ReportWire

Tag: census

  • No, West Virginia isn’t the only state losing population

    After Virginia saw sweeping Democratic victories in November’s elections, West Virginia state Sen. Sen. Chris Rose, a Republican, welcomed his neighboring state’s conservatives to move to his state, among the nation’s most solidly red. 

    Another West Virginia legislator, Democratic Del. Kayla Young, responded to Rose on Nov. 5.

    “Wild to see the crashout of the GOP when their ideas are soundly rejected across the country,” Young wrote. “But come to WV, the only state losing population, where next session the focus will probably be forcing stupid AI memes to be coal-fired power generated too.”

    The part of Young’s post that caught our eye was the notion that West Virginia is “the only state losing population.” That’s inaccurate.

    Running the numbers

    There are two ways to measure state population change. One is to compare the most recent population estimate, in this case for 2024, with the last full census, in 2020. The other is to compare the two most recent population estimates, which in this case would be from 2023 and 2024.

    West Virginia’s population fell by both measures. But it was not the only state with that outcome.

    Comparing the 2024 population estimate with the 2020 census, West Virginia saw the largest percentage decline in population among all 50 states — just over 1.2%.

    West Virginia was joined in population loss during that time period by six other states: California, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi and New York.

    The list of states losing population between the 2023 and 2024 estimates is smaller — only three. West Virginia is again on the list, though by this measurement its percentage loss was slightly smaller than Vermont’s. Mississippi also lost population during this period.

    When PolitiFact West Virginia reached out to Young, she acknowledged she should have clarified her point.

    “I realize other states have lost population per census assumptions and numbers post the 2020 Census,” she said, adding that West Virginia did have the sharpest decline of all 50 states after the 2020 census.

    West Virginia holds one other dubious population distinction. In 2021, when then-Gov. (now Sen.) Jim Justice said West Virginia “is the only state to decline in population over the last 70 years,” we rated that True.

    West Virginia had about 2 million residents in the 1950 Census but only 1.79 million in the 2020 census and 1.77 million in the 2024 population estimate. 

    We checked the updated numbers for this article and confirmed West Virginia remains the only state to decline in population since 1950.

    Our ruling

    Young said West Virginia is “the only state losing population.”

    Between the 2020 census and the 2024 population estimate, and between the 2023 and 2024 population estimates, West Virginia lost residents. But it was not the only state to do so.

    Six other states have lost population since the 2020 census and two other states have declined since the 2023 population estimate.

    We rate the statement False.

    Source link

  • The DC region is becoming more diverse. Where are Latinos moving? – WTOP News

    The D.C. region is becoming increasingly diverse, and it’s drawing a large number of Latinos because of the opportunities available, experts said.

    WTOP celebrates National Hispanic Heritage Month this Sept. 15 through Oct. 15, with stories spotlighting the contributions, culture and accomplishments of Hispanic communities across the D.C. region.

    The D.C. region is becoming increasingly diverse, and it’s drawing a large number of Latinos in because of the opportunities available, experts said.

    According to a WTOP analysis of 2024 census data released this summer, every D.C.-area suburb added to its Hispanic population. In Virginia, Fairfax County reported the largest increase of people who identify as Hispanic. In Maryland, Prince George’s County saw the biggest hike.

    Gabriel Moreno, chief executive officer of the Maryland-based immigration nonprofit Luminus Network, said census data revealed that in many cases, children are being born to at least one of two parents who identify as Hispanic.

    Part of the growth, Moreno said, can be attributed to people telling family members and friends that there’s a large Latino population in the D.C. region.

    In-state college tuition after graduating from high school is also an attractive perk, and because of the large existing population, it’s “a lot easier for folks that are trying to learn English in a space where they’re also comfortable with their native language,” Moreno said.

    Takoma Park and Silver Spring in Maryland stand out as areas with concentrated Latino growth, Moreno said. In Montgomery and Prince George’s counties, there are more politicians who identify as Hispanic or Latino, which means “if they have an issue in their community, in their neighborhoods, they feel more comfortable, likely reaching out to someone that looks like them,” he said.

