[urbanscraper]

N.C. population now in top 10


Print Email this Article WASHINGTON (AP) - Arizona has ended Nevada's 19-year reign as the nation's fastest-growing state, fueled by immigrants and Americans moving from other states.

At the other end of the scale, Louisiana lost nearly 220,000 people _ more than any other state _ in the year following Hurricane Katrina, according to population estimates released Friday by the Census Bureau.

Arizona led the nation with a population growth rate of 3.6 percent in the past year, followed by Nevada, Idaho, Georgia and Texas.

"There are housing developments sprouting everywhere, whether they are on former farmland or in the desert," said Tom Rex, associate director of the Center for Competitiveness and Prosperity Research at Arizona State University.

The pace of development has strained Arizona's resources and preoccupied local officials, Rex said.

"All they can think about is getting the sewer lines out to the new housing and getting the roads in," he said.

Arizona added about 32,000 immigrants in the past year. It added four times that many people who were relocating from other states. The biggest donor state: California.

"It used to be merely a retirement magnet for Midwest seniors," said William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. "Now it's also a front door for immigrants from Mexico and an escape hatch for Californians seeking affordable housing."

The Census Bureau estimates annual state population totals using local records of births and deaths, IRS records of people moving within the United States and census statistics on immigrants. The bureau does not distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants, and most experts believe that the number of illegal immigrants is underestimated.

Among the findings for 2006:

* Texas gained the most people, about 580,000, followed by Florida, California, Georgia and Arizona.

* North Carolina broke into the top 10 in total population, nudging New Jersey to 11th.

* Four states and the District of Columbia lost population: Louisiana, New York, Rhode Island and Michigan.

Many other states lost people who relocated elsewhere in the country, increasing their populations only through births and immigration.

The South had a net gain of a half million people relocating there from other parts of the U.S., while the Northeast had a net loss of 375,000 people and the Midwest lost 184,000, according to the census estimates.

The West added 53,000 people from other parts of the U.S., even though California lost nearly 300,000 people to other states.

Texas passed Florida as the top destination, in part from people fleeing the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

Other relatively affordable southern states such as Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee also had significant increases in people moving there from other states.

"Good climate and affordability seem to be the draws for Americans this decade," Frey said.

In the Northeast, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts continued to lose large numbers of people to other states. In the Midwest, the big losers were Illinois, Michigan and Ohio.

Louisiana had been losing people to other states for years before Hurricane Katrina hit, though the storm exacerbated the problem, said Elliott Stonecipher, a veteran Louisiana demographer and pollster. Last year's loss amounted to nearly 5 percent of the state's people.

"The numbers make it clear that Katrina has had an incredibly negative effect," Stonecipher said. "But pre-Katrina, Louisiana was already in trouble."

[Chris Creech]

It' s going to be interesting with the next census and all and any following congressional redistrictings. It looks like some of the traditional political powerhouses like New York, Michigan, California, will probably lose seats and electorial college votes to Southern states.

[austin356]

It' s going to be interesting with the next census and all and any following congressional redistrictings. It looks like some of the traditional political powerhouses like New York, Michigan, California, will probably lose seats and electorial college votes to Southern states.



When is the 2010 data available? In time for the congressional elections or do they need more time to sort out all the data and take care of appeals?

[Fiorenza]

They need time to redistrict...thus 2012 will be the first election to be affected..

[urbanscraper]

I think the south may become more democrat and less rebublican as more Northeasterners move south.

[ScreamShatter]

I think the south may become more democrat and less rebublican as more Northeasterners move south.

I worked for the Democratic National Committee this summer, and I believe feel similarly. But they are also expecting that everything is just going to moderate: like parts of the NE will become swing states and parts of the SE will become swing states compared to the NE being hardcore liberal and the SE being hardcore conservative.

