The face of America is changing. This is taken at, cough, face value these days. The recent election is a harbinger of the changes to come, to a time when equating the United States of America with the musings and prerogatives of old rich white men will not be cause to decry racism, but rather a cause for chuckles.
The thing is, we aren't really going to blend all together into one nice shade of mocha. The intermix of the various races and cultures is uneven from place to place, from state to state.
It is this mix, and the rate at which new ingredients are being added, that will change the face of America in very interesting ways.
What follows is just one of many possible explorations, but I think the techniques used have some promise for additional independent research and, given the electoral implications, for campaign and public policy research as well.
The Concept
According to the United State Bureau of the Census, the country will be approximately 46% non-Hispanic white by the year 2050. I take this target value as my starting point.
Why not just take the Census Bureau's 2050 forecasts at face value, including the racial composition? Because they do not take into account the consequence of water scarcity on population growth.
For some reason, there are people who to this day think that water is not a limiting factor to population growth and development, or feel that other factors (energy, for example) are the bottleneck variables that must be dealt with. I submit that across the range of time and geography, it's water that defines which regions ultimately fill up with millions and which remain millions of hectares of wilderness. As a planet, we simply have not reached that threshhold until now. There is a reason why over a billion people live in China and India, respectively - people have been farming and building urban civilizations there for thousands of years, and there is lots of water. There is a reason Egypt is so crowded - same difference. For the same reason, ultimately, there will be vastly more people in the United States, likewise in Brazil. That's where the water is...
...fo the time being.
If there is a radical change in the ecology of the planet, obviously the situation will change greatly.
Okay, so how do I model for carrying capacity here in the USA? I had to make some guesses on how far each state could ration water consumption (some states with low population require high per capita usages to support irrigation; Idaho, for example), then assign a theoretical maximum sustainable population based on domestic residential usage.
Another important caveat is I do not rule out desalination technology as having an impact. Nor do I factor in any catastrophic global warming surges, supervolcano events, superplagues, nuclear wars, or the ever-fun surprise visits from asteroids. Such issues are important and interesting and I've discussed most of these in other diaries...which is the point. They are topics better addressed in other diaries. All of them.
The Modeling Framework
- The U.S census is mostly right
- I use this data at the state and racial classification level to build up projections.
- Hispanic/non-Hispanic status is available for all groups, which creates some interesting subgroups. The first example that caught my eye was "Hispanic Pacific Islander", but hey, that's the the data. I am assuming that reflects admixture or an ancestral sojourn elsewhere in the Americas. "Hispanic Asian" is another interesting one which, given the origin of the word "Hispanic" (out of Spain) most likely captures persons of Philippine ancestry (which after all was a Spanish colony almost as long as Mexico).
- differential growth rates produce changes to the mix of difference demographic categories, including the new 'combination' category.
- Pre-existing demographics are "sticky", that is, they are not nearly so easily supplanted even where their natural growth rates are much less than new waves of migration. This is reflected in a increment modifier, evenly applied to all racial groups, to create an inertia effect.
- A more detailed model would reflect the actuarial reasons - that more established groups tend to be wealthier and longer lived while having fewer children per household, and as new groups settle in the same effect occurs as well. I did not have access to life tables for each state, plus changes across several decades, so I had to simplify the approach.
The First Task: Estimated Carrying Capacity by State
- Identify total water usage, by state
- Identify domestic residential consumption, by state
- For carry capacity purposes, assume 100% conversion of CURRENT water resources to domestic use (and use of sea and waste water for industrial, hydrothermic and other purposes). Obviously this is going to cramp ranching in dry, heavily populated states. But maybe there is a lesson in this: Mixing large volumes of people and livestock? Don't. Health issues.
- Identify per capita domestic consumption, by state
- Identify average per capita consumption across states.
- Identify standard deviation of by-state per capita values, and subtract from average to derive an assume 'ideal' level of per-capita consumption.
- Add a 25% cushion to this value; so we save some water for the lawns, the dogs and the cats. All kidding aside, this value happens to tie closely to per capita water consumption in the state of Washington, the territory of which covers a wide range of climate and geography. The other state which is close to this value is Texas, which likewise encompasses a range of environments.
Year 1990 consumption levels in the District of Columbia are just below this value; values for the same year from Idaho are lower, Nevada and Utah much more so. So it's not just doable; it's being done.
