Official US 2010 Census Results

[jimrtex]

Is there a schedule anywhere? I want Washington data!

http://2010.census.gov/news/press-kits/redistricting.html

That doesn't seem terribly informative.

Damnit, Gary! What's the point of having you in charge if you don't put WA first?

It is largely tied to when the states need the data.  The first states were those that have odd-year elections for their legislatures and so need to complete legislative redistricting real soon (before the primaries).  Illinois and Texas have early primaries next year, so they need to be completed before the filing deadline.  Texas redistricting is done by the legislature so it has to be finished by May if it is done in the regular session.  Washington has an August primary, and a commission to do the redistricting, so they could be among the last.  It also takes longer for larger states, so Washington might lag a bit there.

The Census Bureau is required to provide all states results within 1 year of the census, so March 31st at the latest.

[jimrtex]

Self-redesignation as American Indian continues apace in Oklahoma, I see. (One will have to wait until the release of the individual tribes count in a couple of years to see if there's also a population explosion among the more genuinely Indian population.)

You can use the ACS for that.

It appears that you need 2005-9 to get a complete picture.

2007-9 for selected states: WA to TX + CO + OK + MO + WI + FL

2009: CA and TX

[jimrtex]

Texas data is out.

Houston population is 2,099,451

The Houston city charter has a provision to increase the number of district members from 9 to 11 if the population exceeds 2,100,000.  This was put in place as a sort of a compromise when district elections were imposed in response to the VRA.

A couple of years ago Houston was sued to have the two additional districts created, but the city argued that there was not accurate enough data to draw district boundaries.

But the census determined that the trigger was not reached (by 549 persons, or 0.026%).

There is also a trigger related to composition of the Metro (mass transit) board.  Currently the mayor appoints 5 of the 9 members, and has effective control of Metro.  But the trigger would switch control to members appointed by county commissioners and city councils of smaller cities.

[jimrtex]

Next week are:

• Alabama
• Colorado
• Hawaii
• Missouri
• Nevada
• Oregon
• Utah
• Washington

[jimrtex]

Aw hell, here's the table. Despite excel always looking terrible on the forum.

Do something like  concat(a1.rept(" ",20-len(a1)))  to left justify and fill with trailing blanks.
and concat(rept(" ",8-len(b1)),b1) to right justify with leading blanks.  Set the values of 20 and 8 based on the column content.   Then concat(I1:m1) or whatever to merge all the formatted columns.  Then paste that to the forum, and surround with tt tags to get fixed pitch spacing.

[jimrtex]

Surprising is that Salt Lake City could fall by the wayside as a state capital that is also the largest city in its state, while Montgomery could reclaim its claim.

Clark County doesn't quite have enough population for 3 of Nevada's 4 CD.  It is 74,000 short.  You can either go along the Utah border to Idaho, or take the entire pointed lower pointed part of the state to get enough population.  So now the cow counties are not only overwhelmed by Reno and Las Vegas they will be divided up.

[jimrtex]

What's the nonhispanic SOR population.

Amazing. I noticed way back in 2000 that Arkansas' Pacific Islander pop. was elevated compared to what I'd expected, but I never guessed it was all in one place, and that not even Little Rock.

The SOR poulation is Springdale is almost all Hispanic.

The NHOPI population in the census is more than double what was being reported in the ACS.  Springdale is HQ of Tyson Foods, so they work in chicken processing plants.

In the 2005-9 ACS there were 1253 Other Micronesian (ie not Guamanian or Chamorro) in Arkansas.  1209 were in Washington County and 1207 were in Springdale.  

I found a story of a Marshallese who came in the 1980s and would always tell his relatives and friends of the jobs available.  Marshallese don't need visas, so they are preferred workers for low-paying unpleasant working conditions.  Supposedly, the food processing workers in Springdale have been assisted by relatives, as opposed to brought here by brokers, for employment in nursing homes and amusement parks.   The Marshall Islands opened a consulate in Springdale in 2009.

[jimrtex]

What's the nonhispanic SOR population.

Amazing. I noticed way back in 2000 that Arkansas' Pacific Islander pop. was elevated compared to what I'd expected, but I never guessed it was all in one place, and that not even Little Rock.

SOR in Springdale is 15332 and HLO is 24692. Which seems like a pretty big ratio (most ratios i've seen are 3:1 Hispanic:SOR)

I wish there were a break down for SOR too.

