Fantastic news! Let the redistricting games begin!

P.S. - Please keep me in Tommy Wells' ward!

by Shipsa01 on Dec 21, 2010 12:06 pm • link • report

I was actually hoping for/expecting a much larger increase, mostly because I believed earlier figures were undercounting due to the transience of a certain element of our population. I still don't truly believe that the full population is being counted, particularly in diplomatic and academic/university circles. A lot of people who aren't registered in DC for tax or car registration purposes are also reluctant to fill out things like Census forms, as paranoid as that may be.

by SG on Dec 21, 2010 12:10 pm • link • report

DC is still bigger than Wyoming (which gets not only a voting Congressperson but two senators). DC is still behind Vermont but is closing the gap (2000 difference of 36,000; 2010 difference of 24,000).

by Gavin on Dec 21, 2010 12:11 pm • link • report

But note that DC's growth rate of 5.2% is below the national average of 9.7%. Neighbors Maryland and Virginia grew at 9.0% and 13.0%, respectively.

If growth rates stay the same in the next decade, Vermont will still be bigger than DC in 2020 -- but Wyoming will be bigger too.

by Gavin on Dec 21, 2010 12:18 pm • link • report

Good to see DC break a symbolic population mark. I will gladly accept some growth after decades of declines.
Unless housing becomes more affordable (and the recent article on rising rents suggests otherwise), I don't know how sustainable this growth will be.

by DCster on Dec 21, 2010 12:33 pm • link • report

I wonder if a new deal can be struck to get DC a seat in the House, similar to the old one with Utah. Mostly republican Texas is set to gain either 3 or 4 seats. Add 2 seats to the House, give Texas 4 and DC can get the other. And accept reasonable restrictions on gun control laws (SCOTUS already did that).

I think EHN should have been defeated in this last election, because she did not deliver on the Utah deal, which would have given her the seat.

by goldfish on Dec 21, 2010 12:58 pm • link • report

With a GOP House, the DC voting rights bill is simply dead.

by Fritz on Dec 21, 2010 1:10 pm • link • report

@DCster

DC is not only already affordable for those working in white collar fields, but has great upside as a personal investment. The only dam holding the inrush left is schools. There will be a tipping point where wealthy families from the suburbs begin to return in earnest to the city to raise families. Energy (Transportation) costs, and demographic trends will ensure this.

Who will lose? DC will no longer be a monument to poverty and poverty encouraging programs. The socio-political grip that poverty programs-the poor-and politicians who promote poverty will crumble.

by John Doe on Dec 21, 2010 3:05 pm • link • report

Fritz -- just heard Tom Davis on the Kojo show say what you wrote. Sigh. Since the Republicans will be taking over, and with the upcoming Congressional redistricting also favoring Republicans, it looks like Utah opportunity was the best hope of getting a rep in a generation. And it was squandered.

This calls for radical change.

Two crazy ideas come to mind: (1) EHN should resign and be replaced with a Republican. The Republican-led house will then surely push for DC to get a vote. EHN clearly has become the obstacle. (2) Since the DC delegate has no vote, why not have that job appointed by the Mayor, who would select a person better suited to getting representation for DC?

Since representation is years or decades away, anything is better than the status quo.

by goldfish on Dec 21, 2010 3:24 pm • link • report

Those are some crazy ideas alright. Why not modify your first - replace her with Barry? At least then we have a laugh watching him torment the Republicans and embarass the Dems. (Plus that would get him off the Council)

by Shipsa01 on Dec 21, 2010 3:44 pm • link • report

@John Doe:

Who will lose? DC will no longer be a monument to poverty and poverty encouraging programs. The socio-political grip that poverty programs-the poor-and politicians who promote poverty will crumble.

Easy there, gentrifier! Don't you know the city is for poor people?

by oboe on Dec 21, 2010 3:48 pm • link • report

@Shipsa01--Crazy yes, but in the unlikely event that one of them comes to pass, it would actually work. Your idea otoh, while funny, would undermine the effort because former Mayor Barry is not respected by the other members of Congress.

by goldfish on Dec 21, 2010 3:51 pm • link • report

When will we have Household Income distribution by tract? Are we just a few months away from that? Or closer to a year?

by Jason on Dec 21, 2010 4:33 pm • link • report

Stop the presses! Stick Marion Barry on the state quarter and run Frederick Douglass for Congress.

by Turnip on Dec 21, 2010 6:55 pm • link • report

@Jason: you won't have that information from Census 2010, since everyone got a "short form" this year; all the long form questions, like income, are now only on the American Community Survey. Tract level information from 2010 will be released over the second half of 2011, but it won't get any more specific than race/ethnicity, household type, and housing tenure.

by Payton on Dec 21, 2010 8:17 pm • link • report

@Payton - thanks for the info. I couldn't remember what was included on the short form when I took it. Income seems important enough that it should have been on there. But so many people are obsessed with race/ethnicity. Oh well...

by Jason on Dec 21, 2010 9:05 pm • link • report

The statement at the top of the homepage that "DC topped 600,000 for the first time since the 1950s" is not correct and does not appear in the story that it links to.

Here's a link to Census data for 1990 showing a population above 600,000 for DC:

http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0027/tab22.txt

by Eric on Dec 22, 2010 9:47 am • link • report

With a GOP House, the DC voting rights bill is simply dead.

by Fritz on Dec 21, 2010 1:10 pm (link)
---------------

You know, there's this old canard that now with GOPs in charge of the House that DC won't get its just due representation. I didn't exactly see a whole lot of aggressive recent push for voting rights under Congressional Democratic control either, folks. This was hardly a vocal top priority for Pelosi and Reid. Outside of our area many national politicians who have any opinion at all about this issue still believe D.C. shouldn't have Congressional representation anyway and use the Constitution as justification. Long-term, if D.C. is ever to get full voting rights in Congress there will need to be another push to amend the Constitution, just like it had to in order to vote in Presidential elections. These vague, amorphous promises of piecemeal deals and trying to work with short-term political constituencies in Congress is not going to cut it.

by Mike O on Dec 22, 2010 10:59 am • link • report