- Develop a maximum sustainable carrying capacity for the all fifty states plus DC.
The results:
State | 1990 Population (000s) | Total Use, 1990 | DomesticUse(Mgal/day) | Per Capita Dom.Use, 1990 | "Ideal" Per Capita Use | Carry Capacity (000s) |
Alabama | 4041 | 706 | 368 | 9.97 | 7.1875 | 10754 |
Alaska | 550 | 93 | 30 | 12.53 | 7.1875 | 2972 |
Arizona | 3665 | 706.1 | 509 | 6.66 | 7.1875 | 4711 |
Arkansas | 2351 | 307.7 | 188 | 9.47 | 7.1875 | 5070 |
California | 29760 | 5828 | 3740 | 6.82 | 7.1875 | 44004 |
Colorado | 3294 | 651 | 441 | 6.92 | 7.1875 | 4682 |
Connecticut | 3287 | 374.6 | 188 | 14.2 | 7.1875 | 12940 |
Delaware | 666 | 84.9 | 41 | 12.88 | 7.1875 | 2471 |
District of Columbia | 607 | 156 | 109 | 5.57 | 7.1875 | 673 |
Florida | 12938 | 1927.5 | 1250 | 8.96 | 7.1875 | 24870 |
Georgia | 6478 | 908 | 594 | 8.67 | 7.1875 | 11945 |
Hawaii | 1108 | 237.9 | 126 | 8.41 | 7.1875 | 2448 |
Idaho | 1007 | 200.9 | 143 | 5.37 | 7.1875 | 1057 |
Illinois | 11431 | 1859.3 | 904 | 11.17 | 7.1875 | 36538 |
Indiana | 5544 | 604 | 303 | 13.17 | 7.1875 | 20250 |
Iowa | 2777 | 322.7 | 138 | 15.14 | 7.1875 | 13679 |
Kansas | 2478 | 373.8 | 192 | 11.61 | 7.1875 | 7793 |
Kentucky | 3685 | 427 | 179 | 14.36 | 7.1875 | 17563 |
Louisiana | 4220 | 618 | 448 | 8.06 | 7.1875 | 6528 |
Maine | 1228 | 106.2 | 40 | 17.23 | 7.1875 | 7816 |
Maryland | 4781 | 798 | 414 | 9.52 | 7.1875 | 12206 |
Massachusetts | 6016 | 714.8 | 365 | 15.07 | 7.1875 | 24702 |
Michigan | 9295 | 1403 | 585 | 13.01 | 7.1875 | 40351 |
Minnesota | 4375 | 514.5 | 432 | 6.78 | 7.1875 | 4915 |
Mississippi | 2573 | 320.3 | 236 | 8.14 | 7.1875 | 3955 |
Missouri | 5117 | 677.2 | 348 | 11.75 | 7.1875 | 16278 |
Montana | 799 | 135 | 77 | 7.73 | 7.1875 | 1507 |
Nebraska | 1578 | 300.9 | 138 | 8.7 | 7.1875 | 4165 |
Nevada | 1202 | 384.4 | 238 | 4.71 | 7.1875 | 1272 |
New Hampshire | 1109 | 95 | 49 | 14.16 | 7.1875 | 4236 |
New Jersey | 7730 | 1038.2 | 511 | 13.35 | 7.1875 | 29170 |
New Mexico | 1515 | 272.1 | 163 | 7.42 | 7.1875 | 2611 |
New York | 17990 | 2913 | 1890 | 8.41 | 7.1875 | 32444 |
North Carolina | 6629 | 804.4 | 319 | 14.92 | 7.1875 | 34699 |
North Dakota | 639 | 76.6 | 42 | 11.5 | 7.1875 | 1865 |
Ohio | 10847 | 1299 | 455 | 19.91 | 7.1875 | 85783 |
Oklahoma | 3146 | 516.5 | 227 | 11.76 | 7.1875 | 11712 |
Oregon | 2842 | 470 | 246 | 9.02 | 7.1875 | 6814 |
Pennsylvania | 11882 | 1728 | 570 | 16.07 | 7.1875 | 80537 |
Rhode Island | 1003 | 101.5 | 63 | 14.83 | 7.1875 | 3334 |
South Carolina | 3487 | 352 | 160 | 13.25 | 7.1875 | 14142 |
South Dakota | 696 | 75.7 | 45 | 12.33 | 7.1875 | 2009 |
Tennessee | 4877 | 694.5 | 338 | 11.75 | 7.1875 | 16382 |
Texas | 16987 | 3094 | 2310 | 6.97 | 7.1875 | 22064 |
Utah | 1723 | 508 | 360 | 4.58 | 7.1875 | 1549 |
Vermont | 563 | 39.1 | 27 | 12.33 | 7.1875 | 1399 |
Virginia | 6187 | 710 | 351 | 13.33 | 7.1875 | 23210 |
Washington | 4867 | 875 | 546 | 7.25 | 7.1875 | 7868 |
West Virginia | 1793 | 159.9 | 87 | 13.56 | 7.1875 | 6217 |
Wisconsin | 4892 | 596 | 179 | 19.05 | 7.1875 | 43171 |
Wyoming | 454 | 87.5 | 55 | 6.18 | 7.1875 | 621 |
FYI: It adds up to 779,951,726, much more than the current American population. And it does get utilized eventually.