You can get the racial breakdown by Hispanics and by the total population, and take the difference to get if for Hispanics:

White: 45,185 total, 36,798 Non-Hispanic, 8,387 Hispanic = 18.6% Hispanic
Black: 1,251, 1,160, 91 7.3%
AIAN: 679, 534, 145, 21.4%
Asian 1363, 1336, 27, 2.0%
SOR 15332, 105, 15227, 99.3%
NHOPI 3976, 3967, 9, 0.2%
White-Black 252, 239, 13, 5.2%
White-AIAN: 574, 520, 54 9.4%
White-Asian: 151, 139, 12 7.9%
White-SOR: 601, 16, 585, 97.3%
Other 2+: 433, 291, 142 32.8%

[jimrtex]

Alabama, Hawaii, Missouri, Nevada and Utah are now out.  The highlights, in reverse alphabetical order:

Utah
In Utah, growth was largely in the Salt Lake City area, particularly in the I-15 corridor from Salt Lake City to Provo.  The state's fastest-growing cities were Lehi (+149%),  Spanish Fork (+71%), South Jordan (+71%), Draper (+67%), Riverton (+55%), West Jordan (+52%) and St. George (+47%), all but the last of which are in that corridor.  Salt Lake City proper barely grew (+3%) and suburban Sandy lost population (-1%).

The fastest-growing counties were Wasatch (+55%), on the other side of the mountains for which it is named from Provo (perhaps exurban spillover in the Heber City area - but the population is still under 25k), Washington (+53%), on the state's southwest corner in Utah's dixie, home to the city of St. George, Tooele (+43%), immediately west of Salt Lake County, and Utah (+40%), home of Provo and BYU.   Salt Lake County grew slower than the state (14.6% vs. 23.8%), but still picked up more residents than all but Utah County - and more residents than live in all but the top 5 counties.

Where are you getting the tabular form for data like this? The website is hard to navigate.

If you go to this site,

http://2010.census.gov/news/press-kits/redistricting.html

Click on a state in those that have been released, and then under "Release Information" in the box in the upper right click on "Custom Tables" which is a link to Excel (.xls) spread sheets with some summary information.  Only the 20 largest cities and counties are included.

If on the above page you click on the map, you will get an interactive widget that lets you put the cursor and get a population read out for each county.

And the data is now in the American Fact Finder.  If you haven't used the new version of American Fact Finder, run some of the tutorials - or it probably won't make any sense.

[jimrtex]

Delaware and (more interestingly) North Carolina shipped today.

So Kansas and Wyoming tomorrow or just sometime this week?

The schedule is that they ship sometime between Monday and Thursday; are received between Tuesday and Friday; and all the data is is available on the census bureau web site between Wednesday and Saturday.

[jimrtex]

Its Indian population fell? Lol. What's going on here?

California has a huge number of reservations but most of them are tiny. It also has a lot of people of (often part) native Californian descent who are not members of any recognized sovereign nation and who usually pass as Chicanos for most of their daily lives - a lot of them identify as Native American on Census records though, or at least did in 2000. Actually, quite a few offrez-residing recognized California natives do the same thing.
And needless to say, it has huge numbers of whites with a part Indian great-grandparent, or Whites with an Indian grandparent who're actually registered members of an Indian nation, or Whites with a false family tradition of Indian ancestry somewhere deep in the recesses of the 19th or 18th century. A lot of whom report as Native or more commonly as White and Native. But if those reporting practices were changing, we would have seen that in stats for other states as well, wouldn't we?

I'd bet a lot of those were Okies, where it has become less clear what the relationship was over time.  The summary lumps everyone who reports two or more races into one group.

In 2010 in California, a majority (55%) of those who report they are AIAN alone are Hispanic.

The non-Hispanic White+AIAN population is up 4.4% from 134K to 140K
Non-Hispanic AIAN is down from 179K to 162K
NH Black+AIAN up 15.8% from 22K to 26K
NH W+B+AIAN up 49.8% from 16K to 24K

[jimrtex]

FL-03, Corrine Brown's gerrymandered monstrosity, is now majority-black.

So does that give it VRA protection then?

Minority populations have VRA protection. Districts don't. Ever. Please don't perpetuate that fallacy ever again. The Black population in Northeast Florida is and remains VRA protected, whether the old version of the seat is over or under 50% VAP Black is quite irrelevant.

I don't think Brown's lawsuit has been dismissed has it?

[jimrtex]

Something quite weird happened with the city of Atlanta - the estimated growth for the decade is so wildly off it makes me wonder: was there a secession to form a new municipality in the last couple of years?

