Census population estimates 2011-2019

[Skill and Chance]

California Texas Florida New York Pennsylvania Illinois Ohio Georgia North Carolina Michigan New Jersey Virginia Washington Arizona Massachusetts Tennessee Indiana Missouri Maryland Wisconsin Colorado Minnesota South Carolina Alabama Louisiana Kentucky Oregon Oklahoma Connecticut Utah Iowa Nevada Arkansas Mississippi Kansas New Mexico Nebraska West Virginia Idaho Hawaii New Hampshire Maine Montana Rhode Island Delaware South Dakota North Dakota Alaska Vermont Wyoming

39,512,223 28,995,881 21,477,737 19,453,561 12,801,989 12,671,821 11,689,100 10,617,423 10,488,084 9,986,857 8,882,190 8,535,519 7,614,893 7,278,717 6,892,503 6,829,174 6,732,219 6,137,428 6,045,680 5,822,434 5,758,736 5,639,632 5,148,714 4,903,185 4,648,794 4,467,673 4,217,737 3,956,971 3,565,287 3,205,958 3,155,070 3,080,156 3,017,825 2,976,149 2,913,314 2,096,829 1,934,408 1,792,147 1,787,065 1,415,872 1,359,711 1,344,212 1,068,778 1,059,361 973,764 884,659 762,062 731,545 623,989 578,759

52.589 35.497 26.545 27.355 17.932 18.113 16.285 13.677 13.461 13.953 12.411 11.294 9.493 9.024 9.243 8.959 9.153 8.454 8.150 8.028 7.100 7.487 6.529 6.748 6.400 6.126 5.408 5.296 5.045 3.902 4.301 3.812 4.116 4.190 4.028 2.907 2.578 2.616 2.213 1.920 1.858 1.875 1.397 1.486 1.268 1.149 0.949 1.003 0.883 0.796

52.476 38.510 28.525 25.836 17.002 16.830 15.524 14.101 13.929 13.264 11.797 11.336 10.113 9.667 9.154 9.070 8.941 8.151 8.029 7.733 7.648 7.490 6.838 6.512 6.174 5.934 5.602 5.255 4.735 4.258 4.190 4.091 4.008 3.953 3.869 2.785 2.569 2.380 2.373 1.880 1.806 1.785 1.419 1.407 1.293 1.175 1.012 0.972 0.829 0.769

Goodbye 53rd Good for gain of 3 Good for 2 27th is gone, 26th hanging on 18th is gone 18th is long gone Will just slip blow the threshold, goodbye 16th 14th is guaranteed 14th is gone 12th could be lost in 2030 Falls short of 12th 10th is certain Could save 9th in 2030 8th safe for now, but most likely gone in 2030 Guaranteed 8th Highly likely loss of 8th Farewell 7th 6th all but certain 5th could be lost in 2030 3rd safe for now 3rd is history Possible 3rd in 2030 2nd likely Loss of 2nd all but guaranteed

Looks like LA could be at risk of losing LA-06 at the 2030 census?

[Brittain33]

California Texas Florida New York Pennsylvania Illinois Ohio Georgia North Carolina Michigan New Jersey Virginia Washington Arizona Massachusetts Tennessee Indiana Missouri Maryland Wisconsin Colorado Minnesota South Carolina Alabama Louisiana Kentucky Oregon Oklahoma Connecticut Utah Iowa Nevada Arkansas Mississippi Kansas New Mexico Nebraska West Virginia Idaho Hawaii New Hampshire Maine Montana Rhode Island Delaware South Dakota North Dakota Alaska Vermont Wyoming

39,512,223 28,995,881 21,477,737 19,453,561 12,801,989 12,671,821 11,689,100 10,617,423 10,488,084 9,986,857 8,882,190 8,535,519 7,614,893 7,278,717 6,892,503 6,829,174 6,732,219 6,137,428 6,045,680 5,822,434 5,758,736 5,639,632 5,148,714 4,903,185 4,648,794 4,467,673 4,217,737 3,956,971 3,565,287 3,205,958 3,155,070 3,080,156 3,017,825 2,976,149 2,913,314 2,096,829 1,934,408 1,792,147 1,787,065 1,415,872 1,359,711 1,344,212 1,068,778 1,059,361 973,764 884,659 762,062 731,545 623,989 578,759