The Second Task: Calculating Total Population, By State
This is more than a question of reaching the carrying capacity limit then stopping; there is going to be some overshooting of the mark, but once reached the cost of goods and services spikes, and the risk of what happens if the water and sewage infrastructure breaks down becomes a serious quality of life impairment. What happens? People stop moving in; some start moving out.
The modeling assumption here is that once the carrying capacity limit is surpassed that the population gradually averages down to that limit and holds there. It's mathematically clunky but for this sort of conceptual exercise works out nicely.
Here's the results through the year 2100...
State | 2000 | 2010 | 2020 | 2030 | 2040 | 2050 | 2060 | 2070 | 2080 | 2090 | 2100 |
Alabama | 4.45 | 4.63 | 5 | 5.27 | 5.65 | 5.98 | 6.38 | 6.78 | 7.22 | 7.68 | 8.18 |
Alaska | 0.63 | 0.71 | 0.81 | 0.93 | 1.06 | 1.2 | 1.37 | 1.56 | 1.78 | 2.03 | 2.31 |
Arizona | 5.17 | 6.86 | 5.66 | 5.05 | 4.63 | 4.6 | 4.64 | 4.7 | 4.72 | 4.72 | 4.74 |
Arkansas | 2.68 | 2.87 | 3.2 | 3.48 | 3.85 | 4.2 | 4.63 | 5.07 | 5.17 | 5.16 | 5.1 |
California | 34 | 38.09 | 43.24 | 44.93 | 45.11 | 44.47 | 44.08 | 43.91 | 43.92 | 43.97 | 44 |
Colorado | 4.33 | 5.05 | 5.02 | 4.86 | 4.7 | 4.66 | 4.65 | 4.67 | 4.68 | 4.68 | 4.68 |
Connecticut | 3.41 | 3.56 | 3.71 | 3.86 | 4.02 | 4.19 | 4.36 | 4.55 | 4.74 | 4.93 | 5.14 |
Delaware | 0.79 | 0.9 | 1.05 | 1.21 | 1.4 | 1.62 | 1.88 | 2.17 | 2.48 | 2.55 | 2.54 |
District of Columbia | 0.57 | 0.59 | 0.58 | 0.58 | 0.58 | 0.58 | 0.58 | 0.58 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 |
Florida | 16.05 | 19.6 | 24.19 | 25.82 | 25.97 | 25.33 | 24.94 | 24.78 | 24.79 | 24.83 | 24.87 |
Georgia | 8.23 | 10.08 | 12.09 | 12.5 | 12.41 | 12.09 | 11.94 | 11.89 | 11.91 | 11.93 | 11.95 |
Hawaii | 1.21 | 1.33 | 1.45 | 1.59 | 1.74 | 1.9 | 2.08 | 2.27 | 2.46 | 2.49 | 2.49 |
Idaho | 1.3 | 1.56 | 1.24 | 1.11 | 1.03 | 1.03 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.94 | 0.92 | 0.89 |
Illinois | 12.44 | 13.01 | 13.97 | 14.73 | 15.73 | 16.66 | 17.73 | 18.82 | 20.01 | 21.24 | 22.58 |
Indiana | 6.09 | 6.43 | 6.97 | 7.42 | 7.99 | 8.54 | 9.18 | 9.83 | 10.55 | 11.31 | 12.13 |
Iowa | 2.93 | 2.98 | 3.11 | 3.19 | 3.31 | 3.41 | 3.53 | 3.64 | 3.76 | 3.89 | 4.02 |
Kansas | 2.69 | 2.79 | 2.99 | 3.13 | 3.32 | 3.5 | 3.7 | 3.91 | 4.13 | 4.36 | 4.61 |
Kentucky | 4.05 | 4.3 | 4.67 | 4.99 | 5.39 | 5.79 | 6.24 | 6.7 | 7.22 | 7.76 | 8.36 |
Louisiana | 4.47 | 4.52 | 4.72 | 4.82 | 5 | 5.13 | 5.3 | 5.45 | 5.63 | 5.79 | 5.97 |
Maine | 1.28 | 1.35 | 1.41 | 1.48 | 1.55 | 1.63 | 1.71 | 1.8 | 1.88 | 1.98 | 2.08 |
Maryland | 5.31 | 5.85 | 6.48 | 7.15 | 7.9 | 8.73 | 9.65 | 10.66 | 11.78 | 12.37 | 12.45 |
Massachusetts | 6.36 | 6.5 | 6.79 | 6.99 | 7.26 | 7.5 | 7.78 | 8.04 | 8.34 | 8.63 | 8.94 |
Michigan | 9.96 | 10.26 | 10.85 | 11.28 | 11.86 | 12.38 | 12.99 | 13.58 | 14.22 | 14.88 | 15.58 |
Minnesota | 4.93 | 5.3 | 5.11 | 4.99 | 4.9 | 4.89 | 4.9 | 4.91 | 4.92 | 4.92 | 4.92 |
Mississippi | 2.85 | 2.95 | 3.2 | 3.37 | 3.61 | 3.82 | 3.98 | 4 | 3.99 | 3.96 | 3.95 |
Missouri | 5.61 | 5.98 | 6.49 | 6.96 | 7.52 | 8.09 | 8.73 | 9.4 | 10.13 | 10.92 | 11.77 |
Montana | 0.9 | 0.97 | 1.08 | 1.17 | 1.29 | 1.41 | 1.51 | 1.53 | 1.53 | 1.51 | 1.51 |
Nebraska | 1.71 | 1.8 | 1.93 | 2.04 | 2.17 | 2.3 | 2.45 | 2.6 | 2.77 | 2.94 | 3.13 |
Nevada | 2.02 | 2.87 | 1.93 | 1.45 | 1.22 | 1.21 | 1.07 | 1.03 | 0.94 | 0.88 | 0.81 |
New Hampshire | 1.24 | 1.37 | 1.52 | 1.69 | 1.87 | 2.08 | 2.31 | 2.56 | 2.84 | 3.15 | 3.49 |
