weekend commentary ... political demographics trends
"Political direction signals
By Donald Lambro
July 14, 2005
Anyone who wants to know where American politics is headed should look at the U.S. Census Bureau's eye-popping population shift projections for the next three decades.
In a nutshell, it forecasts that Americans will continue moving out of the liberal bastions of the Northeast and Midwest and into the Sun Belt states in the South and West. That, in turn, will boost Republican congressional and electoral clout and further erode the Democratic political base.
Republicans have refastened their electoral lock on the South and the Western Plains and Mountain states, while Democrats have lost electoral strength in Northeastern and Midwestern states. The reason: many more Americans are moving to places like Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, Arizona and Nevada -- conservative-leaning states the GOP has carried with increasing regularity over the last several decades.
The Census Bureau's Interim Population Projections, its first in eight years, shows this political migration will not only continue but will accelerate over the next 30 years.
So much so that heavily Democratic Michigan and New Jersey will be replaced on the list of the 10 most populated states by heavily Republican and fast-growing Arizona and North Carolina. Ohio, a pivotal swing state in presidential races, will fall from seventh to 10th place in population, and Republican-rich Georgia will move from 10th to eighth.
A bigger seismic shift: Heavily Republican Florida will become the third most populous state, surpassing Democratic New York, which will fall into fourth place perhaps as early as 2011.
"The net beneficiary of this will continue to be the Republican Party because the population shift is moving into an environment that is heavily dominated by the Republicans," says Merle Black, Emory University professor of politics and government and co-author of seminal books on the South's political realignment. "(snip)
Re: weekend commentary ... political demographics trends
Doesn't this analysis assume that the people moving from traditional Democratic areas to traditionally Republican ones will, for some unspecified reason, adopt the majority politics of their new communities rather than bringing their political allegiances with them? That assumption seems far from obvious, to say the least, to me. I could imagine the effect being just the opposite...namely that an influx of liberals from Democratic areas could tip the balance in at least some of the more evenly balanced but traditionally Republican states.
-Ww
Re: weekend commentary ... political demographics trends
Your assumption would be correct if a 'uniform cross section' of northern state populations were moving south. However this is not the case. Where New York residents are concerned, for example, the 'upper class rich' are not moving south since they can earn just as much investment income in NY, since their social circle is in NY, since the upscale culture is in NY. Nor are the 'underclass' moving south, as Welfare/MedicAid/other social benefit programs are much more generous in NY. The major demographic groups of New Yorkers who are moving south are young people in their 20's who seek long term career opportunity, middle class people in their 50's and 60's who seek to improve their retirement via avoiding ridiculous state and local NY taxes, entrepreneurs who seek a more 'friendly' economic and regulatory climate in which to operate their business etc. These groups are migrating because in essence they disagree with the political policies of NY which are responsible for a lack of decent entry level jobs, which are responsible for ridiculously high taxes, and which are responsible for the expensive state environmental and labor regulations which directly affect them.
Thus it is arguable that as these particular demographic groups choose to remain in NY versus migrate south, that NY will get 'bluer' while southern states get 'redder'. Thus it is likely that state policies in NY will get 'bluer' as well, leading to more social spending and higher taxes to pay for it, providing even more incentive for young people, people on the verge of retirement, and entrepreneurs to vote with their feet.
As the article points out, as population totals shift south, even though a 'very blue' future New York may support democratic/liberal political candidates with big state majorities, because of the population shift a 'very blue' future New York will hold fewer and fewer house seats and fewer and fewer electoral votes towards the presidency. Southern states will of course gain those house seats and electoral votes. Thus the only division of gov't which will not be materially affected by the southern migration will be the US senate, where a 'very blue' future New York will still hold two democratic senate seats. However, it is arguable that some 'border' states (bordering the blue north and the red south) will gain enough migrating young people, people on the verge of retirement, and entrepreneurs to tip the balance of future senatorial elections in those states towards the 'red'.
Re: weekend commentary ... political demographics trends
Ww: You make an excellent point. However, you have to realize how firmlly entrenched the Republican Party is in in some of these states, and thanks to gerrymandering, will remain so. An example is the fast growing state of Texas. If I'm not mistaken, there are currently no democrats that have been elected state-wide in the state. Also remember the effect on the presidential election where it is winner take all. As we learned in Florida and Ohio, you just have to get a majority to win the state. So unless enough democrats migrate to a state to make a majority, the net effect is to give more electoral votes to the republicans.