52.589 35.497 26.545 27.355 17.932 18.113 16.285 13.677 13.461 13.953 12.411 11.294 9.493 9.024 9.243 8.959 9.153 8.454 8.150 8.028 7.100 7.487 6.529 6.748 6.400 6.126 5.408 5.296 5.045 3.902 4.301 3.812 4.116 4.190 4.028 2.907 2.578 2.616 2.213 1.920 1.858 1.875 1.397 1.486 1.268 1.149 0.949 1.003 0.883 0.796

52.476 38.510 28.525 25.836 17.002 16.830 15.524 14.101 13.929 13.264 11.797 11.336 10.113 9.667 9.154 9.070 8.941 8.151 8.029 7.733 7.648 7.490 6.838 6.512 6.174 5.934 5.602 5.255 4.735 4.258 4.190 4.091 4.008 3.953 3.869 2.785 2.569 2.380 2.373 1.880 1.806 1.785 1.419 1.407 1.293 1.175 1.012 0.972 0.829 0.769

Goodbye 53rd Good for gain of 3 Good for 2 27th is gone, 26th hanging on 18th is gone 18th is long gone Will just slip blow the threshold, goodbye 16th 14th is guaranteed 14th is gone 12th could be lost in 2030 Falls short of 12th 10th is certain Could save 9th in 2030 8th safe for now, but most likely gone in 2030 Guaranteed 8th Highly likely loss of 8th Farewell 7th 6th all but certain 5th could be lost in 2030 3rd safe for now 3rd is history Possible 3rd in 2030 2nd likely Loss of 2nd all but guaranteed

Looks like LA could be at risk of losing LA-06 at the 2030 census?

If Oregon is getting a 6th district at 5.602, wouldn't that require a much faster rate of decline in LA than we saw since 2010?

That said, a major hit to New Orleans is a distinct possibility in this decade.

[jimrtex]

There are eight states that are in a band of about 1% of the ideal break point.

Above the line:

NY(26) 1.004
TX(39) 1.003
FL(29) 1.002
MT(2) 1.001
----------------
AL(6) 0.998
MN(7) 0.997
CA (52) 0.995
OH(15) 0.994

At this point, what is more significant is how accurate the estimates are, than the growth trend for the final 9 months of the census period. Overall drops in growth may mean estimates are more accurate. If a state grew at an estimated 30% during a decade, it may be difficult to determine whether it was 29% or 31%. But it is likely an estimated rate of 2.5% is more accurate.

Based on 2009 estimates, Florida and Texas have not yet gained their 39th and 29th seat respectively, while Alabama and Ohio have not lost their 7th and 16th seat respectively.

New York year-to-year change has dropped every year this decade. That is, its second derivative is negative, and its population is in parabolic decline. After the 2011 estimate, it was projected that New York would keep its 27th seat. Since then, smaller increases, which have have become decreases since 2016 put New York at risk of losing two representatives. A projection based on estimates from 2010-2019 would result in a surplus of around 130K. But the average annual gain from 2010 to 2019 was around 6K, while the loss for 2018-2019 was 76K. If we project a loss of 95K for 2020 based on recent trends, that would be a deficit of 100K (75K for nine months) which would eat into more than half of the projected surplus. Much will depend on how accurate the revisions in estimates of international migration were. International emigration is difficult to measure since it depends on measuring persons who no longer exist.

Birth records are accurate. Death records are accurate. Estimates of domestic migration based on IRS and SSA records may be reasonably accurate. If New York keeps a 26th representative it may be lost before the 2020 census results are announced. New York is projected to lose 1.634 representatives (from 27.243 to 25.609). They are in a favorable position for rounding.

