:

Until 1975, half of Americans said they entertained guests at their home every month.

Then something changed. Americans stopped throwing parties. Even more fundamental, they stopped visiting one another. From 1975 to 1998, the share of Americans who gave or attended a monthly dinner party declined by half. The share of Americans saying they never entertained people at home tripled. Although cultural critics often bemoan the decline of organized religion, the dip in church attendance was downright modest compared with the collapse in hosting, according to data gathered by the DDB Needham Life Style Surveys.

In his 2000 book, Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam wrote that if these trends continued, the ancient practice of visiting with friends “might entirely disappear from American life in less than a generation.” Check your calendars. One generation and change later, Putnam’s prediction needs an update.

So what’s the state of hosting in the 21st century? To get an apples-to-apples answer to that question, the polling group Data for Progress replicated the DDB Needham Life Style Surveys cited by Putnam. Unfortunately, the upshot is about as brutal as you’d imagine.

In the past 30 years, Americans have seen double-digit declines in practically every measure of socializing. They are less likely to play cards; attend a sporting event; go to the bar; volunteer; work on a community project.

When it comes to hosting people at home, the declines are particularly stark. Since 1995, the share of Americans who say they’ve hosted guests or attended a dinner party has declined by about 20 percent, from 88 to 67 percent—and that’s in addition to the declines that Putnam noted a quarter century ago.

Combining the two surveys, we get this astonishing fact: The share of Americans who say they host friends or family at their home at least monthly has fallen from 42 percent in 1975 to 12 percent in 2026—a 70 percent collapse in a half century.

...

 

 

Poverty and Housing Costs

A number of posts have dealt with poverty.

According to the most accurate measure, California does poorly.

Alex Horowitz, Liz Clifford, and Linlin Liang at Pew:

Housing costs are usually the largest item in a household’s budget and can determine a family’s financial stability. In the United States, a housing shortage estimated at 4 million to 7 million homes has driven rents so far above historical norms that these costs have become a significant cause of poverty. Zachary Parolin, a professor at the University of Oxford in England, examined 2023 housing costs in the U.S. and identified the states (counting Washington, D.C., among them) where the greatest share of poverty is attributable to high rent. They are Hawaii, California, D.C., New Jersey, Massachusetts, Colorado, Maryland, Connecticut, New York, and New Hampshire.

This analysis by The Pew Charitable Trusts explores Parolin’s work and examines the ways housing supply and costs affect poverty. As cities and states move to address high housing costs and increase supply through changes to zoning codes, building codes, and permitting processes, a key question is who will benefit from those changes. Parolin’s research, building on his earlier work focused on California and published by the Niskanen Center, bolsters evidence that housing costs have a direct impact on poverty and that policies to enable more housing will help reduce poverty and benefit low-income households in particular.

Key takeaways:

• In Hawaii, California, D.C., New Jersey, Massachusetts, Colorado, Maryland, Connecticut, New York, and New Hampshire, 16% to 34% of poverty is attributable to above-average housing costs.
• High housing costs are offsetting some of the anti-poverty effects of measures such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which provides food assistance to low-income households.
• Removing regulatory barriers to housing increases supply and lowers rents.
• In the states examined in this analysis, a drop of approximately 20% in inflation-adjusted rents—as happened in Austin, Texas, and Minneapolis after those cities made reforms—could reduce poverty by 18% to 26% and child poverty by 21% to 38%.