LOOKING FORWARD DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE, ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY, & THE FUTURE OF THE GOLDEN STATE

LOOKING FORWARD DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE, ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY, & THE FUTURE OF THE GOLDEN STATE 10.12 MANUEL PASTOR U.S. Decadal Growth Rates for Population by Race/Ethnicity, 1980-2010 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010 96.3% 57.9% 53.1% 50.3% 42.7% 43.0% 4.2% 3.4% 1.2% 12.0% 16.2% 11.0% White Black API Latino 1

U.S. Change in Youth (<18) Population by Race/Ethnicity, 2000-2010 4,788,632 781,946 875,683 White Black Latino API Other -248,081-4,310,525 2

LEADING THE NATIONAL TREND California's Changing Demographics, 1980-2000 100% 5% 9% 11% 80% 19% 26% Other 8% 32% API 60% 7% 7% Latino 40% Black 20% 67% 57% 47% White 0% 1980 1990 2000 Source: California Department of Finance. 3

IMMIGRATION AS A (NON-) FACTOR 50% A Leveling Off: Immigrant Share of Total Population California, Los Angeles, and the U.S. Total immigrants in the U.S. (millions) 40% 30% 20% Los Angeles California UnitedStates 10% 0% 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2009 CALIFORNIA DEMOGRAPHIC REALITIES 90% California: Among the Most Long-Term of Immigrant Populations % of immigrants who arrived > 10 years ago, 2009 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% North Dakota Kentucky Alabama South Carolina Delaware Mississippi Nebraska Indiana North Carolina Tennessee South Dakota Kansas Wyoming Oklahoma Missouri Georgia Iowa Minnesota District of Columbia Louisiana Arkansas Virginia Utah Ohio Wisconsin Maryland Michigan Oregon Colorado Pennsylvania Idaho Massachusetts New Hampshire Washington Connecticut Texas Alaska Arizona Nevada West Virginia New Jersey Florida Maine New Mexico Illinois New York Rhode Island Montana Hawaii California Vermont 4

CALIFORNIA DEMOGRAPHIC REALITIES 90% Percent Immigrant by Share Long-Term U.S. States, 2009 % of immigrants who arrived >10 years ago 80% 70% 60% 50% Vermont Rhode Island Hawaii Montana Illinois New Mexico Maine Florida West Virginia New Hampshire Washington Alaska Connecticut Arizona Texas Pennsylvania Idaho Massachusetts Michigan Colorado Oregon Maryland OhioWisconsin Utah Virginia Louisiana Arkansas District of Columbia Iowa Minnesota Missouri Georgia Wyoming Oklahoma Kansas South Dakota Tennessee IndianaNebraska North Carolina Mississippi South Carolina Delaware Alabama Kentucky New York New Jersey Nevada California 40% North Dakota 30% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% % immigrant U.S. Change in Racial Identification of Latinos, 1980-2010 100% 3% 3% 2% 2% 80% 38% 43% 50% 44% API 60% Black 40% Other 20% 58% 52% 48% 53% White 0% 1980 1990 2000 2010 5

Del Norte Siskiyou Humboldt Shasta Trinity Modoc Lassen Percent of People of Color by County Legend 20% or less >20 to 30% >30 to 40% >40 to 50% >50 to 60% >60 to 70% Over 70% Tehama Plumas Glenn Butte Sierra Mendocino YubaNevada Lake Colusa Placer Sutter El Dorado Yolo SonomaNapa Alpine SacramentoAmador Solano Calaveras Marin Tuolumne Contra CostaSan Joaquin San Francisco Alameda Stanislaus Mariposa San Mateo Santa Clara Merced Santa Cruz Madera Fresno San Benito Monterey Kings San Luis Obispo Year 2000 Mono Inyo Tulare Kern San Bernardino Santa Barbara Ventura Los Angeles Riverside Orange San Diego Imperial Calcuations based on data provided by California Department of Finance, Race/Ethnic Population Projections with Age and Sex Detail, 2000-2050. July 2007. Del Norte Siskiyou Humboldt Shasta Trinity Modoc Lassen Percent of People of Color by County Legend 20% or less >20 to 30% >30 to 40% >40 to 50% >50 to 60% >60 to 70% Over 70% Tehama Plumas Glenn Butte Sierra Mendocino YubaNevada Lake Colusa Placer Sutter El Dorado Yolo SonomaNapa Alpine SacramentoAmador Solano Calaveras Marin Tuolumne Contra CostaSan Joaquin San Francisco Alameda Stanislaus Mariposa San Mateo Santa Clara Merced Santa Cruz Madera Fresno San Benito Monterey Kings San Luis Obispo Year 2010 Mono Inyo Tulare Kern San Bernardino Santa Barbara Ventura Los Angeles Riverside Orange San Diego Imperial Calcuations based on data provided by California Department of Finance, Race/Ethnic Population Projections with Age and Sex Detail, 2000-2050. July 2007. 6