Texas year-to-year peaked near mid-decade with $100/bbl oil, and then dropped when the price drop to $30/bbl. By 2019, the price has been around $55/bbl which is profitable in the Permian Basin, but not necessarily elsewhere. The year-to-year increase has recovered to near the decade average, and the Texas increase as a share of the national increase was a decade high of 23.7%. Texas has a 147K surplus for the 39th seat and should maintain that. The caveat is whether the Census estimate of 16.6% (2nd highest to Utah) has been accurate.

Florida started the decade recovering from the housing bubble, but by mid-decade growth in 2016 was almost double that of 2017. Since then growth has dropped rather sharply, with 2019 growth almost back to to 2011 levels. Continuation of the trend would make 2020 less than 2011, eating into Florida's 106K surplus. Florida may benefit from the short 9-month interval to the Census. Again the final determination will largely hinge on the quality of estimates.

Montana has been just below the population necessary for a second seat ever since it lost its second seat. Some years it looked might it gain it back and others not. With an economy highly dependent on natural resources and tourism, growth can be volatile. Population is projected to increase by 8.7%, slightly above the national average of 6.8%, but enough for a gain of 0.023 representatives to put Montana over the cusp. With a surplus of just 3300, Montana may be harmed by the April 1 Census date, as seasonal Montanans may not have returned from Arizona.

Alabama had its peak increase in 2019, but it is projected to be about 15K short of keeping the 7th seat. But its total growth for the decade is only 133K. It would essentially have to double its growth rate of the last decade, or hope that some people have been missed.

Minnesota may illustrate an apportionment paradox. It is projected to increase 6.86% for the decade, versus 6.83% for the US as a whole. It's share of the US population is increasing, while its share of representation is decreasing. The entitlement is an increase from 7.472 to 7.474. In effect, Minnesota was lucky not to have lost its 8th seat in 2010.
Minnesota is projected to be about 23K short of keeping its 8th seat. But that it is about 2/3 of its average annual growth. 2019 was Minnesota's 3rd lowest year. It is not likely to have that much in a 9-month period, so its hope depends on inaccurate estimates over time.

California over the first half of the decade had strong growth of over 300K per year. Since 2015 it has plummeted (249K, 191K, 103K, 51K). Based on recent trends, California may have essentially no population growth this year. California may be experiencing a delayed effect of the recovery from the housing bubble. Home owners who were upside down on mortgages have been able to finally cash out, and move to states with more affordable housing. California is 222K short of keeping a 53rd representative and may pile up as much more in the final 9 months of the decade.

Ohio is 80K short of keeping its 16th seat. It's growth has been meager and sporadic. 80K is equivalent to an average of 5 years growth, and 3 of the best year.

[Oryxslayer]

Good breakdown jimrtex. The only thing that I would add is that CA is pouring in millions to assist the census 'discover' residents. The South Valley has a lot of hard-to-reach migratory groups, and CA is pouring in money to ensure every resident is counted, especially those groups missed in 2010. The margin of error around projections therefore is larger here and in other border states, so it's one thing working in the states favor. In contrast, TX has a lot of hard-to-reach groups as well, but the state is putting aside 0$ to assist in contacting their residents (for political reasons of course) so the MOE around those projections is less in their favor.

[jimrtex]

2020 Pop is projected population in millions for April 2020, based on April 2010 (base) and July 2019 estimate.

2010 Ent is based on geometric mean.  sqrt((pop/quota)² + 0.25). Quota is adjusted so that states sum to 435 (about 0.43%). A state with n.500 will be near the dividing line for gaining a n+1 representative.

2020 Ent is based on geometric mean.

2010-2020 is difference in 2020 entitlement minus 2010 entitlement. For example, Mississippi can be said to have lost about 1/4 a representative.

Rank Val is the ranking quotient, for a state receiving an n+1 district if 2020 entitlement was n.xxxx. pop/sqrt(n*(n+1)). Values are normalized by dividing by the adjusted quota, so that values above 1 will generally indicate that the state will gain the extra seat (since 435 seats are apportioned, it is possible that some states above 1 will not gain a seat, or that some below 1 will gain a seat. In this case it happens that Montana(2) with 1.001 is the 435th seat.

2020 is the projected apportionment for 2020.

Change is change in apportionment from 2010.