    Frederick County, Maryland, added about 1,700 people to its Hispanic population last year, according to census data. Montgomery County added more than 6,500 people, and Prince George’s County added almost 10,000.

    In Virginia, Arlington added 1,323 people who identified as Hispanic. Fairfax County added more than 4,700, Loudoun County added 1,388 and Prince William County added 3,363, according to the 2024 census data.

    Terry Clower, director at George Mason University’s Center for Regional Analysis, said the region is an attractive place to settle down because of opportunity.

    The D.C. region is largely wealthy, despite the challenges it’s been experiencing, Clower said. That means many residents spend money in restaurants, for landscaping and repairing homes, “which are those occupations that are most easily accessible for recent immigrants,” he said.

    While Clower said some may consider that a downside, “in the reality, it’s a part of what we need to grow. You want to grow your economy. You want to grow things.”

    In the years after the pandemic, Clower said there was a “real surge” of international migration. It was dominated by people coming to the region from Central or South America, he said, a trend that’s been true “for a long time.”

    Most migrants are “not coming in to purchase homes,” Clower said; and therefore they’re not directly impacting the demand of houses for sale.

    Moreno, meanwhile, said many families are returning to the multifamily home model. There could be two or three generations living in a home, largely because of housing costs.

    “You’re starting to see a lot of family units kind of stay together, and it actually gives them a better position as far as, for example, buying a house,” Moreno said.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • The DC region is becoming more diverse. Where are Latinos moving? – WTOP News

    The D.C. region is becoming increasingly diverse, and it’s drawing a large number of Latinos because of the opportunities available, experts said.

    WTOP celebrates National Hispanic Heritage Month this Sept. 15 through Oct. 15, with stories spotlighting the contributions, culture and accomplishments of Hispanic communities across the D.C. region.

    The D.C. region is becoming increasingly diverse, and it’s drawing a large number of Latinos in because of the opportunities available, experts said.

    According to a WTOP analysis of 2024 census data released this summer, every D.C.-area suburb added to its Hispanic population. In Virginia, Fairfax County reported the largest increase of people who identify as Hispanic. In Maryland, Prince George’s County saw the biggest hike.

    Gabriel Moreno, chief executive officer of the Maryland-based immigration nonprofit Luminus Network, said census data revealed that in many cases, children are being born to at least one of two parents who identify as Hispanic.

    Part of the growth, Moreno said, can be attributed to people telling family members and friends that there’s a large Latino population in the D.C. region.

    In-state college tuition after graduating from high school is also an attractive perk, and because of the large existing population, it’s “a lot easier for folks that are trying to learn English in a space where they’re also comfortable with their native language,” Moreno said.

    Takoma Park and Silver Spring in Maryland stand out as areas with concentrated Latino growth, Moreno said. In Montgomery and Prince George’s counties, there are more politicians who identify as Hispanic or Latino, which means “if they have an issue in their community, in their neighborhoods, they feel more comfortable, likely reaching out to someone that looks like them,” he said.

    Frederick County, Maryland, added about 1,700 people to its Hispanic population last year, according to census data. Montgomery County added more than 6,500 people, and Prince George’s County added almost 10,000.

    In Virginia, Arlington added 1,323 people who identified as Hispanic. Fairfax County added more than 4,700, Loudoun County added 1,388 and Prince William County added 3,363, according to the 2024 census data.

    Terry Clower, director at George Mason University’s Center for Regional Analysis, said the region is an attractive place to settle down because of opportunity.

    The D.C. region is largely wealthy, despite the challenges it’s been experiencing, Clower said. That means many residents spend money in restaurants, for landscaping and repairing homes, “which are those occupations that are most easily accessible for recent immigrants,” he said.

    While Clower said some may consider that a downside, “in the reality, it’s a part of what we need to grow. You want to grow your economy. You want to grow things.”

    In the years after the pandemic, Clower said there was a “real surge” of international migration. It was dominated by people coming to the region from Central or South America, he said, a trend that’s been true “for a long time.”

    Most migrants are “not coming in to purchase homes,” Clower said; and therefore they’re not directly impacting the demand of houses for sale.

    Moreno, meanwhile, said many families are returning to the multifamily home model. There could be two or three generations living in a home, largely because of housing costs.

