The Decade of the South: The New State Population Estimates

southmap.png

Much has been made – particularly in the Northeastern press – of the slowing down of migration to the South and West as a result of the recession. But in many ways this has obfuscated the longer term realities that will continue to drive American demographics for the coming decade.

Americans have been moving from the Northeast and Midwest to the West and South for decades (see US region map). In the first four decades after the Second World War, the warm, dry climates of coastal California were a significant factor. As the nation became more mobile – aided by such things as inexpensive air travel and the interstate highway system and the spread of air conditioning – the larger migration pattern went towards the South. There were, of course, other factors. Business costs, particularly the costs of labor, were often lower in the West and especially the South. Personal taxes in some states were lower than in the Northeast and Midwest. Surely the period from the end of World War II to 2000 could be called the demographic “half-century” of the West and South.

The New State Census Estimates: The latest (July 1, 2009) Bureau of the Census release of state population estimates indicates a fundamental shift in migration patterns. Yes, even at recession-depressed rates, the Northeast and Midwest continue to export domestic migrants, but they are almost exclusively going to the South now, and not the West (See Table).





Net Domestic Migration by State
2009 Rank Net Domestic Migration Rank 2000-2009
State 2009 2000-2009
1 Texas    143,423       838,126 2
2 North Carolina      59,108       663,892 4
3 Washington      38,201       239,037 9
4 Colorado      35,591       202,735 10
5 South Carolina      31,480       306,045 7
6 Georgia      26,604       550,369 5
7 Tennessee      20,605       259,711 8
8 Oklahoma      18,345         42,284 19
9 Virginia      18,238       164,930 12
10 Oregon      16,173       177,375 11
11 Arizona      15,111       696,793 3
12 Louisiana      14,647      (311,368) 45
13 Alabama      11,044         87,199 14
14 Utah        8,623         53,390 17
15 Wyoming        7,192         22,883 25
16 Kentucky        6,268         81,711 15
17 Arkansas        5,298         75,163 16
18 West Virginia        4,510         17,727 26
19 District of Columbia        4,454        (39,814) 37
20 Massachusetts        3,614      (274,722) 44
21 New Mexico        3,366         26,383 24
22 Delaware        2,580         45,424 18
23 Montana        2,410         39,853 21
24 South Dakota        1,619            7,182 27
25 Idaho        1,555       110,279 13
26 North Dakota        1,375        (18,071) 31
27 Pennsylvania        1,346        (33,119) 34
28 Alaska           979          (7,360) 29
29 Missouri          (124)         41,278 20
30 Nebraska          (956)        (39,275) 36
31 Vermont          (975)          (1,505) 28
32 Kansas       (1,242)        (67,762) 41
33 Iowa       (2,135)        (49,589) 40
34 New Hampshire       (2,602)         32,588 22
35 Maine       (2,937)         29,260 23
36 Nevada       (3,801)       361,512 6
37 Hawaii       (5,298)        (29,022) 33
38 Mississippi       (5,529)        (36,061) 35
39 Wisconsin       (5,672)        (11,981) 30
40 Rhode Island       (6,172)        (45,159) 38
41 Indiana       (6,805)        (21,467) 32
42 Connecticut       (7,824)        (94,376) 42
43 Minnesota       (8,813)        (46,635) 39
44 Maryland    (11,163)        (95,775) 43
45 Florida    (31,179)    1,154,213 1
46 New Jersey    (31,690)      (451,407) 47
47 Ohio    (36,278)      (361,038) 46
48 Illinois    (48,249)      (614,616) 49
49 Michigan    (87,339)      (537,471) 48
50 New York    (98,178)  (1,649,644) 51
51 California    (98,798)  (1,490,105) 50
Derived from US Bureau of the Census data.




Moving to the South: Between 2000 and 2009, the South attracted 90% of domestic migrants from other states, with the West accounting for only 10% (see chart below). In 2001, the South attracted 71% of domestic migration but its share rose to 86% in 2002 and accounted for virtually all net migration by 2007. In that year, not only did the Northeast and Midwest lose domestic migrants, but also the West. By 2009, the South’s share of inbound domestic migration fell back to 94%.

Throughout the decade, the small share of domestic migration that did not go to the South went to the West, while the Northeast and Midwest continued to lose residents. The 2000s are best characterized as the demographic “decade of the South” because the vast majority of Americans moving between states moved South.