I do believe the US is going to become much more liberal in the future as Generation Y is very large and very liberal compared to the other generations. But as we've seen in the past, it all comes down to voter turnout, and Generation Y tends to be very self-centered and apathetic. Thus far Gen Y does have a higher percentage of voter turnouts than other generations have had in the past…so who knows.

[alon504]

Most of the people that are moving South are wealthy and are Republican. The opposite of thoughts on this thread is occurring. Staunch Democrats are known to stay put and believe in the local community. Those that are moving South are more affluent than Democrats and are relocating because they are disgruntled with the liberal Democrats that seem to have a hold on where they are living. The move South will make the South more Republican, not more Democratic. Traditionally the South is more Republican and is against the draft, which the Democrats support.

[austin356]

Do you guys really think the south will begin to support democrats? The south moderating for the reasons you mentioned are plausible (also up for debate), but to think that the south will fundamentally change its political stance of supporting only republicans to becoming a region of swing states is a little far fetched.

Lets check the reasons why people are moving south:

-weather - no politics involved

-escaping high taxation - most that fit this category are conservative or libertarian

-middle class seeking more housing for their money - these are not the type of people that support policies they left in Jersey or NYC, they are closer politically to Houston than SF

-corporate relocations - though varying, these types are generally more upper middle class, and subsequently more conservative

-"Snowbirds" - varies significantly, but could be more supportive of liberal policies, a good example of this would be south Florida

-African Americans moving back south (ATL in particular) - this group of African Americans is though economically liberal, they are more prone to be conservative than their non-moving counterparts.

-college educated 24-35 year olds seeking a start a life - this group (grew by 45% in ATL over last 5 years) is moderate, but will definitly grow up highly conservative after the reach 35. This plays off the saying that "If at 25 you are not a liberal you dont have a heart, if at 35 you are not conservative you.........(I forgot the rest of the saying but, the point is still made)

[Chris Creech]

Most of the people that are moving South are wealthy and are Republican. The opposite of thoughts on this thread is occurring. Staunch Democrats are known to stay put and believe in the local community. Those that are moving South are more affluent than Democrats and are relocating because they are disgruntled with the liberal Democrats that seem to have a hold on where they are living. The move South will make the South more Republican, not more Democratic. Traditionally the South is more Republican and is against the draft, which the Democrats support.

HUH? I think you're 10-20 years behind the curve here -- that used to be the case. Almost any immigration now into the South dilutes the Republican Conservative base. People from the NE bring there religion, union leanings, moderate views with them, if you move from almost anywhere else in the US, you're going to be more moderate, also some of the fastest growing latino and asian populations are in the south. Those lean Democratic, except for some of the Cubans in Miami.

It would probably be more accurate to tie conservative politics to the demographics of white flight and surburban sprawl. In the 60s-90s, that was most of the growth in the South. Now as some of the areas are maturing into more urban areas and the surburbs now have to face many of the traditional "urban" problems like traffic, that surburban Republican base isn't as easy to pin down. Forunately too with professional populations moving back into urban areas and driving the current condo craze throughout the South, and at the same time, many minority populations moving outside of the traditional urban confines, even the traditional innercity/Democrat-surburban/Repblican spit is all getting a little fuzzier.

[urbanscraper]

I worked for the Democratic National Committee this summer, and I believe feel similarly. But they are also expecting that everything is just going to moderate: like parts of the NE will become swing states and parts of the SE will become swing states compared to the NE being hardcore liberal and the SE being hardcore conservative.

I do believe the US is going to become much more liberal in the future as Generation Y is very large and very liberal compared to the other generations. But as we've seen in the past, it all comes down to voter turnout, and Generation Y tends to be very self-centered and apathetic. Thus far Gen Y does have a higher percentage of voter turnouts than other generations have had in the past…so who knows.

I agree. The younger generation tends to be more liberal and as they age I think we'll see alot more democratic control of our country in the future.

[urbanscraper]

Do you guys really think the south will begin to support democrats? The south moderating for the reasons you mentioned are plausible (also up for debate), but to think that the south will fundamentally change its political stance of supporting only republicans to becoming a region of swing states is a little far fetched.