    “You’re starting to see a lot of family units kind of stay together, and it actually gives them a better position as far as, for example, buying a house,” Moreno said.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • No, Obama didn’t remove census citizenship question

    Before Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed James Uthmeier, his former chief of staff, as attorney general, Uthmeier worked in the first Trump administration in the Department of Commerce, which oversees the U.S. Census Bureau.

    Now Uthmeier’s past is present after President Donald Trump called for a rare, mid-decade census to exclude immigrants in the U.S. illegally.

    “During my time working in the first Trump Admin, the Supreme Ct (5-4 decision) blocked us from asking in the Census whether someone is a U.S. citizen (though it was asked for over 150 years, prior to Obama admin),” Uthmeier posted Aug. 24 on X. “Illegals shouldn’t be included in apportionment.” 

    Apportionment is how the federal government determines how many seats each state receives in the U.S. House of Representatives. It’s based on population figures reported in the census, including people who are not U.S. citizens.

    Uthmeier is right that the U.S. Supreme Court blocked Trump’s 2019 attempt to add a citizenship question in the 2020 census. But he’s wrong that the census asked the question for 150 years before President Barack Obama came along.

    The 2010 census broke from tradition, but the change was in the works before Obama took office, and the Census Bureau continues to ask about citizenship in an annual survey.

    “The Obama administration did not change the census question related to citizenship,” said Terri Lowenthal, a former congressional staffer and census expert. Instead, the question was  included in the annual American Community Survey, which replaced a long-form census questionnaire. Not everyone who received a census form received the question.  

    Joining other states jockeying for congressional seats ahead of the 2026 midterms, Florida Republican legislators convened a select committee on congressional redistricting to look at the state’s map.

    Sign up for PolitiFact texts

    PolitiFact contacted Uthmeier’s office for comment but did not hear back by publication.

    What’s the history of census citizenship questions?

    Uthmeier said a citizenship question was asked in the census “for over 150 years,” but it has not been part of the decennial census for all U.S. households that entire time.  

    The earliest U.S. census in 1790 asked for the head of the family’s name and number of people in the household, including enslaved people.

    The first version of a census citizenship question appeared in 1820, asking each household “the number of foreigners not naturalized.” Until 1920, it was asked only of adult men — women and children automatically had the same citizenship status as their husbands or fathers.

    Some form of the citizenship question has been included as a general question every decade since 1890 (but not asked of all households), with the exception of 1960, which focused on place of birth.

    The last time the Census Bureau came close to asking every household about citizenship status was in 1950, when census workers knocked on doors and interviewed residents. They asked where each person was born and, in a follow-up question for those born outside the U.S., asked if they were a naturalized citizen.

    In 1970, the Census Bureau started distributing two different questionnaires: a short form sent to most households and a long form sent to about 1 in 6 households. Only the long version asked about citizenship. 

    In 2000, for example, the long-form questionnaire asked respondents, “Is this person a CITIZEN of the United States?” 

    The short form asked for the basics, such as name, date of birth, sex and race. It continued not to ask about citizenship in 1980, 1990 and 2000.

    What happened under Obama?

    In 2010, the census eliminated the long-form questionnaire in favor of a 10-question short-form questionnaire that didn’t ask about citizenship.

    The census bureau had started collecting demographic and socioeconomic information through an alternative questionnaire — the American Community Survey, or ACS, in 2005. The annual survey is sent to about 3.5 million households and continues to ask about citizenship, among other topics.

    Plans to stop using the long-form census started years before Obama took office, during former President George W. Bush’s administration.

    “To deal with some of these challenges at the beginning of the decade, the 2010 census was re-engineered to build a better, faster and simpler census. The plan was to leverage technology, eliminate the long form and conduct a short-form-only decennial census,” Carlos Gutierrez, the commerce secretary under Bush, testified to Congress in 2008, according to The New York Times.

    Several government reports from the early 2000s concluded that the American Community Survey produced the same estimates as the long-form census.

    “The ACS includes a question on citizenship, as the long-form did. Therefore, President Obama did not change the content of the 2010 Census,” Lowenthal said. “Besides, Obama did not take office until 2009 — too late to change the content of the census without risking significant adverse consequences for census operations and, therefore, accuracy.”