Next is guesstimate of next change based on 2010-2020 trend. If blank, no change is expected through 2050. Trends out that far are unreliable anyway.

State	2020 Pop	2010 Ent	2020 Ent	2010-2020	Rank Val	2020	Change	Next
Hawaii	1.420	1.976	1.935	-0.042	1.322	2	0
New Hampshire	1.363	1.917	1.862	-0.055	1.268	2	0
Maine	1.346	1.933	1.840	-0.093	1.252	2	0
Mississippi	2.977	4.202	3.948	-0.253	1.131	4	0	L 2040/50
New Mexico	2.100	2.937	2.808	-0.130	1.128	3	0	L 2040/50
Kansas	2.918	4.041	3.872	-0.169	1.108	4	0	L 2040/50
Kentucky	4.478	6.120	5.913	-0.207	1.076	6	0	L 2040/50
Maryland	6.068	8.131	8.000	-0.131	1.067	8	0
South Carolina	5.194	6.521	6.852	0.331	1.054	7	0	G 2040/50
Connecticut	3.565	5.049	4.717	-0.332	1.049	5	0	L 2030/40
Indiana	6.753	9.128	8.899	-0.229	1.047	9	0	L 2040/50
Nebraska	1.943	2.615	2.605	-0.010	1.044	3	0
North Carolina	10.569	13.413	13.915	0.502	1.031	14	+1	G 2030/40
Wisconsin	5.834	8.010	7.692	-0.318	1.026	8	0	L2030
Colorado	5.822	7.087	7.677	0.590	1.024	8	+1	G 2040
Pennsylvania	12.810	17.862	16.862	-1.000	1.022	17	-1	L 2030
Oregon	4.251	5.408	5.615	0.207	1.021	6	+1
Arizona	7.356	8.999	9.691	0.692	1.020	10	+1	G 2040
New Jersey	8.890	12.368	11.707	-0.661	1.018	12	0	L 2030
Illinois	12.659	18.043	16.663	-1.380	1.010	17	-1	LL 2030
New York	19.460	27.243	25.609	-1.634	1.004	26	-1	LL 2030
Texas	29.333	35.349	38.597	3.248	1.003	39	+3	GGG 2030
Florida	21.710	26.437	28.570	2.133	1.002	29	+2	GG 2030
Montana	1.075	1.478	1.501	0.023	1.001	2	+1
Alabama	4.913	6.738	6.484	-0.254	0.998	6	-1
Minnesota	5.668	7.472	7.474	0.002	0.997	7	-1
California	39.701	52.368	52.238	-0.130	0.995	52	-1
Ohio	11.702	16.224	15.404	-0.820	0.994	15	-1	L 2040
Rhode Island	1.060	1.562	1.481	-0.081	0.986	1	-1
Virginia	8.580	11.258	11.301	0.043	0.983	11	0
Michigan	9.995	13.902	13.161	-0.742	0.975	13	-1	L 2030
Georgia	10.697	13.628	14.083	0.455	0.971	14	0	G 2030/40
Idaho	1.806	2.260	2.428	0.169	0.970	2	0	G 2030
Washington	7.692	9.465	10.133	0.668	0.965	10	0	G 2030
West Virginia	1.787	2.652	2.404	-0.248	0.960	2	-1
Massachusetts	6.921	9.217	9.120	-0.097	0.960	9	0
Oklahoma	3.974	5.297	5.253	-0.044	0.955	5	0
Utah	3.245	3.917	4.298	0.381	0.955	4	0	G 2030
Missouri	6.150	8.433	8.107	-0.326	0.954	8	0	L 2040/50
Tennessee	6.870	8.934	9.053	0.118	0.953	9	0
Louisiana	4.658	6.392	6.149	-0.243	0.946	6	0	L 2050
Iowa	3.164	4.312	4.193	-0.119	0.931	4	0
Nevada	3.113	3.829	4.126	0.298	0.916	4	0	G 2030/40
Delaware	0.980	1.358	1.383	0.026	0.912	1	0
Arkansas	3.026	4.129	4.013	-0.116	0.890	4	0
South Dakota	0.891	1.249	1.274	0.025	0.829	1	0
North Dakota	0.770	1.069	1.130	0.060	0.716	1	0
Alaska	0.733	1.117	1.087	-0.030	0.682	1	0
Vermont	0.624	1.012	0.961	-0.051	0.580	1	0
Wyoming	0.580	0.937	0.912	-0.025	0.540	1	0