New Jersey | 8.43 | 8.89 | 9.59 | 10.18 | 10.93 | 11.65 | 12.47 | 13.31 | 14.23 | 15.2 | 16.25 |
New Mexico | 1.82 | 2.02 | 2.36 | 2.62 | 2.69 | 2.67 | 2.63 | 2.61 | 2.6 | 2.61 | 2.61 |
New York | 19 | 19.53 | 20.44 | 21.14 | 22.04 | 22.86 | 23.79 | 24.7 | 25.68 | 26.68 | 27.73 |
North Carolina | 8.08 | 9.32 | 11.16 | 13.03 | 15.47 | 18.17 | 21.49 | 25.3 | 29.88 | 34.8 | 35.94 |
North Dakota | 0.64 | 0.63 | 0.63 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.61 | 0.61 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.59 | 0.59 |
Ohio | 11.36 | 11.56 | 11.99 | 12.27 | 12.67 | 13.01 | 13.41 | 13.79 | 14.2 | 14.6 | 15.03 |
Oklahoma | 3.45 | 3.62 | 3.91 | 4.14 | 4.45 | 4.73 | 5.07 | 5.4 | 5.77 | 6.16 | 6.58 |
Oregon | 3.43 | 3.84 | 4.52 | 5.15 | 5.99 | 6.83 | 7.03 | 7 | 6.88 | 6.82 | 6.8 |
Pennsylvania | 12.29 | 12.45 | 12.79 | 13.02 | 13.33 | 13.59 | 13.9 | 14.19 | 14.5 | 14.81 | 15.13 |
Rhode Island | 1.05 | 1.08 | 1.13 | 1.17 | 1.21 | 1.26 | 1.3 | 1.35 | 1.4 | 1.45 | 1.51 |
South Carolina | 4.02 | 4.5 | 5.14 | 5.79 | 6.58 | 7.43 | 8.43 | 9.53 | 10.8 | 12.23 | 13.85 |
South Dakota | 0.76 | 0.81 | 0.87 | 0.93 | 1 | 1.07 | 1.15 | 1.24 | 1.33 | 1.42 | 1.53 |
Tennessee | 5.7 | 6.29 | 7.21 | 8.06 | 9.16 | 10.29 | 11.66 | 13.13 | 14.85 | 16.46 | 16.8 |
Texas | 20.95 | 24.91 | 23.72 | 22.89 | 22.03 | 21.9 | 21.91 | 22.02 | 22.06 | 22.08 | 22.07 |
Utah | 2.24 | 2.8 | 1.96 | 1.64 | 1.48 | 1.49 | 1.4 | 1.38 | 1.31 | 1.28 | 1.22 |
Vermont | 0.61 | 0.63 | 0.67 | 0.7 | 0.74 | 0.78 | 0.82 | 0.86 | 0.91 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
Virginia | 7.1 | 8.04 | 9.19 | 10.43 | 11.89 | 13.52 | 15.4 | 17.51 | 19.94 | 22.69 | 23.74 |
Washington | 5.91 | 6.65 | 7.87 | 8.09 | 8.12 | 7.95 | 7.88 | 7.84 | 7.85 | 7.86 | 7.87 |
West Virginia | 1.81 | 1.8 | 1.81 | 1.81 | 1.82 | 1.82 | 1.83 | 1.83 | 1.83 | 1.84 | 1.84 |
Wisconsin | 5.37 | 5.71 | 6.21 | 6.64 | 7.18 | 7.72 | 8.33 | 8.96 | 9.65 | 10.39 | 11.19 |
Wyoming | 0.49 | 0.52 | 0.56 | 0.59 | 0.62 | 0.63 | 0.63 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.62 |
Total | 282.17 | 310.66 | 334.19 | 348.95 | 364.06 | 378.9 | 396.41 | 415.53 | 436.91 | 458.5 | 473.67 |
The Third Task: Electoral College Votes, By State
OK, now we get to the real deal. Due to rounding, I often found myself have to deduct and add EVs in order to tie back to 538 votes. My rules of thumb for this exercise were
- We aren't adding states to the Union
- We are keeping the Electoral College
- When the rounding produces too high a total, I deduct with the following priorities: from the states gaining most, from the states already possessing the most EVs.
- When rounding produces too low a total, add to the states losing the most, to the states with the least EVs.
- If this was not enough I'd deduct more from large states that were marked as unchanged in a given reapportionment or add to smaller states.
- Trust that law of large numbers would even out any errors and goofs on my part.
And the results through 2100 in the Electoral College:
State | 2000 | 2010 | 2020 | 2030 | 2040 | 2050 | 2060 | 2070 | 2080 | 2090 | 2100 |
Alabama | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 |
Alaska | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
Arizona | 10 | 12 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 6 |
Arkansas | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 |
California | 55 | 56 | 58 | 58 | 56 | 53 | 51 | 48 | 46 | 44 | 42 |