    The questions on the decennial census “have never been political until now,” said Misty Lee Heggeness, a University of Kansas associate professor and former U.S. Census Bureau economist. “Changes made to previous census forms had to do with innovations related to survey implementation and data collection and costs.”

    Census directors appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents have previously agreed that a question on citizenship would discourage responses and undermine census accuracy. Heggeness co-authored a March 2025 peer-reviewed study that supports that perspective.

    Heggeness said the point of the census is to get an accurate count “of all the people in the United States’ borders,” as mandated by the U.S. Constitution.

    “It’s about getting as many people as possible to respond because an undercount can cause a lot of complications in the following decade,” she said.

    Our ruling

    Uthmeier said citizenship status was asked in the U.S. Census “for over 150 years” prior to the Obama administration.

    The last time the decennial census came close to asking every household about citizenship status was in 1950, when it was a follow-up question for foreign-born respondents. Subsequent censuses have asked the question only of a sample of households.

    In 2010, the Census Bureau took the citizenship question out of the long-form questionnaire as part of changes planned under the Bush administration. The Census Bureau still asks the question of 3.5 million households each year through the American Community Survey.

    We rate this claim False.

    PolitiFact Staff Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report. 

    Source link

  • Examining claims about count of noncitizens in the census

    Examining claims about count of noncitizens in the census

    A bill that would exclude noncitizens from the U.S. Census count that determines the number of congressional seats in each state has spurred misleading claims online. 

    “In case you missed it, every single Democrat in the House just voted for illegal immigrants to count toward representation in Congress and the Electoral College,” a woman in an Instagram video says. She continues, “If the legal citizens won’t vote for you, and having the dead people attempt to vote for you isn’t working, bring in, just bring in the illegals.”

    The video includes a screenshot of an article from the Not the Bee, a news website that is an offshoot of satirical website The Babylon Bee. 

    This post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

    The full article references the Equal Representation Act, a bill that would add a citizenship question to the U.S. Census to exclude noncitizens from the population count that determines congressional apportionment. Noncitizens are now counted in the census and have been for more than 200 years.

    No Democrats voted in favor of the bill. The bill’s critics said excluding noncitizens from Congressional apportionment violates the Constitution. 

    The U.S. Census has always counted noncitizens, and in voting against the Equal Representation Act, Democrats opted to keep the system as is. The bill passed with a majority in the House of Representatives and has been sent to the Senate. 

    The U.S. House of Representatives has 435 seats. Each state automatically receives one seat, and the remaining seats are allocated based on population size as reported in the U.S. Census, which is conducted every 10 years. The number of electoral votes allocated to each state is also based on the census. 

    Thomas Wolf, democracy initiatives director at the nonprofit Brennan Center for Justice, said the U.S. Census has counted every person living in the U.S., regardless of citizenship status, since the first census was conducted in 1790. He said the only exceptions were Native Americans who were not taxed and therefore were not counted, and enslaved people who were counted as three-fifths of a person until the passage of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment. 

    Since 1790, the census has also been used to determine the number of seats each state has in the House of Representatives. 

    Dan Vicuña, the redistricting and representation director at Common Cause, a voting rights group, told PolitiFact, “Making residents of the United States invisible for the purposes of congressional apportionment would be a clear violation of the U.S. constitution.” 

    The 14th amendment, which was ratified in 1868, says representatives should be apportioned to states based on the “whole number” of people in each state, and it does not make exceptions for people’s immigration status.  

    The Equal Representation Act is not the first time politicians have tried to change who’s counted in the census. Former President Donald Trump unsuccessfully tried in 2020 to exclude noncitizens from the census count and congressional apportionment

    Wolf sent us an amicus brief that census historians wrote when Trump’ tried changing redistricting processes; the brief said excluding immigrants in the U.S. illegally from congressional apportionment violates the Constitution. 

