The Recent Migration Slowdown
and America’s Changing Regional
Demographics
William H. Frey
The Brookings Institution
www.frey-demographer.org
US: Population by Race: 2000 and 2050
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
46.3%
300,000
White
Black
250,000
200,000
Asian
69.1%
150,000
Hispani
c
Other
100,000
50,000
0
2000
Source: William H. Frey analysis
2050
US: Population by Age: 2000 and 2050
450,000
400,000
20.2%
350,000
65+
300,000
250,000
12.4%
45-54
200,000
20-44
150,000
Under 20
100,000
50,000
0
2000
Source: William H. Frey analysis
2050
New Demographic Regions

Melting Pot America

The New Sunbelt

The Heartland
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Melting Pot, New Sunbelt
and Heartland States
Source: William H. Frey analysis
New Sunbelt
Melting Pot
Heartland States
Share of U.S. in Melting Pot States
Foreign Born
70%
Asian Language at Home
68%
Spanish at Home
76%
Mixed Marriages
51%
Native Born
37%
English at Home
34%
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Demographic Components, 2000-2009
(Rates per 1000)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
66
45
Immigratio
n
Domestic
Migration
30
16
-15
-19
Melting Pot
New Sunbelt
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Heartland
Domestic Migration Magnets, 2000-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Phoenix
Riverside, CA
Atlanta
Dallas
Las Vegas
Tampa
Charlotte
Houston
Source: William H. Frey analysis
530,579
457,430
412,832
307,907
299,027
254,650
243,399
242,573
Greatest Domestic Out-Migration, 2000-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
New York
Los Angeles
Chicago
Detroit
San Francisco
New Orleans
Miami
San Jose
Source: William H. Frey analysis
-1,920,745
-1,337,522
-547,430
-361,632
-343,834
- 298,721
-284,860
-233,133
Immigrant Magnet Metros, 2000-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
New York
1,079,016
Los Angeles
803,614
Miami
506,423
Chicago
363,134
Dallas
323,941
Washington DC
310,222
Houston
289,648
San Francisco
257,318
Source: William H. Frey analysis
US County Growth 2005-6
Source: William H. Frey analysis
US County Growth 2008-9
Source: William H. Frey analysis
CA, West Growth 2005-6 vs 2008-9
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Florida Growth, 2005-6 vs 2008-9
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Annual Population Growth, 2000-9
Nevada, Arizona, Florida, Texas
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-05 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9
Nevada
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Arizona
Florida
Texas
Annual Population Growth, 2000-9
Los Angeles Metro, New York Metro
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
2000-1
2001-2
2002-3
2003-4 2004-05 2005-6
Los Angeles
Source: William H. Frey analysis
2006-7
New York
2007-8
2008-9
Annual Population Growth, 2000-9
Urban, Suburban, Exurban
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2000-1
2001-2
2002-3
Urban
Source: William H. Frey analysis
2003-4 2004-05 2005-6
Suburban
2006-7
2007-8
Exurban
2008-9
19
48
19 -194
50
9
19 -195
52
1
19 -195
54
3
19 -195
56
5
19 -195
58
7
19 -195
60
9
19 -196
62
1
19 -196
64
3
19 -196
66
5
19 -196
68
7
19 -196
70
9
19 -197
75
1
19 -197
80
6
19 -198
82
1
19 -198
84
3
19 -198
86
5
19 -198
88
7
19 -198
9
19 0-19 9
92
-19 91
19
94 93*
19 -199
96
5
19 -199
98
7
20 -199
00
9
20 -200
02
1
20 -200
04
3
20 -200
06
5
20 -200
08
-20 7
09
Migration Slowdown
1947-8 to 2008-9
25
20
15
10
5
0
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Migration between States by Age
2000-1 versus 2008-9
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
M
ay
14
-O
ct
15
-1
9
20
-2
4
25
-2
9
30
-3
4
35
-3
9
40
-4
4
45
-4
9
50
-5
4
55
-5
9
60
-6
4
65
+
9-
Ag
e<
5
0
2000-2001
Source: William H. Frey analysis
2008-2009
Reasons for Moving Between States
2004-5 versus 2008-9
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
13
30
34
22
2004-5
Source: William H. Frey analysis
15
25
Other
Family Related
Jobs Related
46
14
2008-9
Housing
Related
California versus Mountain West
Annual Net Domestic Migration 2000-9
400000.0
300000.0
200000.0
100000.0
0.0
-100000.0
-200000.0
-300000.0
-400000.0
2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-05 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9
California
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Mountain West
Nevada: Greatest Net Migration Origins:
2000-8
Net Mig.
