Page 1 of 3

2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:27 pm
by TitosBuritoBarn
State population estimates are out. Nebraska increased 0.7% between 2014 and 2015, 0.1% below the US average. Iowa grew by 0.5%.


State........14 pop.....'15 pop......+/-.......%

Nebraska..1,882,980..1,896,190 ..13,210..0.7
Iowa.......3,109,481..3,123,899 ..14,418..0.5
Other notables:
Colorado..5,355,588..5,456,574..100,986..1.9
Kansas.....2,902,507..2,911,641.....9,134..0.3
Missouri....6,063,827..6,083,672...19,845..0.3
S Dakota...853,304...858,469........5,165..0.6
Wyoming..584,304...586,107........1,803..0.3

US.......318,907,401..321,418,820..2,511,419..0.8
Midwest...67,762,069..67,907,403..145,334..0.2



http://www.census.gov/popest/data/state ... index.html

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:30 pm
by daveoma
Wow! What is going on in Colorado?

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:46 pm
by RNcyanide
daveoma wrote:Wow! What is going on in Colorado?
Legal weed?

Sigh. It's going to be quite a while before we hit 2 million I see.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 9:29 pm
by GetUrban
RNcyanide wrote:
daveoma wrote:Wow! What is going on in Colorado?
Legal weed?

Sigh. It's going to be quite a while before we hit 2 million I see.
Rocky Moutain High....Colorado. The mountains might have something to do with it too.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 9:52 pm
by MTO
And Omaha's CSA was 931,666 in 2013, we are "this" close to having the majority in our metro after which All provential authority is seceded to Omaha.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 9:55 pm
by RNcyanide
MTO wrote:And Omaha's CSA was 931,666 in 2013, we are "this" close to having the majority in our metro after which All provential authority is seceded to Omaha.
Provential authority?

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 10:59 pm
by MTO
RNcyanide wrote:
MTO wrote:And Omaha's CSA was 931,666 in 2013, we are "this" close to having the majority in our metro after which All provential authority is seceded to Omaha.
Provential authority?

Commissioner Stothert will be sworn-in as prefect until a new capital can be rebuilt in Omaha's CBD.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 1:14 am
by Garrett
Was Nebraska the second fastest growing in the Midwest this year? Since 2010 we've been 3rd, behind North Dakota and South Dakota, but if we've jumped South Dakota we're probably 2nd.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 8:52 am
by skinzfan23
NE
2010 Population: 1,826,341
2015 Population: 1,896,190

Gain of 69,849 or 3.8%

IA
2010 Population: 3,046,355
2015 Population: 3,123,899

Gain of 77,544 or 2.5%

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 7:12 pm
by nativeomahan
It appears that, for the most part, the entire region continues to shrink in population as compared with the nation as a whole. Colorado has long been an area of tremendous growth. Probably for the past half century it has grown much faster than the national average.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 7:52 pm
by MTO
nativeomahan wrote:It appears that, for the most part, the entire region continues to shrink in population as compared with the nation as a whole. Colorado has long been an area of tremendous growth. Probably for the past half century it has grown much faster than the national average.
"Shrink"?

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 10:10 pm
by Erik
nativeomahan wrote:It appears that, for the most part, the entire region continues to shrink in population as compared with the nation as a whole. Colorado has long been an area of tremendous growth. Probably for the past half century it has grown much faster than the national average.
Yeah. The growth is rather skewed towards a few states. Nebraska actually grew faster than 31 states in the last year. So the state is growing faster than the median, but still about .08 percent lower than the mean.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2015 12:29 pm
by MTO
Intriguing that Colorado is going gangbusters yet Wyoming merely tossed in a few as they remain the least populated state. It would be nice if someone could figure out all the factors that go into population growth rates and put together a detailed publication.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2015 1:51 pm
by Stargazer
Relatively boring topography, a mixture of brutal cold and oppressive humidity, isolation from other population centers, 19th century political climate (maybe that actually draws some people here). I'd say we're doing alright under the circumstances.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2015 6:11 pm
by Erik
Stargazer wrote:Relatively boring topography, a mixture of brutal cold and oppressive humidity, isolation from other population centers, 19th century political climate (maybe that actually draws some people here). I'd say we're doing alright under the circumstances.
It's crazy isnt it? I cannot believe there are enough idiots out there that would believe that living in the nation's ugliest and miserable location is worth a mediocre job.