    PolitiFact found that  excluding noncitizens from congressional apportionment would not necessarily benefit Democratic-led states. Republican-led states have experienced significant increases in immigrant populations in recent years.​

    Source link

  • Detroit’s population growth masks glaring racial disparities

    Detroit’s population growth masks glaring racial disparities

    click to enlarge

    Steve Neavling

    Downtown Detroit is buzzing with new businesses, lofts, and entertainment, but the city’s neighborhoods continue to struggle.

    You may have woken up Thursday to the good news that Detroit’s population is rising for the first time since 1957, a time when white people began flocking to the suburbs.

    Between July 1, 2022, and July 1, 2023, Detroit gained 1,852 residents, putting the city’s population at 633,366, according to U.S. Census estimates released Monday morning.

    Detroit is now ranked as the 26th most populated city in the U.S., leapfrogging Memphis, Louisville, and Portland.

    While population gains are a positive sign for any city, the growth in Detroit is far more nuanced and complicated than a single estimate can reveal.

    Between 2000 and 2020, Detroit lost about 295,000 Black residents, or 37.4% of its African American population. No other city has lost more Black residents.

    Meanwhile, Detroit’s white population grew by more than 5,100 between 2010 and 2020.

    Black people now account for 77.2% of the city’s overall population, compared to 82.2% in 2010, when Detroit had the highest percentage of Black residents in the country.

    You can see the growth in the pricey lofts and condos that are cropping up in Midtown, downtown, Corktown, Brush Park, the Cass Corridor and the riverfront.

    At the same time, a disproportionate number of Black residents are living in neighborhoods dominated by blight, abandonment, and crime. The number of middle-class neighborhoods in Detroit shrunk from 22 in 2010 to 11 in 2020, leaving longtime residents with fewer options to find a decent place to live.

    The areas where white people are flocking are getting more expensive, displacing Black businesses and residents.

    While the latest census information doesn’t break down data by race, it’s difficult to imagine that the Black population suddenly began to rise.

    As part of a series Metro Times published last year about the growing racial and economic disparities in Detroit, we talked to Black residents who fled the city and asked them why they left. Overwhelmingly, they said they couldn’t find decent-paying jobs in the city. By contrast, white newcomers are disproportionately getting employed by high-paying businesses.

    Over the last decade, the median income of white Detroiters rose 60%. For Black Detroiters, the increase was 8%, according to Detroit Future City, a think tank that develops strategies for a more equitable city.

    The average income of a white Detroiter is $46,650, compared to $32,290 for a Black resident. The unemployment rate for Black Detroiters is 1.5 times higher than white residents.

    In a recent report, Detroit Future City found that metro Detroit’s fastest-growing, well-paying jobs are disproportionately going to white workers. About 16% of Black workers in the region are in so-called growth occupations, compared to 26% of white workers.

    Jobs are considered growth occupations if they are growing at the same or higher rate than the region as a whole, pay at least a middle-class salary, have increased wages between 2014 and 2019, and employ at least 300 people. Most of the jobs pay more than $73,000 a year.

    “What we’re seeing pretty consistently unfortunately is that the highest growth for Detoiters in terms of workforce is lower-wage jobs, which means the jobs that you would think of as middle wage or higher wage are not being occupied by Detroiters,” Anika Goss, CEO of Detroit Future City, told Metro Times in May 2023. “The jobs are either going to people who are moving here from other places or suburbanites. They are not Detroiters.”

    Black Detroiters are also more likely to be denied mortgages, regardless of their income level. Higher-income Black residents, for example, were denied a loan at a higher rate than moderate-income white applicants.

    In a news release Thursday morning, Mayor Mike Duggan tried to make the case that Black Detroiters are getting more opportunities. He pointed to a recent University of Michigan study that indicated Black homeowners gained $2.8 billion in home value. He also said the city spent $1 billion for more than 4,600 units of affordable housing over the past five years.

    Duggan has objected to past census estimates that showed population decline, saying many residents weren’t counted.

    “We have known for some time that Detroit’s population has been growing, but this is the first time the U.S. Census Bureau has confirmed it in its official estimate,” Duggan said Thursday. “This day is for the Detroiters who stayed and for everyone who has put in the hard work to make Detroit a great place to live.”

    Despite the good news about Detroit’s overall population growth, much work still needs to be done to address a future for Black residents.

