November 20, 2012
Superstorm Sandy
Affects Two Thirds of Garden Staters, Rutgers-Eagleton Poll
Finds
Two-thirds of New Jersey residents were
affected when Superstorm Sandy wreaked havoc on the Garden
State three weeks ago, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton
Poll. Only 35 percent report they were not touched by the storm,
which caused massive damage throughout the state.
Sandy's wrath was impressive. Nearly every resident (94
percent) lost power for at least some time in the storm’s
aftermath; 65 percent were without electricity for more than
five days. One fifth of affected residents were forced to
leave their homes, and of those, 6 percent say they have not
yet returned. Almost one-third reported damage to their home
or other property.
Across the state, 61 percent of all New Jerseyans reported
power losses, with 40 percent of all residents losing it for
at least five days. All totaled, 14 percent of the state’s
residents were forced to leave home.
"We already knew Sandy had a wide impact," said David
Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and
professor of political science at Rutgers. "What we get from
these numbers is a clearer sense of its disruptive effects
on nearly all New Jerseyans, whether near the shore or much
further inland."
In Sandy’s
aftermath, New Jerseyans give high
marks to FEMA and the Red Cross,
even though only 10 percent of those
affected by the storm report using
the services of a
disaster-assistance agency. Half of
all residents say the Red Cross has
handled the storm’s challenges “very
well,” while another quarter say it
has done so “somewhat well.”
FEMA gets slightly lower marks; 37
percent say FEMA has handled things
very well, while another 31 percent
say somewhat well.
Given the challenges electric
companies experienced with power
repairs, Garden Staters are
surprisingly supportive. Across the
state, 41 percent say their electric
company handled the crisis very well
and 34 percent say it was handled
somewhat well.
Results are from a poll of 1,228 New
Jersey adults conducted statewide
among both landline and cell phone
households from Nov 14-17. The
sample has a margin of error of +/-
2.8 percentage points.
Impact of Sandy Varies by
Region
While the effects of Superstorm
Sandy were felt throughout the
Garden State, those living in the
south Jersey/Philadelphia area were
much less likely to say they were
affected by the storm.
Three-quarters of residents in shore
counties reported personal impact,
but only a quarter of those living
in counties near Philadelphia said
the same.
While the Jersey Shore took the
brunt of Sandy’s initial fury (79
percent affected), those in the
northwestern exurban counties were
just as likely to report being
affected since falling trees there
caused massive damage. Moreover, 69
percent of residents of Essex and
Hudson counties also say they felt
direct effects, as did 73 percent of
those in suburban counties.
“This storm was unprecedented in the
extent of its impact on New Jersey,”
noted Redlawsk. “Learning how many
people were directly affected drives
home the degree of devastation.”
Among affected New Jerseyans, one in
five said they were forced out of
their homes by Sandy, and 6 percent
still have been unable to return
permanently. Not surprisingly,
residents of shore communities were
most likely to report being forced
to leave their homes (24 percent),
and they are far more likely than
other residents to be unable to
return (17 percent of those forced
out). But 24 percent of urban
residents also said they had to
leave their homes, although nearly
all have since returned.
Because of Sandy’s impact on
residents of urban New Jersey, 31
percent of blacks and 24 percent of
Hispanics were much more likely to
have been forced to evacuate
compared to whites (19 percent).
Power companies reported that the
large majority of their customers
were offline at the height of the
damage – more than 90 percent lost
power, except for those living in
the South Jersey/Philadelphia area,
where 78 percent were without power.
Those who lost power in south Jersey
got it back quickly; very few said
it took more than five days.
The story was different for
residents of exurban and shore
communities, where 79 percent and 70
percent, respectively, of those
losing power lost if for more than
five days. Not surprisingly, exurban
and shore region residents were most
likely to report suffering: 30
percent of exurban residents and 36
percent of shore residents suffered
the most damage to homes. Forty-nine
percent of the former and 40 percent
of the latter suffered property
damage.
Approval for Electric
Utilities Varies
Large majorities of residents
throughout the state (73 to 88
percent) say their electric
companies handled the crisis
“somewhat” or “very well,” but those
in exurban counties were much less
likely (61 percent) to agree. While
80 percent of those who did not lose
power gave their electric companies
good marks, even among those losing
power, 70 percent rated their
electric company’s performance
highly. Among residents who lost
power for more than five days, there
is less good will, but still a
majority (60 percent) gives positive
reviews. Eighty-six percent of those
who did not lose power or went
without for a shorter time felt
positively about their utility
company.
