Official US 2010 Census Results

[cinyc]

So Michigan lost population and Rhode Island almost did (+0.4%).  DC gained population for the first time since the 1950 census.  And Texas gained as many residents in the last decade as live in a state like Louisiana or Kentucky.

So who is the biggest loser of today's numbers?  I nominate Russ Carn.ahan.  

Some NYC area Dem rep is also royally f-ed today.  Which one do you think it will be?  Most likely Ackerman, Maloney or Crowley, based on previous talk.

From a map drawing aesthetics perspective, it should be Engel in NY-17.  His district is the ugliest (other than Velasquez' NY-12, which won't be axed due to racial reasons).  There's no reason at all why the Bronx should share a district with Rockland County.

Obviously, the other dead district is going to have to come from Upstate.  NY-23 is probably most vulnerable to being carved up due to likely population loss and the sheer size of it.

[cinyc]

The Census Director is scheduled to hold a press conference at 1PM on Wednesday, January 12 to "brief the media on next 2010 Census data releases, including state redistricting data."  Will we get some lower-level data tomorrow afternoon?

[cinyc]

We might get some more info on the exact timeline, though. That would be very welcome.

I tuned in to late for the press conference.  It says it is being archived.  Anyone catch it?

I didn't catch it, but there doesn't seem to be much of interest in the press kit for the press conference.  There's some internal migration data for Texas, California and Michigan - but that may or may not have been previously released.

[cinyc]

We might get some more info on the exact timeline, though. That would be very welcome.

I tuned in to late for the press conference.  It says it is being archived.  Anyone catch it?

I didn't catch it, but there doesn't seem to be much of interest in the press kit for the press conference.  There's some internal migration data for Texas, California and Michigan - but that may or may not have been previously released.

Yes, in a few places, internal migration could move the numbers by a discernible amount, and I try to factor that in, in my maps, when I am cutting it close to what I think is the point, where the odds of the seat being at risk in a semi wave, start to go up exponentially. I don't draw for a wave quite as strong as 2008. I don't think the odds are high that it will be replicated soon. And even then, the maps I draw should enable competent incumbents to survive. My sense of it is, is that a competent incumbent who is not a partisan attack dog, or becomes demonized by the opposition, can generate about 3 PVI points in his or her favor, over what would otherwise happen; with a superstar, like Gerlach in PA, or Ryan in WI, that is worth perhaps about 5 PVI points, in all cases assuming competent and reasonably funded opposition.

Just to be clear, Torie, by internal migration, I meant raw statistics regarding people already in the US moving in or out of the state.  I don't think the analysis was strictly based on Census 2010 data, and like I said, it might have been previously released.

[cinyc]

The press conference transcript is here.  There's not much there there.  As we knew, the state redistricting data will trickle out by state starting the first week of February.  Census will tell us which states will be released next about a week ahead of time - so we'll start knowing by the end of January.  The release schedule is sensitive to state redistricting needs - so I'd imagine those with 2011 elections might come first, if they have to redistrict beforehand.   State officials will get the data before the rest of us, but we will get it at the same time as the press.

New Tiger shapefiles will be put up on Census' website soon.

There's going to be a webinar on the new American Factfinder on January 18 and on redistricting on January 24.

Oh sorry, cinyc, I did indeed misunderstand. When I am drawing my maps, I am obsessed with intra county migrations, which can matter a lot in bigger, and politically variegated counties. I don't want my maps to hit the dumpster because I didn't try to anticipate for that.

Yeah, my initial phrasing was misleading.  While it certainly wasn't clear from just the handouts, from the transcript, it sounds like the Census Bureau was using Pew and Heritage inter-state migration estimates, among other things, to try to judge the accuracy of the 2010 Census, which was in line with the mid-level population estimates.  Obviously, not everyone responds to the census, and in some cases, census workers had to ask proxies like neighbors or building management.   It also sounds like the full accuracy analysis won't be ready until 2012.  The final accuracy analysis for the 2000 census indicated a slight overcount.

[cinyc]

Maps of New Jersey:
 http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/02/04/nyregion/20100204-jersey.html?ref=nyregion

Wish that map were interactive :/

The universal declines in the Shore towns are striking. Is that Hoboken or Jersey City with the big increase in white population in Hudson County? It's hard to tell. Either way, Jersey City has to be indisputably the most diverse city in the country now.