Migration
Share of
total
California
192,382
69%
New York
15,237
5%
Illinois
14,734
5%
Hawaii
10,358
4%
Michigan
10,125
4%
Source: William H. Frey analysis
California Net Migration by Education:
2004-5 versus 2007-8
10,000
0
-10,000
-20,000
-30,000
-40,000
-50,000
-60,000
-70,000
Less Than HS
HS grad
2004-5
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Some College
2007-8
College Grad
New York versus Florida
Annual Net Domestic Migration 2000-9
300000.0
200000.0
100000.0
0.0
-100000.0
-200000.0
-300000.0
2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-05 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9
New York
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Florida
Top Metro Net Migration Gainers, 2004-5
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
Metro
Phoenix
Riverside
Tampa
Orlando
Atlanta
Las Vegas
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Net Mig
98,789
72,341
51,985
51,826
51,305
39,331
New and Old Net Migration Gainers, 2008-9
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
9
13
30
279
306
346
Metro
Houston
Dallas
Austin
Raleigh
Denver
Charlotte
Net Mig
49,662
45,241
25,654
20,095
19,831
19,211
Atlanta
Phoenix
Tampa
Riverside
Las Vegas
Orlando
17,479
12,441
4,663
-616
-1,256
-4,279
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Florida Metro Areas
Annual Net Migration 2000-2009
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
-10,000
2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-05 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9
Orlando
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Tampa
Jacksonville
Texas Metro Areas
Annual Net Migration 2000-2009
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
-20,000
2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-05 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9
Dallas
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Houston
Austin
Metro Las Vegas
Domestic and International Migration 2000-2009
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
-10,000
2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-05 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9
Domestic
Source: William H. Frey analysis
International
Metro Phoenix
Domestic and International Migration 2000-2009
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-05 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9
Domestic
Source: William H. Frey analysis
International
Metro Riverside, CA
Domestic and International Migration 2000-2009
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
-20,000
2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-05 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9
Domestic
Source: William H. Frey analysis
International
Metro Los Angeles, CA
Domestic and International Migration 2000-2009
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
-50,000
-100,000
-150,000
-200,000
-250,000
-300,000
2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-05 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9
Domestic
Source: William H. Frey analysis
International
Race Composition of Regions 2008
Heartland
New Sunbelt
Melting Pot
2% 5%
11%
2%
3%
3%
27%
53%
12%
15%
2%
7%
68%
79%
11%
White
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Black
Asian
Other
Hispanic
Hispanic Concentrations
Percent of County
Population
25% and above
10.0% to 24.9%
5.0 to 9.9%
Under 5%
Data source: William H. Frey, US Census Estimates
Asian Concentrations
Percent of County
Population
10% and above
5.0% to 9.9%
2.0% to 4.9%
Under 2%
Data source: William H. Frey, US Census Estimates
Black Concentrations
Percent of County
Population
25% and above
10.0% to 24.9%
5.0% to 9.9%
Under 5%
Data source: William H. Frey, US Census Estimates
White Concentrations
Percent of County
Population
95% and above
85.0% to 94.9%
70.0% to 84.9%
Under 70%
Data source: William H. Frey, US Census Estimates
CA and MT West: Race Change 1990-2008
6,000,000
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0
White
Black
Asian
Hispanic
-1,000,000
-2,000,000
California
Source: William H. Frey analysis
MT West
Race Ethnic Profile: 1990, 2008
CALIFORNIA
100%
MOUNTAIN WEST
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
67
57
51
42
20%
10%
0%
1990
Whites
2008
Blacks
Source: William H. Frey analysis
1990
Hispanics
Asians
2008
Others
Annual Hispanic Growth Rates, 2000-8:
Selected West Metros
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
2000-1
2001-2
2002-3
Las Vegas
Source: William H. Frey analysis
2003-4
Phoenix
2004-05
2005-6
Riverside
2006-7
2007-8
Los Angeles
State Growth in Child Population*, 2000-2010