    As a result of the inequities, many Black children are facing long odds of succeeding later in life. More than half of the city’s Black children live in poverty. About 20% of young adults who grow up in poverty end up poor in their 20s, according to the National Center for Children in Poverty.

    Detroit’s Black population grew exponentially in the early and mid-1900s, lured by the bustling auto industry. But those fleeing Jim Crow laws in the U.S. south found themselves in similar situations in Detroit, largely relegated to substandard homes in segregated, overpopulated neighborhoods.

    In the 1950s, when Detroit’s population peaked at nearly 2 million, Mayor Albert Cobo campaigned on a platform of “Negro removal” — a pledge to force Black people out of predominantly white neighborhoods and deny federal funding for Black housing projects.

    In the mid-1950s, the construction of highways decimated the city’s historic Black communities, Black Bottom and Paradise Valley.

    By the time federal civil rights laws banned racial discrimination in the 1960s, white people were fleeing the city for the suburbs, and the jobs followed, leaving behind a majority-Black population that lacked the resources to thrive.

    Now that white flight is reversing, it’s up to city leaders and wealthy landowners to ensure that Black residents have a fair shake this time.

    Steve Neavling

    Source link

  • There’s A Real Crisis The Biden Impeachment News Distracted From — And It’s Even Worse Than It Looks

    There’s A Real Crisis The Biden Impeachment News Distracted From — And It’s Even Worse Than It Looks

    We’ve spent a lot of time this week talking about Hunter Biden and impeachment, which is fair enough. I just wish we’d found more time to discuss another story, because it painted an alarming picture of what’s happening to millions of low-income Americans ― and made it very clear which party’s leaders want to do something about it.

    I’m talking about the annual U.S. Census Bureau report on income and health insurance, which came out Tuesday and which my colleague Jonathan Nicholson summarized for HuffPost. The report found that the country’s poverty rate jumped from 7.8% in 2021 to 12.4% last year ― and that the poverty rate among children, specifically, rose even more dramatically, from 5.2% to 12.4%.

    To put it another way, last year more than 1 in 8 American kids were living in a household struggling to pay for food, shelter, transportation and other essentials. Just a year before, fewer than half as many kids were in that position.

    Of course, none of this was a surprise. In 2020 and 2021, poverty fell dramatically, with poverty among children hitting record lows. The reason was the extra income support that the federal government had provided as part of its efforts to get families ― and the U.S. economy ― through the disruptions of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    President Joe Biden and Democratic leaders wanted to make permanent a temporary subsidy for families with children. But Republicans wouldn’t support the proposal, and neither would Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). That was enough to keep the proposal from passing.

    John Tully for The Washington Post via Getty Images

    A key element of that support was the child tax credit that provided families with up to $300 a month per child from July through December 2021. The credit was part of the American Rescue Plan, which President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats enacted shortly after he took office.

    Biden and his allies had hoped to make the temporary measure permanent. But they couldn’t get the votes. Republicans wouldn’t support it, which left the proposal’s fate in the hands of the Senate’s most conservative Democrat, Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Manchin blanched at the credit’s impact on the federal budget, and expressed concern that low-income families would use the money to buy drugs.

    In reality, as the data showed, low-income Americans were using the money mainly to pay for necessities. Now, with the assistance gone, they are back to paying more for those necessities ― or not getting them at all. Which is to say, they’re back in poverty.

    It’s a disheartening, devastating story. And it’s not the last time we’re going to hear a version of it.

    Coming Next: More Uninsured Americans

    As usual, the annual Census report also included statistics on health insurance coverage. In 2022, just 8.3% of Americans had no insurance. That’s the lowest share ever recorded, which is great.

    But a big reason for that was another pandemic relief measure ― a federally imposed suspension of states’ requirements that Medicaid recipients reconfirm their eligibility for the program. That suspension ended earlier this year, which means states have started up the eligibility verification process again.

    “What we’ve proved is that poverty for children in America is not some accident. It’s a policy choice.”

    – Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)

    So far, nearly 6.5 million Medicaid recipients have lost coverage through this process, according to a running tally the health research organization KFF is keeping. A large number of these people are losing coverage for “procedural” reasons, meaning they might still be eligible for Medicaid and are only losing coverage because they got stuck or lost in the bureaucratic process of showing they still qualify.