Del Norte Siskiyou Humboldt Shasta Trinity Modoc Lassen Percent of People of Color by County Legend 20% or less >20 to 30% >30 to 40% >40 to 50% >50 to 60% >60 to 70% Over 70% Tehama Plumas Glenn Butte Sierra Mendocino YubaNevada Lake Colusa Placer Sutter El Dorado Yolo SonomaNapa Alpine SacramentoAmador Solano Calaveras Marin Tuolumne Contra CostaSan Joaquin San Francisco Alameda Stanislaus Mariposa San Mateo Santa Clara Merced Santa Cruz Madera Fresno San Benito Monterey Kings San Luis Obispo Year 2020 Mono Inyo Tulare Kern San Bernardino Santa Barbara Ventura Los Angeles Riverside Orange San Diego Imperial Calcuations based on data provided by California Department of Finance, Race/Ethnic Population Projections with Age and Sex Detail, 2000-2050. July 2007. Del Norte Siskiyou Humboldt Shasta Trinity Modoc Lassen Percent of People of Color by County Legend 20% or less >20 to 30% >30 to 40% >40 to 50% >50 to 60% >60 to 70% Over 70% Tehama Plumas Glenn Butte Sierra Mendocino YubaNevada Lake Colusa Placer Sutter El Dorado Yolo SonomaNapa Alpine SacramentoAmador Solano Calaveras Marin Tuolumne Contra CostaSan Joaquin San Francisco Alameda Stanislaus Mariposa San Mateo Santa Clara Merced Santa Cruz Madera Fresno San Benito Monterey Kings San Luis Obispo Year 2030 Mono Inyo Tulare Kern San Bernardino Santa Barbara Ventura Los Angeles Riverside Orange San Diego Imperial Calcuations based on data provided by California Department of Finance, Race/Ethnic Population Projections with Age and Sex Detail, 2000-2050. July 2007. 7

Del Norte Siskiyou Humboldt Shasta Trinity Modoc Lassen Percent of People of Color by County Legend 20% or less >20 to 30% >30 to 40% >40 to 50% >50 to 60% >60 to 70% Over 70% Tehama Plumas Glenn Butte Sierra Mendocino YubaNevada Lake Colusa Placer Sutter El Dorado Yolo SonomaNapa Alpine SacramentoAmador Solano Calaveras Marin Tuolumne Contra CostaSan Joaquin San Francisco Alameda Stanislaus Mariposa San Mateo Santa Clara Merced Santa Cruz Madera Fresno San Benito Monterey Kings San Luis Obispo Year 2040 Mono Inyo Tulare Kern San Bernardino Santa Barbara Ventura Los Angeles Riverside Orange San Diego Imperial Calcuations based on data provided by California Department of Finance, Race/Ethnic Population Projections with Age and Sex Detail, 2000-2050. July 2007. Del Norte Siskiyou Humboldt Shasta Trinity Modoc Lassen Percent of People of Color by County Legend 20% or less >20 to 30% >30 to 40% >40 to 50% >50 to 60% >60 to 70% Over 70% Tehama Plumas Glenn Butte Sierra Mendocino YubaNevada Lake Colusa Placer Sutter El Dorado Yolo SonomaNapa Alpine SacramentoAmador Solano Calaveras Marin Tuolumne Contra CostaSan Joaquin San Francisco Alameda Stanislaus Mariposa San Mateo Santa Clara Merced Santa Cruz Madera Fresno San Benito Monterey Kings San Luis Obispo Year 2050 Mono Inyo Tulare Kern San Bernardino Santa Barbara Ventura Los Angeles Riverside Orange San Diego Imperial Calcuations based on data provided by California Department of Finance, Race/Ethnic Population Projections with Age and Sex Detail, 2000-2050. July 2007. 8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