Nearly all states in the South gained domestic migrants during the decade. Only Mississippi, Maryland and Louisiana, along with the District of Columbia, lost domestic migrants. Even before Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, Louisiana was losing domestic migrants. Perhaps the big surprise is Florida, which has led the nation in domestic in-migration for years and has attracted 1.1 million from other states during the 2000s.

Florida’s peak came in 2004 and 2005, when more than a net 260,000 domestic migrants moved to Florida from other states. Things have changed markedly, however, with Florida rapidly losing domestic migrants in 2008 and 2009, very likely due to the impact of the housing bubble and an overreliance on inbound retirees to drive its economy.

However, Florida’s recent decline does not weaken the near-monopoly position of the South as the dominant destination of movers. Florida’s rapidly declining domestic migration has been largely replaced by a new domestic migration champion: Texas. In the early 2000s, Texas generally attracted from 30,000 to 50,000 net domestic migrants. Migration from Louisiana from Rita and Katrina propelled Texas to the top in 2006 and the state appears to have consolidated its position as the leader in domestic migration. In 2009, with domestic migration at more modest levels nationally, the Texas gain was more than any year except for 2006 with Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. But it’s not just a Lone Star story. Seven of the top ten states in domestic migration remained in the South in 2009. Throughout the entire decade, 6 of the top 10 states were from the South and 4 from the West. However, most of the gains in the West were simply from moving around (and from California); there was relatively little inter-regional domestic migration.

Moving Around the West (and Away from California): Most states in the West have also gained domestic migrants in the 2000s, with the exceptions of Alaska, Hawaii and California. California is the real story in the West, having lost nearly 1.5 million domestic migrants, a population greater than that of the city of San Diego. In 2000, California lost nearly 100,000 domestic migrants and for the fourth year in a row led the nation in net domestic out-migration. This includes 2006, when not even Louisiana’s catastrophic hurricanes could drive as many people away as California. During the first year of the decade, California lost only 45,000 net domestic migrants. By 2007, as the center of the worldwide housing bubble, California’s losses were 7 times that amount. In 2009, even with depressed migration rates associated with the recession, out migration more than doubled between 2001 and 2009.

California is simply not the draw that it used to be. There was a time, in the late 1930s, that the state tried to bar “Okies” from moving to the state, legislation wisely declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Things have certainly changed. The latest Internal Revenue Service data indicates that every year during the 2000s, Oklahoma gained net domestic migrants from California.

Outside California, there has been healthy domestic in-migration in the West. However, California’s losses cancelled out more than 80% of the West’s gains during the decade. Much of the movement within the region was internal, with Californians shifting to markets where housing was less expensive (but still expensive), such as Arizona, Nevada, Washington and Oregon. More recently the movement to the housing bubble ground zero states of Arizona and Nevada, have all but disappeared, with far smaller gains in Arizona and a small net loss in Nevada in 2009.

In one year (2007), California lost more domestic migrants than all of the other states of the West gained. Domestic migration in the West remains largely about households moving around within the region: from California to other states, with a far smaller number arriving from elsewhere in the nation.

Escape from New York (and the Northeast): Domestic migrants continue to leave the Northeast, just as they have for decades. In the Northeast, only New Hampshire and Maine gained domestic migrants in the 2000s. However, it was a bit different in 2009. Both New Hampshire and Maine lost, while Massachusetts and Pennsylvania gained.

Pennsylvania has been the subject of more than one “what’s wrong with Pennsylvania” report as analysts inside and out decry its competitive position. In fact, by the ultimate measure of competitiveness, where people choose to move to or from, Pennsylvania has done relatively well in the 2000s. Pennsylvania’s modest loss of 33,000 domestic migrants pales by comparison to the net 2.5 million people who have moved away from neighboring New York, New Jersey, Maryland and Ohio. Like Texas, Georgia and many other states, Pennsylvania largely missed the housing bubble, which probably accounts for some of this surprising phenomenon.

But the relative success of Pennsylvania should not be touted, as the mainstream media would tend to, as a sign of general Northeastern resurgence. New York alone lost 1.65 million over the 2000-2009 period. This is, in absolute numbers, more than California and a larger percentage loss than Louisiana with Katrina and Rita. Critically, data through 2008 shows that most of the domestic migration losses came from New York City and to a lesser extent its suburbs. Upstate New York, which also missed the housing bubble, experienced comparatively modest domestic migration losses, as Ed McMahon and I showed in an Empire Center policy report earlier this year.