Just a few more years of experience and Im off to my new city..

When do you get your ticket out of this prison?

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2015 7:52 am
by Coyote
Does anyone know what it would take for Nebraska to lose one of its congressional seats? Granted we are growing, but not as fast as other states, how close are we getting to becoming a two seat state?

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2015 9:34 am
by riceweb
Coyote wrote:Does anyone know what it would take for Nebraska to lose one of its congressional seats? Granted we are growing, but not as fast as other states, how close are we getting to becoming a two seat state?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ortionment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... tative.jpg

I think it would be a while before Nebraska (at 1.8m) would lose a seat (one per approx 675k people). I doubt after the 2020 Census that Nebraska would be in a position to lose a seat, but possibly after the 2030 Census the ratios would have shifted enough to push us to only 2 seats.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2015 9:48 am
by iamjacobm
We do have the 5th lowest population per house seat. If we lost one we would have one of the largest pops per house seat on the level of SD and ID.

We did jump WV in this latest census so we aren't the smallest state with 3 reps.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2015 9:34 am
by Dundeemaha
It is possible we will drop 1 seat in 2020 and if not then very likely in 2030 barring changes to population trends.

Edit: Also if DC is ever given representation we will lose a seat.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 12:09 pm
by iamjacobm
Here is The Economist's prediction for Congressional redistribution in 2020.

Image

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 12:49 pm
by GetUrban
Looks like traditionally "blue" states are projected to lose seats and more traditionally "red" states are projected to gain seats. This will affect electoral votes somewhat. I wish more states would award House electoral votes by district (as Nebraska and Maine do) rather than winner take all. Nebraska Repubs are trying to change it to winner-take-all though.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:05 pm
by daveoma
GetUrban wrote:Looks like traditionally "blue" states are projected to lose seats and more traditionally "red" states are projected to gain seats. This will affect electoral votes somewhat. I wish more states would award House electoral votes by district (as Nebraska and Maine do) rather than winner take all. Nebraska Repubs are trying to change it to winner-take-all though.
Agreed, I think however that some of these red states will become purple or blue (NC case in point). I'm really surprised that Minnesota is projected to lose seats.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:57 pm
by GetUrban
daveoma wrote:
GetUrban wrote:Looks like traditionally "blue" states are projected to lose seats and more traditionally "red" states are projected to gain seats. This will affect electoral votes somewhat. I wish more states would award House electoral votes by district (as Nebraska and Maine do) rather than winner take all. Nebraska Repubs are trying to change it to winner-take-all though.
Agreed, I think however that some of these red states will become purple or blue (NC case in point). I'm really surprised that Minnesota is projected to lose seats.
I hope so. That is surprising Minnesota might lose some seats, agreed.

The GOP seems to be in disarray right now with Trump, etc.... so who knows, maybe they'll split into two factions and/or lose a few followers back over to the blue side. But the gun fight might reunite them a bit while they're all riled-up over packing heat.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 2:07 pm
by Garrett
GetUrban wrote:Looks like traditionally "blue" states are projected to lose seats and more traditionally "red" states are projected to gain seats. This will affect electoral votes somewhat. I wish more states would award House electoral votes by district (as Nebraska and Maine do) rather than winner take all. Nebraska Repubs are trying to change it to winner-take-all though.
Looks to me like red states gaining 4, blue gaining 2, and purple gaining 3. And I agree, all of the states splitting votes would be great, but gerrymandering also needs to be addressed too.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:15 pm
by daveoma
Garrett wrote:
GetUrban wrote:Looks like traditionally "blue" states are projected to lose seats and more traditionally "red" states are projected to gain seats. This will affect electoral votes somewhat. I wish more states would award House electoral votes by district (as Nebraska and Maine do) rather than winner take all. Nebraska Repubs are trying to change it to winner-take-all though.
Looks to me like red states gaining 4, blue gaining 2, and purple gaining 3. And I agree, all of the states splitting votes would be great, but gerrymandering also needs to be addressed too.
Agreed, some recent progress was made in Florida regarding gerrymandering.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2016 1:30 pm
by bigredmed
daveoma wrote:
Garrett wrote:
GetUrban wrote:Looks like traditionally "blue" states are projected to lose seats and more traditionally "red" states are projected to gain seats. This will affect electoral votes somewhat. I wish more states would award House electoral votes by district (as Nebraska and Maine do) rather than winner take all. Nebraska Repubs are trying to change it to winner-take-all though.
Looks to me like red states gaining 4, blue gaining 2, and purple gaining 3. And I agree, all of the states splitting votes would be great, but gerrymandering also needs to be addressed too.
Agreed, some recent progress was made in Florida regarding gerrymandering.
The Voting Rights act needs amended for genuine improvement here. The dominant African American district layout pretty much forces other districts to either be serpentine or to be dominant non-black. We should go to color blind, party-blind geographically logical districts.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2016 1:46 pm
by RNcyanide
Haha, good luck with that!!