South Los Angeles with 2000 U.S. Census Tract Boundaries Total Population: 1990: 802,371 2000: 825,408 2005-09: 858,773 7% increase from 1990 to 2005-09 South Central Los Angeles High School School Demography, Demographics 1981-82 School Year 1981-1982 School Year 1% 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 2% 0% 1% 2% 7% 5% 10% 7% 42% 31% 99% 91% 93% 90% 98% 91% 57% 68% Other Latino African American Crenshaw Dorsey Fremont Jefferson Jordan Locke Manual Arts Washington Prep 22

South Central Los Angeles High School School Demography, Demographics 2008-09 School Year 2004-2005 School Year 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 30% 42% 47% 90% 90% 77% 67% 81% 68% 57% 52% 9% 9% 22% 31% 18% Other Latino African American Crenshaw Dorsey Fremont Jefferson Jordan Locke Manual Arts Washington Prep A CRITICAL ALLIANCE 23

24

California and Select Counties: Dependency Ratio by Projected Year Dependency Ratio 84 82 80 78 76 74 72 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 Fresno County Los Angeles County Inland Valley San Diego County Ventura County California Dependency Ratio is the percent of those above the age of 64 and below the age of 18 as a share of the working age population 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Notes: THE GAP MATTERS 250 Demographics and State Capital Spending Adjusted for Income Per capita state spending capital outlays adjusted for per capita income (100 = average of U.S. states) 200 150 100 50 0 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% percent age/ethnic difference 25

THE GAP MATTERS 45% Income Adjusted Per Pupil Spending on Public Schools & the Generation Gap by State 2007-2008 Per Pupil Spending / Per Capita Income 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% VT WV ME NH NY AK RI NJ PA WY DE HI OH WI MTMI SC LA NM GA KY ALMAAR MD IA IN ND MS MO OR KS NE MN VA CT IL SD FL DC NC TN CA OK ID CO WA AZ UT TX NV 15% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Difference in % non-hispanic white between the old (>65) and the young (<18) Source: Policylink/PERE analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) Current Population Survey (CPS) March Supplement. THE CHALLENGE OF INEQUALITY 26

$35 Changing Returns to Education in California, 1979 2009 $30 $25 $20 Real wage earned at various education points note that the return has increased for college grads such that the wage premium was about 100 percent in 1979 and is now nearly 200 percent in 2009 $15 1979 2009 $10 $5 $0 < high school high school only some college, no degree AA or equivalent BA or better WE USED TO BE OPPORTUNITY-RICH... 0.52 Gini Index by State (2007-2009) 0.50 0.48 Once considered a land of opportunity, California is now one of the most unequal states in the U.S. 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.40 Alaska Utah New Hampshire Hawaii Iowa Wisconsin Wyoming Vermont Idaho Nebraska Nevada Indiana Maine South Dakota Delaware Minnesota Washington Montana Maryland Kansas Oregon North Dakota Ohio Missouri Michigan Arizona Colorado West Virginia Virginia Rhode Island Pennsylvania Oklahoma New Mexico Arkansas South Carolina North Carolina New Jersey Kentucky Massachusetts Illinois Georgia Alabama Tennessee California Florida Texas Mississippi Louisiana Connecticut New York Note: The Gini coefficient is a measure of income inequality. A zero coefficient implies that all households in a state have exactly the same amount of wealth, while a coefficient of 1.0 means a single household has all the state's income. 27

THE CONTINUING SIGNIFICANCE OF RACE Note the persistent disparities in economic fortunes AND OF NATIVITY... $90,000 California: Median Household Income by Race and Nativity (2007-2009) $80,000 $70,000 $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 Non-Hispanic White African American Latino (US born) Latino (immigrant) API (US born) API (immigrant) 28

HIT HARD BY RECESSION THE WEALTH GAP 29

MAKING CHANGE MAKING CHANGE 30

WHAT S THIS MEAN FOR COMMUNITY BUILDING? Keep pitching to the coming California Understand that this is an aspirational not an angry constituency Keep our eyes on economic growth as well as fairness Understand the central task: bridging generations and geographies Build movements, not just organizations WHAT S THIS MEAN FOR LEADERSHIP? Understand that equity and inclusion are no longer luxuries but imperatives for economic and social sustainability Understand the need for policy packages, unexpected alliances, and new collaborations Understand that collaboration and conflict can go together 31

LEADING THROUGH THE DIVIDE PERE S ARC OF RESEARCH Visit us at: http://dornsife.usc.edu/pere 32