Hollowing out the Heartland: Domestic migrants are also deserting the Midwest, though in somewhat smaller numbers than in the Northeast. Only Missouri and South Dakota gained domestic migrants in the 2000s, although in 2009, Missouri experienced a small loss and was replaced by North Dakota as a gainer. But it is not a region-wide phenomena. Nearly 90% of the loss in the Midwest was in Illinois and the economic basket case states of Michigan and Ohio.

Slowing Migration: One of the principal stories out of this year’s Census release is that interstate domestic migration declined markedly in 2009. Indeed, domestic migration was lower than in any other year in the decade, but not by that much. In 2009, 500,000 people migrated between the states, compared to between 570,000 and 620,000 annually from 2001 to 2003. Then, from 2003 to 2007, interstate domestic migration was up to 1.25 million and averaged more than 900,000. The anomaly is not so much that domestic migration is down, but rather that domestic migration got so high in the middle part of the decade, at the very same time that house price differences reached unprecedented heights. It’s no wonder people were moving.

The Future? What comes next after the chaotic decade of the 2000s? As is suggested above, much of the variation in domestic migration is explained by differences housing prices and trends. Indeed, the price of housing may be a surrogate for the cost of living, which varies principally between areas based upon housing cost differences. This is likely to continue. In coastal California, house prices remained above historic norms, even at the largest “bubble burst” losses,” and there are recent indications that unhealthy price escalation has resumed. Much of the West and most of the country is far more affordable. This would suggest that coastal California’s domestic migration losses will continue and rise in the future.

By contrast, in much of the rest of California and the other “ground zero” states of Florida, Arizona and Nevada house prices have returned to historic norms, which suggests that after the recession, strong domestic in-migration could resume.

The future looks very bright for Texas and other states in the South that have done so well (such as North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Oklahoma and even Arkansas). Their biggest challenge will be to resist the siren songs to become more like California, with its disastrous policies appreciated only by proponents and a fawning media.

Wendell Cox is a Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris. He was born in Los Angeles and was appointed to three terms on the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission by Mayor Tom Bradley. He is the author of “War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life.



















Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I am happy to find your

I am happy to find your distinguished way of writing the post. Now you make it easy for me to understand and implement the concept. Thank you for the post.
website dieses benutzers besuchen

I was reading your article

I was reading your article and wondered if you had considered creating an ebook on this subject. Your writing would sell it fast. You have a lot of writing talent.
latest mobiles

Its a great pleasure reading

Its a great pleasure reading your post.Its full of information I am looking for and I love to post a comment that "The content of your post is awesome" Great work.
Dating-Journal

Great job for publishing

Great job for publishing such a beneficial web site. Your web log isn’t only useful but it is additionally really creative too. There tend to be not many people who can certainly write not so simple posts that artistically. Continue the nice writing
Edward Bass Producer

Great Article it its really

Great Article it its really informative and innovative keep us posted with new updates. its was really valuable. thanks a lot.
www.archive.org

I found your this post while

I found your this post while searching for some related information on blog search...Its a good post..keep posting and update the information.
schoenen werk

Very good points you wrote

Very good points you wrote here..Great stuff...I think you've made some truly interesting points.Keep up the good work.
location plantes vertes

Thanks for the post and

Thanks for the post and great tips..even I also think that hard work is the most important aspect of getting success..
Copy Fight org

Excellent and very exciting

Excellent and very exciting site. Love to watch. Keep Rocking.

how do i clear facebook activity log

Its a great pleasure reading

Its a great pleasure reading your post.Its full of information I am looking for and I love to post a comment that "The content of your post is awesome" Great work.
where to buy girlfriend system v2

Thanks for the post and

Thanks for the post and great tips..even I also think that hard work is the most important aspect of getting success..
gfas by christian h.