Definitely Hoboken.  The non-Hispanic White population of Jersey City declined from 56,736 to 53,236.  Hoboken's increased from 27,196 to 36,607.   The percentage of non-Hispanic Whites in Hoboken increased by a little under 3 points from 70.5% to 73.2%.  

Jersey City's numbers moved slightly in the opposite direction, from 23.6% to 21.5%.  The fastest growing group there was Asians.  Even the percentage of Hispanics and African Americans declined from 2000 (the total number of African Americans, too).

Edited to add: Jersey City is now 27.6% Hispanic, 23.9% African American, 23.5% Asian and 21.5% White.  Its politicians are still 100% crooked.

[cinyc]

...though Allegheny did so by 0.2%

Hispanic share almost doubled - Hispanic population more than doubled. Black share also rose. State is now down to 55% Anglo.

The Prince George's County exurban outmigration continues.  The African-American population in neighboring Charles County nearly doubled, while the white population dropped by almost 10,000.  African-Americans make up about 41% of the county's population.   Whites are now barely a majority there, with 50.3%.   Whites continue to leave Prince George's County, too.

[cinyc]

...though Allegheny did so by 0.2%

Hispanic share almost doubled - Hispanic population more than doubled. Black share also rose. State is now down to 55% Anglo.

The Prince George's County exurban outmigration continues.  The African-American population in neighboring Charles County nearly doubled, while the white population dropped by almost 10,000.  African-Americans make up about 41% of the county's population.   Whites are now barely a majority there, with 50.3%.   Whites continue to leave Prince George's County, too.

I wonder if this reflects the "syndrome" that whites don't want to live with blacks when their percentage in the hood gets "too high," or whether it is more due to differential hood housing demand, with blacks paying a premium to live in high percentage black neighborhoods that are safe and middle class, with decent schools. Does anyone know? Is this more about "racism" or economics is my question. And I have no idea, at least in this neck of the woods (in the deep South I just might assume racism frankly), what the answer is.

Part of it is that whites are leaving Maryland (and much of the Northeast, I suspect) for other areas of the country.  Maryland's non-Hispanic white population dropped by about 32,000 in the last 10 years.  Part is people moving from suburban Prince George's to new exurban developments in Charles County.  Since the overwhelming majority of Prince George's residents are black, it usually logically follows that those moving in to new developments up the road would be of the same race.  And a good part of it is probably simple white flight to other areas of Maryland.  The white population of Charles County's neighbors, St. Mary's and Calvert counties, both rose by over 10,000.

[cinyc]

Any comments on Indiana, Iowa and Vermont?

There's not a heck of a lot to say about Vermont.  It didn't grow by much (under 3%), and what little growth there was appears to be in the Burlington and Montpelier areas.   Population growth in Southern Vermont was pretty much flat, with Rutland and Windsor Counties losing population.  Essex County on the Canadian border also lost population.

Vermont is still overwhelmingly white - 94.3%, down from 96.2%.  The Hispanic population nearly doubled - but that's not saying much - it's still under 10,000 and less than 2% of the total population.  So did the black population, but that's still under 6,000.

[cinyc]

One thing to note about Indiana is that Fort Wayne's population growth is overstated.  The city grew by 23.3% from 2000 - by far, the most of the top 5 cities in the state.  But that's skewed because Fort Wayne also annexed some neighboring towns in 2006.

Of the other top 5 cities, Indianapolis grew by just under 5%.  Evansville (-3%), South Bend (-6%) and Hammond (-3%) all lost population.

[cinyc]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

With a rather substantial shift from inner Indianapolis (the old city, rather than the new city, which is all of Marion County), to the now defunct suburbs of Indianapolis in now outer Indianapolis. In other words, just about all the growth was in the outer portion of Marion County.

The counties surrounding Marion also experienced rapid growth, particularly Hendricks (+40%)  to the west and Hamilton (+50%) to the north.  The population of Carmel and Fishers in Hamilton County both more than doubled; Noblesville in that county grew by more than 80%.

Gary lost 22% of its population.   Jeffersonville, a Louisville suburb, grew by 64%.

[cinyc]

The congressional districts that appear to have lost population are (within state ordered from most declining):

AL-7
AR-4
CA-31, 53, 38, 47
FL-10
IL-4, 1, 2, 17, 7, 9, 6
IN-7, 6
IA-5
KS-1
LA-2, 3, 5
MI-14, 13, 5, 12, 1, 9, 15, 11
MN-4, 7
MS-2
MO-1
NE-3
NJ-10, 8
NY-28, 27, 24, 25, 26, 29
NC-1
OH-11, 10, 6, 17, 5, 1, 4
PA-14, 12, 5, 4, 2, 3
RI-1
SC-6
TN-9
VA-2
WV-3, 1

Most of which are self-explanatory (inner cities, black belt, plains, rust belt), but I was somewhat surprised at IL-6, VA-2, and FL-10.