[jimrtex]

Good breakdown jimrtex. The only thing that I would add is that CA is pouring in millions to assist the census 'discover' residents. The South Valley has a lot of hard-to-reach migratory groups, and CA is pouring in money to ensure every resident is counted, especially those groups missed in 2010. The margin of error around projections therefore is larger here and in other border states, so it's one thing working in the states favor. In contrast, TX has a lot of hard-to-reach groups as well, but the state is putting aside 0$ to assist in contacting their residents (for political reasons of course) so the MOE around those projections is less in their favor.

It is unclear whether you are referring to the San Joaquin Valley, or southern San Fernando Valley.

Estimates of undercount(PDF)

The undercount for California in 2020 is estimated to be 0.60%, while California is estimated to be short by 0.5% of holding on to its 53rd seat.

There might be areas where the undercount was higher, but also lower such as in Marin. And is the mass outreach effective?

[An American Tail: Fubart Goes West]

Good breakdown jimrtex. The only thing that I would add is that CA is pouring in millions to assist the census 'discover' residents. The South Valley has a lot of hard-to-reach migratory groups, and CA is pouring in money to ensure every resident is counted, especially those groups missed in 2010. The margin of error around projections therefore is larger here and in other border states, so it's one thing working in the states favor. In contrast, TX has a lot of hard-to-reach groups as well, but the state is putting aside 0$ to assist in contacting their residents (for political reasons of course) so the MOE around those projections is less in their favor.

It is unclear whether you are referring to the San Joaquin Valley, or southern San Fernando Valley.

Estimates of undercount(PDF)

The undercount for California in 2020 is estimated to be 0.60%, while California is estimated to be short by 0.5% of holding on to its 53rd seat.

There might be areas where the undercount was higher, but also lower such as in Marin. And is the mass outreach effective?

Not OP, but I’m assuming Oryx means the south part of the Central Valley/San Joaquin Valley, which is a big farming area full of migrants.

[jimrtex]

Based on 2010-2020 change Texas will surpass California in population in late 2053, when both states will have over 49 million.

[Oryxslayer]

Good breakdown jimrtex. The only thing that I would add is that CA is pouring in millions to assist the census 'discover' residents. The South Valley has a lot of hard-to-reach migratory groups, and CA is pouring in money to ensure every resident is counted, especially those groups missed in 2010. The margin of error around projections therefore is larger here and in other border states, so it's one thing working in the states favor. In contrast, TX has a lot of hard-to-reach groups as well, but the state is putting aside 0$ to assist in contacting their residents (for political reasons of course) so the MOE around those projections is less in their favor.

It is unclear whether you are referring to the San Joaquin Valley, or southern San Fernando Valley.

Estimates of undercount(PDF)

The undercount for California in 2020 is estimated to be 0.60%, while California is estimated to be short by 0.5% of holding on to its 53rd seat.

There might be areas where the undercount was higher, but also lower such as in Marin. And is the mass outreach effective?

Not OP, but I’m assuming Oryx means the south part of the Central Valley/San Joaquin Valley, which is a big farming area full of migrants.

Yep. I'm not saying the projections will be wrong, this census ACS data is good. However, every state has a MOE around these projections, which you tried to describe. All I'm saying is that some states have smaller or wider MOE's, and certain states and regions are trying their hardest to make the MOE move in their favor.

Generally, hard to count regions are Rural + Residential Minority, be it AA, Canadian, Native, or most notably Hispanic.

[Del Tachi]

Really surprised at VA being below average considering the Amazon HQ2 decision in late 2018. Of course, it could be statistical noise - @cinyc do you have at hand the VA growth estimates and the national estimates?