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Growth 5% and over
Growth under 5%
Decline under 5%
Decline 5% and over
Under age 18
Percent Non White Children*, 2015
Source: William H. Frey analysis
GT 50%
40% - 50%
30% - 40%
20% - 40%
Under 20%
* Under age 15
Percent Children with Immigrant Parents
60
50
51%
40
35%
35%
34%
32%
30
31%
31%
23%
20
10
0
CA
NY
NV
Ist Gen
Source: William H. Frey analysis
AZ
FL
NJ
TX
2nd Gen
US
US Growth by Age 2000-10
60
49
50
40
30
19
20
10
3
10
16
14
4
0
-10
-9
-20
0- 5
15-24 25-34 35-44
Source: William H. Frey analysis
45-54 55-64 65-74
75+
Age 65 + Growth, 2000-10, US States
25% & above
20% -24%
10% -19%
under 10%
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Greatest 65+ Growth, 2000-8
Metros over 500,000
1 Provo
2 Raleigh
3 Austin
4 Atlanta
5 Boise City
6
7
8
9
10
Orlando
Las Vegas
Dallas
Tucson
Houston
Source: William H. Frey analysis
131.4
38.6
36.8
36.2
35.7
33.3
32.4
28.6
28.4
28.1
Percent 65+ population for States, 2005
13.4% & above
12% -13%
11% -11.9%
under 12%
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Projected Age 65+ Growth
2000-30, US States
140% & above
100% -139%
70% -99%
under 69%
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Florida
Source: William H. Frey analysis
California
2000-05
2005-10
2010-15
2015-20
2020-25
2025-30
2030-35
2035-40
2000-05
2005-10
2010-15
2015-20
2020-25
2025-30
2030-35
2035-40
2005-10
2010-15
2015-20
2020-25
2025-30
2030-35
2035-40
percent growth
Projected Age 65+ Growth, 2000-40
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
New York
Race for Age Groups: US
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
71.6
55.5
60.3
Age Under
15
Age 15-39
White
Black
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Asian
Age 40-64
Other
80.4
Age 65+
Hispanic
Race for Age Groups: California
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
50.7
29.4
36.0
Age Under
15
Age 15-39
White
Black
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Asian
Age 40-64
Other
63.3
Age 65+
Hispanic
Race for Age Groups: Nevada
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
66.2
51.0
42.9
Age Under
15
White
76.9
Age 15-39
Black
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Asian
Age 40-64
Other
Age 65+
Hispanic
Race for Age Groups: Arizona
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
82.9
68.4
50.8
42.1
Age Under
15
White
Age 15-39
Black
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Asian
Age 40-64
Other
Age 65+
Hispanic
Race for Age Groups: Minnesota
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
76.4
81.6
Age Under
15
Age 15-39
White
Black
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Asian
90.7
95.6
Age 40-64
Age 65+
Other
Hispanic
United States
Projected Race Compositions, 2025
Age 18 -64
Under Age 18
52 %
white
Age 65+
62 %
black
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Indian
Asian
76 %
Hispanic
Projected State Population Growth 2000-2010
15% and above
10% to 15%
5% to 10%
Under 5%
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Projected Changes in Congressional Seats
after 2010 Census
1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1 -1
-1
1
-1
1
-2
1
1
1
4
-1
1
Source: William H. Frey analysis
-1
Fast-Growing Purple States, 2008
Purple-Dem
Purple-Rep
All Other
Source:William
WilliamH.
H.Frey
Freyanalysis
analysis
Source:
Slow-Growing Purple States, 2008
Purple-Dem
Purple-Rep
All Other
Source:William
WilliamH.
H.Frey
Freyanalysis
analysis
Source:
“Fast-Growing” vs “Slow-Growing”
Purple State Growth, 2004-8
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
41.8
36.8
28.0
12.6
8.3
7.8
8.3
-1.7
Whites
Blacks
Fast Growing
Hispanics
Asians,
Other
Slow Growing
Source:William
WilliamH.
H.Frey
Freyanalysis
analysis of CPS November 2004, 2008 supplements
Source:
2008 Blue States: Won by
Whites and Minorities
Source:William
WilliamH.
H.Frey
Freyanalysis
analysis
Source:
Nevada, New Mexico Voters: 2004, 2008
Nevada
New Mexico
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
80
73
30%
56
55
2004
2008
20%
10%
0%
2004
Whites
2008
Blacks
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Hispanics
Asians
Others
Nevada
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
– Democratic Margins
89
73
54
21
12
-3
-12 -8
Total
Whites
2004
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Blacks
Hispanics
2008
New Mexico – Democratic Margins
50
39
40
30
20
15
12
10
0
-10
-1
-13 -14
-20
Total
Whites
2004
Source: William H. Frey analysis
Hispanics
2008
Useful Websites
www.brookings.edu/metro
www.frey-demographer.org
Source: William H. Frey analysis