Colorado | 9 | 9 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 6 |
Connecticut | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 |
Delaware | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
District of Columbia | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Florida | 27 | 30 | 33 | 34 | 32 | 31 | 29 | 28 | 26 | 26 | 24 |
Georgia | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 16 | 16 | 15 | 15 | 14 | 13 | 13 |
Hawaii | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
Idaho | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Illinois | 21 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 22 | 22 | 22 | 23 |
Indiana | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 13 | 13 | 13 |
Iowa | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
Kansas | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
Kentucky | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 |
Louisiana | 9 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
Maine | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
Maryland | 10 | 10 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 12 | 13 | 13 | 14 | 14 | 14 |
Massachusetts | 12 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
Michigan | 17 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 |
Minnesota | 10 | 9 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 |
Mississippi | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
Missouri | 11 | 10 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 13 |
Montana | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 |
Nebraska | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
Nevada | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
New Hampshire | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
New Jersey | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 17 | 17 |
New Mexico | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 |
New York | 31 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 26 | 27 |
North Carolina | 15 | 15 | 16 | 18 | 20 | 23 | 24 | 28 | 31 | 34 | 35 |
North Dakota | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Ohio | 20 | 18 | 18 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 15 | 16 | 16 |
Oklahoma | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
Oregon | 7 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 8 |
Pennsylvania | 21 | 20 | 19 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 16 | 17 | 17 | 16 | 16 |
Rhode Island | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
South Carolina | 8 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
South Dakota | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Tennessee | 11 | 11 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 18 |
Texas | 34 | 37 | 33 | 31 | 29 | 27 | 25 | 25 | 23 | 23 | 22 |
Utah | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Vermont | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Virginia | 13 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 23 | 24 |
Washington | 11 | 11 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 11 | 11 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 |
West Virginia | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
Wisconsin | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 12 | 12 | 12 |
Wyoming | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Thoughts on the 2010 Reapportionment: Look to Texas and Florida gaining 3 seats, Arizona 2, and California, Georgia, Nevada and Utah gaining one each.
