Census population estimates 2011-2019

[Linus Van Pelt]

+8/-8 would be the lowest total change in the whole 435-seat era. Interstate migration is low by historical standards.

[Linus Van Pelt]

+8/-8 would be the lowest total change in the whole 435-seat era. Interstate migration is low by historical standards.

Relative (and net) migration.  In 1950, if 10% of Minnesota retirees realize that ice fishing is not that much fun and move to Arizona to play shuffleboard, it is a significant increase for Arizona.  And since there were no people in Arizona at that time, none moved to Minnesota.

But now, a similar number of Minnesotans would hardly be noticed, some of the former retirees are dying or moving back to live near their children, and some Arizonan's voluntarily move to Minnesota.

And overall growth rate is declining.  For a state with 10 representatives to lose one, it has to grow 10% slower than the country.  If the country increases 20%, the state could have a healthy 10% increase and still lose representation.  If the country increases 10%, the state would have to have no growth, or could grow at 5% for 20 years.

But with the country growing at 8% rate, 5% growth results in the state losing a district every 30 years.

Yes, but in fact also the gross interstate migration rate has been undergoing a major decline. It was over 0.03 in 1990 and is now close to 0.015, and this has been a secular decline over the 20-year period, not just due to the recent recession. That decline in rate is enough to more than offset population growth, so even the gross number of interstate migrants is smaller now than in 1990.

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/wp/wp697.pdf

[Linus Van Pelt]

Yes, but in fact also the gross interstate migration rate has been undergoing a major decline. It was over 0.03 in 1990 and is now close to 0.015, and this has been a secular decline over the 20-year period, not just due to the recent recession. That decline in rate is enough to more than offset population growth, so even the gross number of interstate migrants is smaller now than in 1990.

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/wp/wp697.pdf

Bump re the above to note an interesting new paper here by some Federal Reserve economists exploring possible reasons why the rate of migration has been declining since the 1980's. They find that the shift is not explained just by demographic changes, and explore some possible other explanations, including: that the range of industries and occupations has become more similar across metropolitan areas; that the rise of dual-career couples has made moves more difficult since both partners are unlikely to be looking for new jobs at the same time; and that the structure of work has changed in ways that disincentivize job changes. The last of these is their favored hypothesis.

[Linus Van Pelt]

Components of population change by state have been released here.

[Linus Van Pelt]

Components of population change by state have been released here.

Link doesn't work for me

Sorry, linking to the FactFinder is tricky. What if you go here and then click on the third link, called "Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change for the United States, Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2013"?