2000 census - 416,474

2001 estimate - 430,684
2002 estimate - 442,538
2003 estimate - 456,919
2004 estimate - 468,725
2005 estimate - 483,108
2006 estimate - 498,496
2007 estimate - 520,368
2008 estimate - 537,958

2010 census - 420,003

I don't think so.  Some previously unincorporated areas in North Fulton County did incorporate, but they weren't within city limits.

It sounds like the same type of problem Census had with Omaha's estimates.  A lot of unincorporated Fulton and DeKalb counties has or had Atlanta zip codes.  I wonder if that's screwing up the estimates.

FWIW, the 2009 ACS estimate pegged Atlanta's population 50% black, 43% white (including Hispanics).  It's actually about 54% black, 38% white.  They got the 5% Hispanic part right.

It's still a growth in the relative white percentage from 2000 - 33% to 38%.  Given that the city was otherwise stagnant, its black population must be falling.

It looks like the 2009 ACS might have been bad.  The 2006, 2007, 2008 ACS were showing modest growth, but were lagging the estimates (note 2005 ACS did not include group quarters, so areas with colleges (dorms), prisons, and nursing homes will be low in that).

All of a sudden the 2009 ACS jumped, so that the 2005-2009 ACS is higher than all but 2009.  And it also produced a jump in the 3-year ACS (I assume that the Census Bureau compensated for the missing group quarters from 2005, eg so that 2005-2009 is based on 4 years of group quarters, and 5 years of households).

I tried to compare census tract from 2005-2009 ACS to the 2010 census, but it was pretty messy.  I ended up using census tracts from DeKalb and Fulton counties, and consolidating on the base tract number.  This produces some super core-tracts in high growth areas where the tracts have been subdivided.  But if the low number tracts that haven't been divided are the same, the ACS was way higher (50% in some cases).

If you throw out the 2009 ACS, and the estimates, the census is not that much lower.

By the way, the Consolidated Statistical Area for Atlanta is now a GA-AL area.

[jimrtex]

Clearly that is what Corrine Brown thinks.

Oh, quite. Then again, she's an idiot.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Meh, I only find it horrible and disgusting when people pretend them not to be such. Or when people do it in real life, of course. Or don't use their powers as lawmakers to make it impossible for the next round of redistricting, as all of them could have.

I'm a little bewildered now as to what, exactly, you actually meant by your original post that sparked this little lovefest of ours. Whether the populations to draw a seat much like her old one that would reelect her exist, without having to head to Tallahassee like some maps predicted?

As I understand the argument of Corrine Brown's (and Diaz-Bahlart) lawsuit, it is that the power of incumbency that permits the protected minority voters to actualize their opportunity to elect their candidate of choice (eg if the representative can choose their voters, the voters can't choose the representative).  Since the initiatives forbid taking into account incumbency, but only race, it may result in effective protection of the right of black people to vote.

Before the election, James Clyburn acting on behalf of the Black Democrat Caucus, wrote the national NAACP trying to get them to rein in the Florida NAACP which was supporting the initiatives.

There was a lawsuit trying to force the State of Florida to submit the initiatives to the USDOJ for pre-clearance.  It had been submitted in the last days of the Crist administration, and then withdrawn under Scott.  I'm not sure where that stands now.

[jimrtex]

Interesting. Never looked at that closely.
I would have assumed that the bill does indeed require preclearance. I would have assumed that it had already received preclearance.
Of course, in practice a constituency at least somewhat like Brown's current one always was going to happen in practice unless literally impossible, which I never presumed to be the case...

This is from last week:

http://americansforredistrictingreform.org/FLTampaTribuneNomovementfromScottonanti-gerrymanderingamendments3-14-11.htm

Crist's SOS had filed for preclearance in December, then Scott's SOS withdrew it in January, and the Florida NAACP, League of Women Voters filed suit in February to force Florida to resubmit it for pre-clearance.  Scott and SOS Browning got permission to have until the end of the month to file their reply (supposedly with the consent of the plaintiffs, who issued their press release on the same day).

The article is misleading about California.  California had already pre-cleared their redistricting commission after it was approved in November 2008.  The November 2010 measure simply extended it to congressional redistricting, plus clarified the term "community of interest".  Also California's measure simply requires compliance with the VRA, which would happen even if the measure didn't say anything.