Who loses? New York and Ohio drop 2, and the following states lose 1 each: Illinois, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Massachusetts, Missouri, Minnesota, Louisiana and Iowa.
Waves of the Future: This is more speculative, of course, but fun.
California, Texas, Florida and New York will be mission-critical states for presidential candidates for the rest of the century. Either you have to win them, or you have to neutralize your opponent's winning them.
Some time around the middle of the century, by around 2060, North Carolina will join this roster. Sometime around 2090, Virginia will replace Texas as one of the larger pieces of the Electoral College puzzle.
Predicting the politics of states decades and centuries in advance is a bit dicey just on population changes. We need more information, perhaps more than we can possibly obtain.
After all we have one more big question to answer.
Fourth Task: Who Are All These New People, Anyway?
- The growth rates of all demographic segments slow down eventually to an equilibrium level
- All other things being equal, in competition the largest subset of the population has the near-term advantage
- The fastest-growing subset has the long-term advantage, if there is room in which to grow
- States close to full capacity do not have room to accomodate rapid, large-magnitude changes in composition of their inhabitants.
- Relatively underpopulated states do, and surprising changes to their demographics can occur in mere decades.
Going back to our comment on how the face of America is changing, I thought it would be useful to show just how swiftly that 'face' could, repeat COULD change based on the modeling used here.
The following table is the percentage of the total population comprised of non-Hispanic whites, by state, through the year 2100.
State | 2000 | 2010 | 2020 | 2030 | 2040 | 2050 | 2060 | 2070 | 2080 | 2090 | 2100 |
Alabama | 70.3 | 67.9 | 65.3 | 60.9 | 54.5 | 46.5 | 39.2 | 33.6 | 30.0 | 27.6 | 26.0 |
Alaska | 67.9 | 64.6 | 59.5 | 52.2 | 43.1 | 34.3 | 27.5 | 22.6 | 19.2 | 16.7 | 14.6 |
Arizona | 64.0 | 57.0 | 49.2 | 48.4 | 47.9 | 47.4 | 46.9 | 46.4 | 45.8 | 45.4 | 45.0 |
Arkansas | 78.6 | 74.5 | 68.8 | 59.6 | 48.8 | 39.0 | 32.3 | 27.9 | 25.1 | 24.2 | 24.2 |
California | 47.2 | 40.6 | 36.2 | 32.2 | 30.3 | 30.0 | 30.0 | 30.0 | 30.0 | 30.0 | 30.0 |
Colorado | 74.7 | 69.5 | 63.5 | 59.8 | 58.4 | 58.1 | 57.8 | 57.5 | 57.2 | 56.9 | 56.6 |
Connecticut | 77.9 | 72.6 | 68.0 | 63.6 | 59.5 | 55.9 | 52.9 | 50.5 | 48.5 | 46.8 | 45.2 |