By a 42 to 29 percent margin, PSE&G
customers are much more positive
than those of JCP&L. One-third of
customers from each company rated
its performance as somewhat well.
However, 22 percent say JCP&L
performed very poorly compared to 10
percent of PSE&G customers. Atlantic
City Power and Light customers are
the most satisfied: 66 percent say
the company performed very well and
another 28 percent said it did
somewhat well. This may be because
less than one-third of its customers
said they were directly impacted by
the storm, and fewer reported losing
power.
“Given the severity of the storm, it
is not surprising that it took the
power companies a long time to
return some sense of normalcy,” said
Redlawsk. “And it seems that most
residents, as frustrated as they
might be, recognized the difficulty
the companies faced. Even so, there
is a clear difference with JCP&L
getting clearly lower ratings from
its customers.”
Preparedness
New Jersey residents are split on
how prepared the state was for
Sandy’s arrival: 35 percent say New
Jersey was adequately prepared while
46 percent disagree. Another 15
percent said that given the nature
of the storm, New Jersey prepared as
well as possible, even if the effort
was insufficient. Another 3 percent
are fatalistic, saying nothing could
have been done to be prepared for
Sandy.
Residents in the northeastern urban
counties were least likely to
believe the state was ready for the
storm (26 percent). Those in the
Philadelphia/south Jersey region
were most likely to think the state
was well prepared (45 percent).
Those who were personally affected
by Superstorm Sandy are less likely
to believe the state was fully
prepared compared to those not
directly affected (32 percent versus
40 percent). A similar pattern is
seen with those who were forced to
evacuate, those unable to return to
their homes, those who lost power
for a lengthy period of time, and
those with damage to their homes.
Disaster Assistance Usage
Depends on Region, Income
Residents of the hardest hit parts
of the state are most likely to
report making use of disaster
assistance, as would be expected.
Yet even in those areas, the large
majority of residents have not
sought agency assistance so far.
In the shore counties, 15 percent of
those affected have sought
assistance, while 14 percent of
those in Hudson and Essex counties,
and 9 percent living in northwestern
New Jersey have done so. While the
highest income New Jerseyans are
more likely to report house and
general property damage, affected
individuals earning less than
$50,000 are twice as likely as
wealthy residents hit by the storm
to use a disaster assistance agency,
13 percent to 6 percent.
Twenty percent of those who
sustained damage to their homes have
sought assistance from agencies like
FEMA and the Red Cross, and 10
percent of those with general
property damage have done the same.
Approval of FEMA and the Red Cross
are high, with interesting
variations. While three-quarters of
Democrats say FEMA has performed
very or somewhat well, only 63
percent of independents and 55
percent of Republicans agree. The
Red Cross gets more bipartisan
support, though Democrats are still
more positive, at 83 percent, versus
71 percent of independents and 73
percent of Republicans.
“FEMA is an arm of the federal
government, so it is perhaps
unsurprising that Republicans – who
generally view the federal
government less favorably – are less
positive about it,” said Redlawsk.
“This perception is probably not
driven by specific facts on the
ground, since Republicans and
Democrats are equally likely to have
been victims of the storm.”
Black residents (80 percent) are
more likely to think FEMA has been
handling the crisis very or somewhat
well than whites 65 percent) or
Hispanics (67 percent). A similar
pattern is seen in race and
ethnicity with views on the Red
Cross. Exurban counties are less
likely to say FEMA or the Red Cross
is doing somewhat or very well,
though most residents in this region
and all other regions are at least
somewhat positive.
Those forced to leave their homes
are slightly less approving of
either organization – particularly
the Red Cross (65 percent versus 77
percent not forced to evacuate).
“For many, life is still not back to
normal, so it was a difficult
decision to start polling again,”
said David Redlawsk, director of the
Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor
of political science at Rutgers
University. “But we felt assessing
how New Jerseyans feel in the
aftermath of this storm and its
effects is important, and as it
turns out many people were happy to
speak with us.”
|