There's no way NY-23 didn't lose population, too.  Perhaps NY-22, as well - though that depends on whether more people left the Binghamton area than moved into the Orange, Ulster and Dutchess portion of the district.

[cinyc]

I used jimrtex's list from this thread though that may be the 2009 ACS estimates, and I used the census 2000 100% summary for the 2000s CD's. That has NY-23 up 3,882 or 0.59% and NY-22 up 13,587 or 2.08%.

I wouldn't doubt NY-22, due to growth in the NYC exurbs.  But how the heck did NY-23 pick up population?  Border towns like Massena and Ogdensburg are morribund.   Plattsburgh should be losing population, too - and likely Watertown (though that's more dependent on how much Fort Drum grew or shrank in the past decade).  The only thing I can think of is that it might be offset by some growth in suburban Syracuse (Madison and Oswego counties).  Or perhaps there are more folks ending up in the prisons within the district.

[cinyc]

Is there data yet for which states had a net loss of whites?

You'll have to wait until all states are out. Or just go by the estimates.

Correct.
 
Of the states with released 2010 redistricting files so far, the total non-Hispanic white population fell from 2000 figures in Louisiana (-1.5%), Maryland (-2.6%) and New Jersey (-5.9%).  

It increased in Arkansas (+4.1%), Indiana (+2.0%), Iowa (+0.2%), Mississippi (+0.2%), Vermont (+1.3%) and Virginia (+5.6%).

[cinyc]

Not going to check all the others, but Mississippi's certainly fell (by 0.3). I noticed it at the time and doublechecked just right now.

What are you looking at?  

I'm getting my data from Table 3 in the custom tables release by the Census bureau titled "Hispanic or Latino and Race Alone or in Combination - All Ages".  Mississippi's tables are available here, in Excel format.  That shows a gain of 4,149 non-Hispanic whites from 2000 to 2010, or 0.2%.  Those charts counts people who listed two races as members of both races, which probably explains the discrepancy.

Iowa (-0.3%) would flip to the negative growth side if you exclude those of two or more races, too.

[cinyc]

 So I take a look at the data for Illinois released today:

  Big shocker:  Non Hispanic population -.8%
                       Hispanic population +32.5%

  If it weren't for Hispanics, our state's population wuold have been sunk.

Ill Ind

Yes.  Illinois' non-Hispanic white (-3%) and black (-1.3%) population both fell.  Asians and Hispanics grew.

Chicago shrunk by almost 7%, at just under 2.7 million.  That's about 150,000 less than  2.85 million 2009 census estimate.  If Houston's population has been grossly understimated, the Second City might be our fourth largest... but I doubt it.

Far west suburban Aurora (+38%) is now the second largest city in the state, passing Rockford (+2%).  Far southwest suburban Joliet (+39%) rocketed from seventh to fourth.   Naperville's population was up by 10.5% - but fell from fourth to fifth.

Like Chicago, Cook County lost population (-3.4%).  DuPage tread water (+1.4%).  The far-out Chicago suburban collar counties grew the most, particularly Kendall (+110%), Will (+35%), Kane (+27%) and McHenry (+19%).

[cinyc]

Oklahoma was also released today.  The state grew by 8.7%, but the non-Hispanic white population only grew by 0.7%.   The Hispanic population is up by 85.2%; the non-Hispanic Native American population grew by 16.0%.

Oklahoma City grew (+14.6%); Tulsa shrunk (-0.3%) - though their respective counties both grew (Oklahoma County +8.8%; Tulsa County +7.1%).  The more rapid growth was in counties bordering those two - Canadian County, west of OKC, grew by 32%; Cleveland County, south of OKC, grew by 23%; Wagoner County, southeast of Tulsa, grew by 27%; Rogers to Tulsa's east, was up by 23%.

South Dakota will be next.  Legislative officials were sent the files today.

[cinyc]

The data released so far doesn't match the sometimes trumpeted theme that people are moving away from the suburbs back into the cities.  Many of the cities we've seen that have grown thus far are those that include areas that very suburban to begin with, like Indianapolis and Oklahoma City, smaller towns, or exurban edge cities like Aurora, Illinois.  Old, dense cities like Chicago and Baltimore continue to lose population.  And suburban growth continues, especially in exurban areas further flung from the central city.