Delaware | 72.6 | 66.7 | 59.6 | 51.0 | 42.3 | 34.5 | 28.4 | 23.6 | 20.0 | 17.4 | 16.6 |
District of Columbia | 28.1 | 33.7 | 36.5 | 37.0 | 36.9 | 36.8 | 36.8 | 36.8 | 36.8 | 36.8 | 36.8 |
Florida | 65.6 | 58.5 | 50.5 | 42.1 | 36.8 | 34.1 | 32.8 | 31.6 | 30.3 | 29.0 | 28.0 |
Georgia | 62.8 | 56.8 | 49.4 | 40.6 | 34.6 | 30.9 | 29.3 | 28.8 | 28.8 | 28.7 | 28.6 |
Hawaii | 23.2 | 25.4 | 24.5 | 20.6 | 16.1 | 12.8 | 10.8 | 9.6 | 8.8 | 8.2 | 8.0 |
Idaho | 88.3 | 84.4 | 78.6 | 74.4 | 66.5 | 55.2 | 43.6 | 36.8 | 34.0 | 33.8 | 33.8 |
Illinois | 68.1 | 63.4 | 59.4 | 55.3 | 51.6 | 48.2 | 45.4 | 43.0 | 41.0 | 39.2 | 37.6 |
Indiana | 86.0 | 82.2 | 77.9 | 72.2 | 65.6 | 58.7 | 52.3 | 47.0 | 42.9 | 39.7 | 37.2 |
Iowa | 92.7 | 89.5 | 85.7 | 80.8 | 75.5 | 69.8 | 64.3 | 59.2 | 54.6 | 50.5 | 46.6 |
Kansas | 83.2 | 79.4 | 75.8 | 71.5 | 67.0 | 62.6 | 58.6 | 55.1 | 52.2 | 49.6 | 47.5 |
Kentucky | 89.4 | 87.2 | 84.2 | 79.6 | 73.1 | 64.8 | 55.9 | 48.0 | 42.0 | 37.8 | 34.7 |
Louisiana | 62.7 | 60.4 | 59.0 | 57.2 | 55.0 | 52.6 | 50.0 | 47.6 | 45.4 | 43.5 | 42.1 |
Maine | 96.6 | 94.5 | 90.6 | 83.4 | 72.3 | 59.3 | 48.4 | 41.4 | 37.5 | 35.3 | 33.9 |
Maryland | 62.2 | 56.0 | 50.3 | 44.1 | 38.2 | 32.5 | 27.7 | 24.1 | 21.3 | 19.1 | 18.0 |
Massachusetts | 82.7 | 78.1 | 74.2 | 70.4 | 67.2 | 64.3 | 61.9 | 59.9 | 58.3 | 56.9 | 55.8 |
Michigan | 78.9 | 76.8 | 74.5 | 71.7 | 68.3 | 64.6 | 60.9 | 57.3 | 54.1 | 51.3 | 49.0 |
Minnesota | 88.3 | 84.2 | 79.3 | 75.3 | 72.4 | 70.2 | 68.1 | 66.1 | 63.9 | 61.4 | 58.8 |
Mississippi | 60.8 | 58.5 | 56.7 | 53.6 | 48.9 | 42.7 | 36.4 | 31.5 | 28.8 | 27.7 | 27.5 |
Missouri | 83.9 | 81.4 | 78.3 | 73.9 | 68.2 | 61.2 | 54.0 | 47.5 | 42.3 | 38.3 | 35.3 |
Montana | 89.7 | 87.1 | 82.7 | 73.4 | 55.1 | 31.4 | 17.4 | 12.6 | 11.6 | 11.6 | 11.6 |
Nebraska | 87.4 | 82.7 | 77.2 | 70.2 | 62.6 | 54.5 | 46.9 | 40.0 | 33.7 | 28.4 | 24.8 |
Nevada | 65.5 | 54.7 | 42.9 | 42.2 | 41.9 | 41.9 | 41.9 | 41.9 | 41.9 | 41.9 | 41.9 |
New Hampshire | 95.3 | 91.9 | 86.3 | 77.3 | 65.4 | 53.0 | 43.3 | 36.7 | 32.4 | 29.2 | 26.6 |
New Jersey | 66.5 | 59.9 | 55.1 | 50.3 | 46.3 | 42.9 | 40.2 | 37.8 | 35.8 | 34.0 | 32.4 |
New Mexico | 45.0 | 40.9 | 37.5 | 33.6 | 29.3 | 25.4 | 21.5 | 18.5 | 16.8 | 16.1 | 15.9 |
New York | 62.5 | 59.2 | 57.0 | 54.9 | 53.1 | 51.4 | 50.0 | 48.7 | 47.6 | 46.5 | 45.5 |
North Carolina | 70.3 | 66.1 | 60.1 | 51.6 | 41.6 | 32.0 | 24.9 | 20.0 | 16.7 | 14.2 | 12.3 |
North Dakota | 91.9 | 88.6 | 84.8 | 79.8 | 73.9 | 68.0 | 63.2 | 59.8 | 58.2 | 57.7 | 57.6 |
Ohio | 84.2 | 81.9 | 80.0 | 77.7 | 75.0 | 72.1 | 69.0 | 66.1 | 63.5 | 61.3 | 59.5 |