In the Corrinne Brown and Mario Diaz-Ballart suit, claiming that the Florida initiative violates the VRA because it forbids incumbent protection, the court has just granted intervenor status to several parties.  The ACLU, Florida NAACP, Democracia Ahora as defendant intervenors, and the Florida House of Representatives as a plaintiff intervenor.  In addition, 5 state legislators have intervened as defendant intervenors, claiming that they are potential congressional candidates, as well as legislators who will be drawing the maps.

I read the actual text of the initiatives.  They forbid a plan that would favor or disfavor an incumbent.  They do not forbid a plan that would favor or disfavor any other potential candidate (eg an ambitious legislator who hopes to carve out a new congressional district for themselves)  So the 5 intervening legislators seem to be saying that they may be harmed by not being able to draw a plan favorable to themselves.

[jimrtex]

South Carolina
Unlike the other slow- or no-growth states released this week, South Carolina grew at a brisk 15.3% pace.  Every one of the top 20 counties grew.  The fastest-growing counties were largely suburban or coastal.  Charleston-suburban Dorchester County (Summerville; +41.6%) lead the growth parade, followed by Charlotte, North Carolina-suburban York County (Rock Hill;+ 37.3%), Myrtle Beach's Horry County (+37.0%) and coastal Beaufort County (+34.1%), home of ritzy Hilton Head Island and Beaufort's U.S. Marine bases, including Parris Island.  Horry County picked up the most new residents - over 72,000, about 1,000 more residents than the largest county in the state, Greenville (+18.9%), in upstate South Carolina.    Other major counties that grew faster than the state include Charlotte-exurban Lancaster (+24.9%), Charleston-suburban Berkeley (+24.7%), Columbia-suburban Lexington (+21.5%) and Columbia's county, Richland (+19.9%).   Charleston County grew by 13.0%.  In upstate, Anderson County (+12.9%) and Spartanburg County (+12.0%) slightly lagged the state.    Some I-95 counties containing smaller towns barely grew, among them Orangeburg County (+1.0%), Sumter County (+2.7%) and Darlington County (+1.9%), near Florence.  And 12 more rural counties lost population.

On the municipal level, the state capital of Columbia (+11.2%) held off Charleston (+24.2%) to remain the state's largest city.  Charleston picked up the most new residents of any city in the state, over 23,000, bringing its population above 100,000.  It is now within 9,200 residents of becoming South Carolina's largest city.  And Charleston's suburbs were among the state's fastest growing major municipalities, including Summerville (+56.4%), Mount Pleasant (+42.5%), Goose Creek (+23.0%) and North Charleston (+22.4%).  Upstate suburbs were also well-represented, with Greer (+51.5%), near the Greenville-Spartanburg Airport, and Mauldin (+50.3%) posting impressive growth rates.  Charlotte-area Rock Hill (+32.9%),  the city of Florence (+22.5%), Myrtle Beach (+19.1%) and Augusta, Georgia-area Aiken (+16.5%) also grew faster than the state.   Upstate Spartanburg (-6.7%) was the only population loser among South Carolina's top 20 municipalities.  Its upstate neighbor, Greenville, only grew by 4.3%.

South Carolina's non-Hispanic white population grew at a respectable 11.7%, three points faster than its non-Hispanic black population (+8.6%).  As a result, South Carolina's non-Hispanic African-American population decreased from 29.4% to 27.7% of the state's population.  But because South Carolina's Hispanic population (+147.9%) more than doubled and non-Hispanic Asian population (+63.9%) rapidly grew, South Carolina's non-Hispanic white percentage also dropped 2 points from 66.1% to 64.1% of the population.  Hispanics make up 5.1% and non-Hispanic Asians 1.3% of South Carolina's residents.

I would have guessed that Greenville or Spartanburg would have made the top 5 cities.  This was somewhat similar to Orlando, which is actually a pretty small city.

[jimrtex]

Here's some really diverse tracts I've found, jfern-

tract 6729, west Houston, TX:
28% Black
25% Hispanic
25% White
20% Asian

I'd probably call it Katy, but its pretty big with 28,000 people so parts are near Sugar Land.  And I think some of it is in the Lamar Consolidated ISD (Richmond-Rosenberg) and with a Richmond zip code.

So maybe just Fort Bend.   It will be a little less diverse once it is divided up.  On its west side is the Grand Parkway which gives access to either I-10 (Katy Freeway) or US 59 Southwest Freeway.  And on the north is the Westpark Tollroad which gives access into the Galleria area and also connects with US 59 much closer to the city.

An interesting contrast is census tract 6737 just to the west with a 0% Asian population.