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2016 3:26 pm
by bigredmed
RNcyanide wrote:Haha, good luck with that!!
Definitely not happening, but I tire of people whining about gerrymandering when the Fed's are the biggest cause of it.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2016 3:40 pm
by BRoss
bigredmed wrote:
RNcyanide wrote:Haha, good luck with that!!
Definitely not happening, but I tire of people whining about gerrymandering when the Fed's are the biggest cause of it.
How are the feds the biggest cause of it? It's the state legislatures doing it.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2016 9:21 pm
by bigredmed
HR Paperstacks wrote:
bigredmed wrote:
RNcyanide wrote:Haha, good luck with that!!
Definitely not happening, but I tire of people whining about gerrymandering when the Fed's are the biggest cause of it.
How are the feds the biggest cause of it? It's the state legislatures doing it.
The states have to comply with the Voting Rights act's provision regarding the African American districts. To not comply in the south gets your districts made by federal judges. To not comply outside the south gets you trouble as well. To make these districts happen, you have to create serpentine districts and you are not allowed to use any other variable over that.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:21 pm
by Garrett
bigredmed wrote:
HR Paperstacks wrote:
bigredmed wrote:
RNcyanide wrote:Haha, good luck with that!!
Definitely not happening, but I tire of people whining about gerrymandering when the Fed's are the biggest cause of it.
How are the feds the biggest cause of it? It's the state legislatures doing it.
The states have to comply with the Voting Rights act's provision regarding the African American districts. To not comply in the south gets your districts made by federal judges. To not comply outside the south gets you trouble as well. To make these districts happen, you have to create serpentine districts and you are not allowed to use any other variable over that.
You mean the gutted voting rights act which doesn't do anything anymore... Right? Or the sections which state that districts which use race as a primary factor are supposed to be considered gerrymandered and unfair, which still stands?

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 2:08 am
by Spatial77
Living in Texas right now where redrawing districts to optimize seats of the party in power is an art! After living in Illinois, Florida, New Mexico, and now Texas, I miss the relative sanity of Nebraska politics.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:57 pm
by daveoma
Spatial77 wrote:Living in Texas right now where redrawing districts to optimize seats of the party in power is an art! After living in Illinois, Florida, New Mexico, and now Texas, I miss the relative sanity of Nebraska politics.
I lived in Texas too and found the politics to be quite corrupt. I'm not an expert on their state constitution but it seems to me that it's interpreted liberally to suit the ones in power and business interests.

Sometimes Nebraska has an old boys club thing, but I will say that being historically populist there is a respect for the will of the people.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:35 pm
by Dundeemaha
The combination of this thread and a gif I saw of the population center of the US got me curious so I hacked together this little page:

http://pop-center.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:46 pm
by daveoma
Dundeemaha wrote:The combination of this thread and a gif I saw of the population center of the US got me curious so I hacked together this little page:

http://pop-center.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/
Wow I thought it would be further east.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:53 pm
by Dundeemaha
daveoma wrote:
Dundeemaha wrote:The combination of this thread and a gif I saw of the population center of the US got me curious so I hacked together this little page:

http://pop-center.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/
Wow I thought it would be further east.
Hah, same here. The first thing my wife said was, "No that's too far west"

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:09 pm
by BRoss
Looks like population is really retracting back into the cities. Makes sense since Millennials tend to like urban areas more.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 11:42 pm
by bigredmed
HR Paperstacks wrote:Looks like population is really retracting back into the cities. Makes sense since Millennials tend to like urban areas more.
That and from a practical view, there are fewer and fewer opportunities that don't involve ownership and capital investment in rural America. Once, there were a number of solid jobs in small towns, but these have declined faster than in cities. There are still shops (run by the owners) and other businesses that are run by owners. Nothing wrong with that, but a generation with large student loan debts is one that will not be participating in such an economy without family connections to provide that capital.