Thanks For sharing this

Thanks For sharing this Superb article.I use this Article to show my assignment in college.it is useful For me Great Work.
textyourexbackmichaelfiore.com/

This is highly informatics,

This is highly informatics, crisp and clear. I think that everything has been described in systematic manner so that reader could get maximum information and learn many things.
shingle roofing burleson tx

Thanks for sharing excellent

Thanks for sharing excellent informations. Your web-site is very cool. I'm impressed by the details that you have on this web site. It reveals how nicely you perceive this subject. Bookmarked this web page, will come back for extra articles. You, my pal, ROCK! I found simply the information I already searched all over the place and simply couldn't come across. What a perfect web-site.
www.immo-consult.be

I wanted to thank you for

I wanted to thank you for this excellent read!! I definitely loved every little bit of it. I have you bookmarked your site to check out the new stuff you post.
www.memyfriends.com/

I can see that you are an

I can see that you are an expert at your field! I am launching a website soon, and your information will be very useful for me.. Thanks for all your help and wishing you all the success in your business.
advanced seo services

This is really a nice and

This is really a nice and informative, containing all information and also has a great impact on the new technology. Thanks for sharing it
www.facebook.com/SheontySultan

Thank you so much for

Thank you so much for sharing this great blog.Very inspiring and helpful too.Hope you continue to share more of your ideas.I will definitely love to read.
whitening creams

Much has been made –

Much has been made – particularly in the Northeastern press – of the slowing down of migration to the South and West as a result of the recession. But in many ways this has obfuscated Naruto: Shippuuden watch online the longer term realities that will continue to drive American demographics for the coming decade.
Americans have been moving from the Northeast and Midwest to the West and South for decades (see US region map). Onepunch-Man manga comics In the first four decades after the Second World War, the warm, dry climates of coastal California were

Right-to-Work states 12 of top 15

Good analysis, thanks for the data sorts and formatting.

In spite of there being just 22 right-to-work states, 12 of the top 15 in-migration states for 2009 have right-to-work laws. 44 of the 50 fastest growing counties are in right-to-work states.

Western Plains continue to get crushed in rural areas, but their metros - Des Moines, Sioux Falls, Omaha, and KS suburbs of KCMO - are all growing above nat'l avg. All are also right-to-work.

Right-to-work is not absolutely essential for solid econ development as Seattle, Denver, and Portland are showing, especially for software and biotech. But the only way anyone with something to manufacture will go to union shop state is if they get huge tax credits. This has been the Granholm way in Michigan and all it's really done is drain the treasury of an already broke state.

New York might be different

I think the situation may be more complicated for New York City. From Mr. Cox's article, most of the migration - in & out - is from the City. According to the data, 1.6 million people left NYC for domestic climes elsewhere in the past decade. But, since the population of the metro area hasn't shrunk, and since the natural increase is roughly zero, we assume that most of these leavers have been replaced by international immigrants moving in. If that were the end of the story, then NYC would look very substantially different now than it did 10 years ago. It doesn't.

But this can't be the end of the story. I'm guessing that most of the out-migrants to warmer climes are, in fact, recent immigrants rather than local New Yorkers. Recent immigrants come first to NYC, stay for a year or so, and then as opportunities beckon move on to other places. Thus the out-migration, rather than demonstrating the unpopularity of New York, simply shows that it is a major transit point to the rest of the country from overseas.

I suspect a similar calculus holds for some other cities, such as Miami or Los Angeles.

Many non-immigrants moving out of NYC too

I'm not so sure that recent immigrants are driving out-migration from NYC. Many long-time middle-class residents have been moving out as well.

This may be anecdotal, but here in suburban Columbia, SC I have met a large number transplants from NYC and its suburbs. Many of them are middle-class or skilled blue-collar African Americans who can easily afford a nice suburban home in a good school district here. Many are also retirees and/or military veterans (climate and a nearby large army base are local draws). They are generally not recent immigrants and were established residents of neighborhoods like Bedford-Stuyvesant or suburbs like Spring Valley, NY. I would not be surprised to similar patterns in Raleigh, Charlotte, and of course Atlanta, on an even larger scale.

Moreover, recent immigrants over the past 10-20 years have increasingly been bypassing central cities and settling directly to the suburbs. If they are skilled professionals they may move directly to, say, an established middle-class suburb like Parsippany, NJ, perhaps later moving their way "up" to a nicer/newer/bigger home in Basking Ridge, NJ or leave the metro entirely to a cheaper metro in the South, for example. If they are working-class immigrants they may move to a more modest, inner-ring suburb, e.g., perhaps an older 1950s-era portion of Long Island.

If you look at the Midwest

If you look at the Midwest by metro instead of by state, there are some bright spots. Indianapolis, Columbus, and Kansas City all have consistent net in-mgration. They aren't Dallas to be sure, but they do have in-migration and population growth exceeding the national average. (I believe the same is true of Des Moines and Madison, though I don't have the numbers handy). With the exception of St. Louis, the I-70 cities seem to be doing ok in the Midwest.