Lets check the reasons why people are moving south:

-weather - no politics involved

-escaping high taxation - most that fit this category are conservative or libertarian

-middle class seeking more housing for their money - these are not the type of people that support policies they left in Jersey or NYC, they are closer politically to Houston than SF

-corporate relocations - though varying, these types are generally more upper middle class, and subsequently more conservative

-"Snowbirds" - varies significantly, but could be more supportive of liberal policies, a good example of this would be south Florida

-African Americans moving back south (ATL in particular) - this group of African Americans is though economically liberal, they are more prone to be conservative than their non-moving counterparts.

-college educated 24-35 year olds seeking a start a life - this group (grew by 45% in ATL over last 5 years) is moderate, but will definitly grow up highly conservative after the reach 35. This plays off the saying that "If at 25 you are not a liberal you dont have a heart, if at 35 you are not conservative you.........(I forgot the rest of the saying but, the point is still made)

I dont know about that. It wasnt that long ago when the south supported democrats. That was very recently so entire region can change their political affliation over night so to speak.

[alon504]

I agree. The younger generation tends to be more liberal and as they age I think we'll see alot more democratic control of our country in the future.

I truly respect the younger generation and find it plausible with their strong support of the party that is pro-draft. Too many people think that the younger generation lacks in patriotism, but, just the opposite is true, with their willingness to support a party that will eventually, have many of them literally fighting the battle overseas. It is most respectable, IMO.

[WSUSOM]

Sorry to get off topic but I've always wondered why people thing that African Americans are so socially conservative. I can understand why people think this for the older generation of African Americans but the generation of my parents and my generation are no where near the religous conservative mindset of my grandparents.

[ScreamShatter]

It is a fact that parts of the south are moderating due to the immigration of northerners and westerners. The best examples to date are both Florida and Virginia. We all know about Florida in the 2000/2004 elections being a swing state, but Virginia is a much more interesting case. In 2004, they elected a democratic governor, and in 2006, they ousted their Republican incumbent for a Democrat. This change is due to the growing burbs of DC in Northern Virginia that are increasingly more liberal. To add, I have heard predictions that NC is going to become a swing state by 2012 if the states growth holds steady. I predict this will happen at some point, maybe not by 2012, but not far after given the types of people moving into the Carolinas.

Another reason the south is going to moderate is because of the growing number of Latinos. Yes, it is true that these individuals have traditionally leaned conservative due to their devotion to the Catholic religion; however, given the recent stances the Republican Party has taken against illegal immigration, we are seeing a reverse trend in the Latino voting records.

While I haven’t read any recent studies about the exact reasons people are moving to the south, I would guess that most people are looking to relocate because of weather, cost of living, and jobs. That being said, I don’t think more conservatives are moving to the south than liberals because everyone wants nice weather, a better cost of living, and better jobs. These three factors are not biased by either party. Because the West Coast and Northeast has significantly more Democrats than Republicans, that has lead to more liberals in the south and to a more moderate Southeast.

[ScreamShatter]

I truly respect the younger generation and find it plausible with their strong support of the party that is pro-draft. Too many people think that the younger generation lacks in patriotism, but, just the opposite is true, with their willingness to support a party that will eventually, have many of them literally fighting the battle overseas. It is most respectable, IMO.


I don't think most of the younger generation realizes that the FAR LEFT supports the draft, and besides, the new democratic congress is a moderated democratic party, which is very different than the one of recent years. The draft is not something the democrats stand for currently. Their current platform pushes for tax-deductible college tuition, an ease on college loan interest rates, a raise in the minimum wage, affordable healthcare, and a balance in power. The GOP’s platform for 2006 was entitled the “American Values Platform” and focused on flag burning, protecting traditional marriage, reforming immigration, and increasing homeland security. These were the main points (not all) the two parties had posted on their websites during the elections.