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Thu May 19, 2016 4:20 pm
by skinzfan23
I don't have time to list them all but the new population estimates for cities came out today.

NE:http://www.census.gov/popest/data/citie ... 015_31.csv
Largest US Cities: http://www.census.gov/popest/data/citie ... index.html

Omaha: 443,885
Lincoln: 277,348
Bellevue: 55,510
Grand Island: 51,440
Papillion: 19,510
La Vista: 16,921
Ralston: 5,994

Re: 2015 Census Estimates

Posted: Thu May 19, 2016 7:33 pm
by BRoss
It would be nice for a table plugin :;): (edit: thanks!)
[tr][td][/td][td]
2010
[/td][td]
2014
[/td][td]
2015
[/td][td]
Diff
[/td][td]
% Chg
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Omaha[/td][td]
     408,958
[/td][td]
     442,316
[/td][td]
     443,885
[/td][td]
     1,569
[/td][td]
     0.35%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Ralston[/td][td]
     5,943
[/td][td]
     5,997
[/td][td]
     5,994
[/td][td]
     -3
[/td][td]
     -0.05%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Boys Town[/td][td]
     745
[/td][td]
     649
[/td][td]
     634
[/td][td]
     -15
[/td][td]
     -2.37%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Waterloo[/td][td]
     848
[/td][td]
     1,003
[/td][td]
     1,044
[/td][td]
     41
[/td][td]
     3.93%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Valley[/td][td]
     1,875
[/td][td]
     2,070
[/td][td]
     2,117
[/td][td]
     47
[/td][td]
     2.22%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Bennington[/td][td]
     1,458
[/td][td]
     1,625
[/td][td]
     1,669
[/td][td]
     44
[/td][td]
     2.64%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Balance of Douglas County[/td][td]
     97,283
[/td][td]
     90,325
[/td][td]
     94,721
[/td][td]
     4,396
[/td][td]
     4.64%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Bellevue[/td][td]
     50,137
[/td][td]
     54,772
[/td][td]
     55,510
[/td][td]
     738
[/td][td]
     1.33%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Papillion[/td][td]
     18,894
[/td][td]
     19,515
[/td][td]
     19,510
[/td][td]
     -5
[/td][td]
     -0.03%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]La Vista[/td][td]
     15,758
[/td][td]
     16,922
[/td][td]
     16,921
[/td][td]
     -1
[/td][td]
     -0.01%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Springfield[/td][td]
     1,529
[/td][td]
     1,583
[/td][td]
     1,584
[/td][td]
     1
[/td][td]
     0.06%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Gretna[/td][td]
     4,441
[/td][td]
     5,035
[/td][td]
     5,046
[/td][td]
     11
[/td][td]
     0.22%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Balance of Sarpy County[/td][td]
     68,081
[/td][td]
     74,464
[/td][td]
     77,121
[/td][td]
     2,657
[/td][td]
     3.45%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Council Bluffs[/td][td]
     62,230
[/td][td]
     62,317
[/td][td]
     62,597
[/td][td]
     280
[/td][td]
     0.45%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Blair[/td][td]
     7,990
[/td][td]
     7,988
[/td][td]
     7,975
[/td][td]
     -13
[/td][td]
     -0.16%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Grand Island[/td][td]
     48,520
[/td][td]
     51,252
[/td][td]
     51,440
[/td][td]
     188
[/td][td]
     0.37%
[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Lincoln[/td][td]
     258,379
[/td][td]
     273,905
[/td][td]
     277,348
[/td][td]
     3,443
[/td][td]
     1.24%
[/td][/tr][/table]