    As a result, next year’s figures are likely to show an increase ― quite possibly a substantial one ― in the number of uninsured Americans. And based on the data about exactly who is losing Medicaid for procedural reasons, experts like Georgetown University research Professor Joan Alker are predicting that increase could include several million children.

    So not only would something like 1 in 8 kids be living in poverty, but a great many of them wouldn’t have health insurance, either.

    Proponents of aggressive cuts argue that Medicaid rolls currently include lots of people who have found alternative sources of insurance. That’s true. But it’s also true that many states make demonstrating Medicaid eligibility difficult, in order to minimize enrollment, and have been doing so for a long time. It’s among the reasons so many Americans have remained uninsured even with programs like the Affordable Care Act in place.

    A Glimpse Of What Might Have Been

    In a sense, the pandemic-era suspension of Medicaid disenrollments functioned a lot like the temporary tax credit for children: It strengthened the safety net, so that Americans were getting the kind of support their Western European counterparts have received from their governments for a long time.

    And while maintaining those pandemic measures required more government spending ― which is what so bothered Manchin and the Republicans ― it also achieved what it was supposed to achieve. Fewer families had to go hungry or without housing. More of them got health care. Kids especially stood to benefit, given all the data that links reliable food, shelter and health insurance to future emotional, intellectual and physical well-being.

    That impact doesn’t seem to have registered with most Republicans, who have been pushing for tax cuts that would make it even harder to fund income support programs ― and who, preoccupied with their impeachment inquiry into Biden, had little to say about the poverty numbers this week.

    Their Democratic counterparts certainly noticed ― although, absent the votes to do something about it, all they could do was point out the irony.

    “We have now proved something pretty phenomenal and at the same time, pretty obscene,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) said this week. “What we’ve proved is that poverty for children in America is not some accident. It’s a policy choice.”

    Source link

  • Austin Pets Alive! | Fostering in Austin

    Austin Pets Alive! | Fostering in Austin

    Aug 23, 2021

    Recently we were lucky to have an amazing group from the UT Austin McCombs School of Business study what the capacity for people to foster animals in Austin really looks like, by comparing current census data to common trends among our [hundreds] of amazing volunteers currently fostering APA! animals.

    What many people don’t know is that there is an entire machine of coordination and support behind any shelters with robust foster programs for homeless pets. The good news is that this machine is completely possible to build in any community and nurture to extend the ability to save the lives of companion animals at risk of euthanasia. And, thanks to this study, we have even more certainty on what we suspected to be a huge opportunity for new fosters in Austin.

    First, Who exactly fosters?

    The study matched active APA! foster parents’ demographics with Austin district census and survey data. Based on the number of current APA! fosters in each zip code, those ages 18-34, without pets, closer to the animal shelter and renters/single occupants are more likely to foster (both dogs and cats).

    When these variables were compared with the census in the same zip codes, a potential 433 potential dog fosters and 498 potential cat fosters were identified! And that number could multiply if the households foster more than one animal in need.

    Why do they foster?

    The study also analyzed the demographic data of APA!’s current fosters to find the top 5 reasons for fostering:

    • New time and bandwidth
    • Not ready for a long-term commitment (adopting)
    • Love of animals/grew up with animals
    • Desire to help animals
    • Trial for future adoption

    Based on this information, we are more knowledgeable than ever on who potential fosters are. And any city could pair these commonalities with their communities, plus best practices for building and maintaining a foster program [ampa resource link here] and we’d be looking at city by city solving a major portion of commonly being too under-resourced to save enough lives – by finding new resources outside of the shelter and into the community via foster homes.

    Thank you to the McCombs School of Business team: Anurag Peddaiahgari, Drake Sides, Haoshu Yuwen, Nicholas Hill, Nicholas Solorzano, and Sandesh Kakade, for shining new light on the potential of fostering animals in Austin!

    For those of you not yet fostering in Austin and are willing to join this lifesaving network, please email [email protected].

    Sources: Simply Analytics/Census and APA! fosters data

    Source link