Of course, there will be exceptions to this (Washington D.C., for sure, likely New York City, too) - but it is a trend we should continue to watch.

[cinyc]

Populations of Shannon and Todd didn't rise all that much. Mind you, grow they did. Most rural white counties' populations fell. Some of the smaller rez counties too - Buffalo, Corson, Dewey. Dewey fell by more than 10 while Ziebach grew by as much - what's going on here, intrarez urbanization? (Estimates say that's happening in Navajoland, hence my guess.)
Native share of Rapid City was 10% in 2000 IIRC, over 12 now.

Ziebach County and urbanization aren't two words that I'd expect in the same sentence.  It's simply not that large.   The county's population population grew from 2,519 to 2,899   That's 380 new residents - fewer people than live in a large NYC apartment building. 

We'd have to look at the tract level data to figure out what happened.  Perhaps there was some spillover from Eagle Butte, which is on the border between the two counties of Cheyenne River Indian Agency Reservation, but largely in Dewey.

[cinyc]

You can see how in Chicago the population changed in this map.
Basically central Chicago grew while most of the rest lost population.

Areas near the Loop up to about Lincoln Park grew, as did some census tracts on the Far northwest side, near O'Hare, and southwest side near Midway.  Everything else lost population, as did the near South suburbs.

Otherwise, Cook County's growth is largely at the far fringes, especially in far Southwest areas.  That makes sense, since that's where some of the county's last available empty tracts were during the past decade.

[cinyc]

So, where in Texas was underestimated?

Of the 20 largest cities, Houston, San Antonio, Dallas, Arlington, Plano, Brownsville and McAllen were all overestimated.  Dallas' population was the most overestimated, followed by Houston and Plano.  Brownsville and McAllen were the least overestimated, by under 2%.

The populations of Austin, Fort Worth, El Paso, Corpus Christi, Laredo, Lubbock, Garland, Irving, Amarillo, Grand Prairie, Pasadena, Mesquite and McKinney were underestimated: Grand Prairie was underestimated the most at about 7% (with a different fraction, depending on whether you use the estimate or actual numbers as the denominator when determining the difference), Corpus Christi the next at about 6%, followed by Irving at about 5%.  Austin and Amarillo were the least underestimated, by under 1%.

Of the top 20 counties, only Dallas (3%), Collin (1%) and Travis (0.2%) were overestimated in 2009.  The population of the other 17 counties was underestimated, some counties greatly so.  Bell County's population (Temple/Killeen) was underestimated by 8%, El Paso's by about 6%, and Nueces (Corpus Christi) and Fort Bend (SW of Houston) counties by about 5%. Denton (N of DFW) and Harris (Houston) counties were the least underestimated, at less than 1%.  The state's population was underestimated by about 1.5% - but since the last estimate I've found was as on July 1, 2009, some of that change was likely due to pure population growth since the estimate.

Texas is one state where the non-Hispanic White population increased, albeit about five times slower than the state's population as a whole. - 4.2% versus 20.6%.

[cinyc]

El Paso's by about 6%,

That's an additional 40,000 or 50,000 voters going into the new TX-23 then, right?

That's about 40,000-50,000 additional El Paso County residents compared to the 2009 estimates, not necessarily that many voters.   I'd give you an exact figure, but I foolishly didn't save my worksheet.  In which congressional district(s) those residents end up is still and open question. 

Some West and North Texas counties shrunk.  Loving actually grew.  It now has a whopping 82 residents.

[cinyc]

I made myself a little excel table of Native population change in South Dakota.

And?  Anything stick out other than the Ziebach County anomoly?  Pennington County?

[cinyc]

Native increases in Yankton and Bon Homme Counties are certainly puzzling.
Aw hell, here's the table. Despite excel always looking terrible on the forum. All counties with Native (only) population over 5% or over 500 in 2010 listed.

The Yankton and Bon Homme increases could be people moving from and/or marrying and having kids with Native Americans from the Yankton reservation in nearby Charles Mix County.  Yankton is the closest larger-sized market town to the reservation, so it makes some sense that rural folks looking for better economic opportunities might move there.

Thanks for the chart.

[cinyc]

Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon and Washington were shipped to state legislators today.  They will likely be released to the public tomorrow.