This is the TC Jester unit of the state prison system (which figures in the true life story on which the movie Sugarland Express (sic) is based.  Many of the Texas prisons are in the Brazos bottoms, and were at one time self sufficient, growing food and cotton for prison clothing.  Forced labor is now frowned upon, and a lot of the farm lands around the prisons proper, especially in the Houston area have been sold to developers, including some of the land in 6729 (though most of the development is further north along the Westpark Tollroad/Westheimer/FM-1093.

[jimrtex]

Does anyone happen to know whether the Census Bureau has/will update past yearly estimates based on the new 2010 census?

They have issued 2010 estimates based on the 2000 census.

When they issue a new estimate they update previous estimates.  For example, when the 2008 estimate is issued, they also include annual estimates for previous years, 2007, 2006, etc.  The 2008 vintage estimate for 2007, is not necessarily the same as the 2007 vintage estimate for 2007.  So there is some sort of retrospective correction.  I don't know what the source of the correction is.

I don't think that they ever go backwards.  While they will eventually issue a July 2010 estimate based on the 2010 census, they won't issue a 2009 estimate.  They probably compare the two internally as part of an error analysis,

The estimates are based on a demographic model, including births, deaths, and migration, so they are probably accumulating error throughout the decade.  But there annual changes are probably somewhat accurate in capturing changes in migration, birth and death rates.  So you might be able to fit the 2010, 2009, 2008, estimate series to the 2000 and 2010 census date, and use that to produce a new estimate for an earlier year.

What are you trying to do?

[jimrtex]

These CD's have lost population:

CA 31, 47, 33

I'm surprised CA-47 lost population since it is mostly a Hispanic and Asian district.

Not all that unusual.  These areas were developed 50 and 60 years ago, and there is no empty land left.  As family sizes decline, the population declines.

[jimrtex]

Does anyone happen to know whether the Census Bureau has/will update past yearly estimates based on the new 2010 census?
Thanks,
Dave

2000-2010 Intercensal Population and Housing Unit Estimates

[jimrtex]

113th CD demographics have been released, though doesn't appear to list VAP or white non-hispanics.

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/american_community_survey_acs/cb13-tps07.html

Those are both cross tabs from race, hispanic and age. The easy stats don't list them, just the main categories. This is also only from the 1-year sample so the statistics get weaker as one tries to cross tabulate different questions.

The Census Bureau releases ACS data based on areas as of January 1 of the last year of the collection period.   The 1-year 2011 data was released in September 2012, and the 3-year data was released in the following months.

Presumably the 2012 release will have data for the congressional districts for the 113rd Congress.  The raw ACS data has street addresses and block numbers, so tabulation should be
"trivial".  The minimum sampling rate (one year) is 1.5%, so the estimates for CD-sized objects entities should be pretty good.

[jimrtex]

113th CD demographics have been released, though doesn't appear to list VAP or white non-hispanics.

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/american_community_survey_acs/cb13-tps07.html

Those are both cross tabs from race, hispanic and age. The easy stats don't list them, just the main categories. This is also only from the 1-year sample so the statistics get weaker as one tries to cross tabulate different questions.

The Census Bureau releases ACS data based on areas as of January 1 of the last year of the collection period.   The 1-year 2011 data was released in September 2012, and the 3-year data was released in the following months.

Presumably the 2012 release will have data for the congressional districts for the 113rd Congress.  The raw ACS data has street addresses and block numbers, so tabulation should be
"trivial".  The minimum sampling rate (one year) is 1.5%, so the estimates for CD-sized objects entities should be pretty good.

I.E., that data isn't available yet? When is it expected to come? Interesting since some states had NHW and VAP data available before the districts took effect.

Any State under the imposition of Section 5 of the VRA will be expected to include that information with their submissions to the USDOJ in Washington, DC.

The redistricting data released in Spring of 2011 included population counts by race, hispanicity, and for over 18 to the census block level.  Since any software would be working at the block level, it would be easy to tabulate.

The Census Bureau has released the 113rd Congress to block number equivalency files, so you could calculate VAP by race and hispanicity.

The 2010 Census did not ask a citizenship question, but the Texas Legislative Council was able to generate CVAP from the ACS data, and they also produce election results by proposed district (they have to allocate precinct election results as necessary to do so).

The Census Bureau will also do a custom tabulation for a fee (minimum price $3000).  The Census Bureau has to switch the ACS over from the 2000 Census Geography to the 2010 Census Geography (block definitions and numbers are not identical).  To conduct the 2010 Census they must have had to conform their master list of addresses to the 2010 census geography, and must have an ongoing program to make corrections.