Amazon hasn't really begun hiring for their HQ2 campus, and while they've ramped up hiring for the AWS offices, there hasn't been the seismic impact on population the full-fledged campus will have. The HQ2 location in Arlington isn't slated to be fully completed until Q1 2023 so it might be a while to see a noticeable effect.

VA now cycles with federal spending/employment growth as a % of the total US economy.  That was unusually high during 2010-14 and has fallen dramatically since then as the rest of the economy took off.  IMO that's all you need to explain VA last decade.

This.  Bad economies are good for government employees + spending, while hot ones are not.

[Kevinstat]

Are county population estimates still expected sometime this month, or are they expected to be delayed due to the COVID-19 outbreak?

[Tender Branson]

Are county population estimates still expected sometime this month, or are they expected to be delayed due to the COVID-19 outbreak?

Still planned for release this Thursday:

https://www.calendarwiz.com/calendars/popup.php?op=view&id=139838361&crd=cens1sample

[DINGO Joe]

Are county population estimates still expected sometime this month, or are they expected to be delayed due to the COVID-19 outbreak?

Still planned for release this Thursday:

https://www.calendarwiz.com/calendars/popup.php?op=view&id=139838361&crd=cens1sample

Probably won't change the release date.  The data has probably been ready for a week or two now.

[EastAnglianLefty]

What's the likelihood Coronavirus will have a significant impact on the census? I'm not thinking of the worst-case scenario of massive death tolls, so much as the likelihood that the census response rate is lower and more variable than usual and that the economic dislocation means fewer people move between states.

[Tender Branson]

What's the likelihood Coronavirus will have a significant impact on the census? I'm not thinking of the worst-case scenario of massive death tolls, so much as the likelihood that the census response rate is lower and more variable than usual and that the economic dislocation means fewer people move between states.

The response rate is currently about 9% higher, not lower, than during the early days of 2010.

The question will be: does the trend of favorable internet/mail/phone returns keep up until May/June, or will it drop off later on ?

Also, the process of visiting homes who have not responded is unclear: will they still visit non-responding/remote households, but with protective gear and a 6 feet distance ? Or just remote areas ? Or not at all ? They have time until August to visit. Or they extend into the fall and delay the publishing of the results into next year.

[EastAnglianLefty]

I guess in terms of movement of people, you'd probably expect a similar impact to after the financial crisis hit, but at a higher intensity?

[Tender Branson]

I guess in terms of movement of people, you'd probably expect a similar impact to after the financial crisis hit, but at a higher intensity?

Probably.

For census taking, it is actually better if people are not bouncing and moving around between states and rather stay home.

[cinyc]

I guess in terms of movement of people, you'd probably expect a similar impact to after the financial crisis hit, but at a higher intensity?

Probably.

For census taking, it is actually better if people are not bouncing and moving around between states and rather stay home.

Except, perhaps, for college students who have been kicked out of their dorms. Census says they still should be counted on campus, but parents might be putting them on their home forms. There’s a process for removing duplicates. It’s probably more important now than ever.

[Tender Branson]

Are county population estimates still expected sometime this month, or are they expected to be delayed due to the COVID-19 outbreak?

The mid-2019 county and metro area estimates are now out:

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2020/pop-estimates-county-metro.html

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-kits/2020/pop-estimates-county-metro.html

[Cokeland Saxton]

Welp, Metro Phoenix just pushed Metro Boston out of the top 10 largest MSAs.

[Nyvin]

Wow, Washtenaw MI lost population last year

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Hurry up and rebound Los Angeles. There is no reason we shouldn't be adding 100k+ annually except for the damn nimbys.

[Cokeland Saxton]

My county grew by about 600.

[cinyc]

Interactive map:

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/51-2019-county-population-change-mutlimap

Default map is 2010EB-2019 Percentage change. Click on Menu to see yearly maps, PCT (percentage) and NUM (numerical change), like 2018-19.

[Skye]

Interactive map:

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/51-2019-county-population-change-mutlimap

Default map is 2010EB-2019 Percentage change. Click on Menu to see yearly maps, PCT (percentage) and NUM (numerical change), like 2018-19.

Your maps are always a welcome sight.