Oklahoma | 74.2 | 70.6 | 66.6 | 61.2 | 55.0 | 48.8 | 43.4 | 39.3 | 36.2 | 33.8 | 31.9 |
Oregon | 83.8 | 78.8 | 72.3 | 64.2 | 54.8 | 44.9 | 36.4 | 31.5 | 27.9 | 25.3 | 23.8 |
Pennsylvania | 84.2 | 80.5 | 77.2 | 73.4 | 69.4 | 65.5 | 62.2 | 59.5 | 57.4 | 55.7 | 54.3 |
Rhode Island | 82.8 | 76.9 | 71.4 | 65.9 | 61.2 | 57.3 | 54.1 | 51.6 | 49.8 | 48.4 | 47.4 |
South Carolina | 66.2 | 64.5 | 61.3 | 55.4 | 46.2 | 36.0 | 28.0 | 22.8 | 19.4 | 17.0 | 15.2 |
South Dakota | 88.1 | 85.0 | 79.4 | 68.8 | 52.9 | 36.7 | 25.4 | 18.6 | 14.9 | 13.1 | 12.2 |
Tennessee | 79.3 | 76.0 | 71.1 | 63.8 | 54.1 | 43.3 | 34.1 | 27.7 | 23.5 | 20.6 | 18.6 |
Texas | 52.5 | 45.9 | 39.5 | 37.9 | 37.4 | 37.1 | 36.8 | 36.5 | 36.1 | 35.9 | 35.6 |
Utah | 85.5 | 81.1 | 75.3 | 75.1 | 74.9 | 74.8 | 74.7 | 74.7 | 74.7 | 74.7 | 74.7 |
Vermont | 96.3 | 94.6 | 92.0 | 87.8 | 81.6 | 73.4 | 64.5 | 56.5 | 50.5 | 46.2 | 43.3 |
Virginia | 70.4 | 65.6 | 59.3 | 51.2 | 42.7 | 34.9 | 28.8 | 24.4 | 21.2 | 18.7 | 16.5 |
Washington | 79.3 | 74.6 | 68.9 | 62.2 | 57.0 | 53.6 | 52.0 | 50.8 | 49.6 | 48.4 | 47.2 |
West Virginia | 94.6 | 93.2 | 91.6 | 89.5 | 87.0 | 83.7 | 80.1 | 76.3 | 72.8 | 69.8 | 67.8 |
Wisconsin | 87.4 | 84.3 | 80.6 | 75.8 | 70.1 | 63.6 | 57.2 | 51.4 | 46.6 | 42.8 | 39.6 |
Wyoming | 89.1 | 86.6 | 83.7 | 79.4 | 72.7 | 62.9 | 51.0 | 40.5 | 33.8 | 30.8 | 29.9 |
It is not a question that the population of the United States will grow.
It is not in question that the existing demographic picture is but a snapshot, far different from the America of 100 years past, and nothing like the America of 100 years from now.
Perhaps in degree, the total population changes, the states of residence, the exact mix of different races and backgrounds. We are talking of a century hence, after all.
But before anyone who reads this starts to fear the face of the America that is to come, ask yourself this: How welcome would your mug be to the 'Americans' of 1908?
And does that archaic, obsolete and offensive definition of who belongs and who doesn't make you any less proud now, to stand and be counted as a citizen if you are and, if not, any less impressed by how far this country has come to live up to its highest vocation: to become a more perfect union?
No. We are not there yet.
But look around at how many more people stand with their backs straight and their eyes shining this week.
They are part of history, each and every one of them.
American history.
And all the nameless faceless numbers I have subjected you to today?
They are going to be part of American history, too.