2012 Three Year Estimates Released !

Each year, the Census Bureau releases three versions of the American Communities Survey (ACS). These are the 1-Year, the 3-Year, and the 5-Year ACS Estimates. These are released based on the population size of the municipality. Five year estimates are released for EVERY level of census geography (down to the block group level) as well as every municipality (think town, city, and village). Three year estimates are only released for geographies or municipalities with a MINIMUM population of 20,000 persons. So many smaller villages and towns are excluded. One year estimates are released for municipalities with a MINIMUM population of 65,000. This means they are mostly for counties and larger cities. For our region, ONLY ONEIDA COUNTY HAS SINGLE YEAR ESTIMATES AVAILABLE.

The most recent 3-Year Estimates are now a permanent part of this blog in the linked area just below the title above. A permanent link will take you to the most recent 3 year estimates post so you can always easily find this important data for both Oneida Counties !

Below are the individual links to the Demographic, Social, Economic and Housing Profiles for the 2012 Three Year ACS Estimates for Herkimer and Oneida Counties.


2012 OC ACS 3 Year Estimate Demographic Profile
2012 OC ACS 3 Year Estimate Social Profile
2012 OC ACS 3 Year Estimate Economic Profile
2012 OC ACS 3 Year Estimate Housing Profile


2012 HC ACS 3 Year Estimate Demographic Profile
2012 HC ACS 3 Year Estimate Social Profile
2012 HC ACS 3 Year Estimate Economic Profile
2012 HC ACS 3 Year Estimate Housing Profile

Driving Boom or Bust: The Decline of Annual Driving Miles Per Capita

According to a report recently released by USPIRG.com, after sixty years of almost constant increases in the annual number of miles Americans drive, Americans have decreased their driving per-capita for eight years in a row. Since 2004, driving miles per person are down especially sharply among Millennials, America’s largest generation that will increasingly dominate national transportation trends.

 

Some skeptics have suggested that the apparent end of the Driving Boom might be just a temporary hiccup in the trend toward more driving for Americans. By the time Americans took notice of the decline in driving, the economy was in deep recession. For some, the culprit behind this decline was the poor economy of the last several years.

So the question became, would economic growth bring back rapid increases in driving?

This study finds that declining rates of driving do not correspond with how badly states suffered economically in recent years. On the contrary:

• Among the 23 states in which driving miles per person declined faster than the national average, only six saw unemployment increase faster than the nation as a whole.
• Among the 10 states with the largest declines in driving per person, only two rank among the ten with largest increases in unemployment.
• Among the 23 states where driving declined faster than the national average, only 11 saw faster-than-average declines in the employed share of their working-age population.
• Among the 10 states with the greatest reductions in the employed share of population, only two were also among the ten states with the largest reductions of driving (Georgia and the District of Columbia)

Click to Enlarge

Their conclusion then? In the view of USPIRG researchers, the evidence suggests that the nation’s per capita decline in driving cannot be dismissed as a temporary side effect of the recession. While certainly a contributing factor and an economic rebound could be expected to have some upward lift on driving, the recession does not appear to be the prime cause of the fall off in driving over the past eight years. Nor is it clear that future economic growth would lead to a resumption of the postwar Driving Boom. Policy makers can stop wondering whether American driving trends are changing. They should focus carefully on these trends, and start adapting policies to match them.

OH SNAP! Part Deux: Looking Back on a Decade of SNAP Data

My most recent post on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provided some data on SNAP, or Food Stamp Program, looking at how it has changed over the last 40 years. Below is a chart that shows SNAP Data for each NYS county over the last decade (2000 to 2010). It includes changes in the annual number of participants as well as changes in the total amount of funding coming to the SNAP recipients in each county. As you can see, the program dollars have grown considerably over the first decade of this century, as has the number of people participating in the program. Click on the table to enlarge it !

Click to Enlarge

NYS Counties SNAP (Food Stamps) Historical Benefits 1970-2010

With cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP or Food Stamp Program) taking place this past week, I thought it would be a good thing to provide some insight into how large the program is in New York State counties.

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities  the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) increased SNAP benefits across the board as a way of delivering high “bang-for-the-buck” economic stimulus and easing hardship in response to the economic downturn.  ARRA increased SNAP maximum monthly benefits by 13.6 percent beginning in April 2009.

ARRA provided that SNAP benefit levels would continue at the new higher amount until the program’s regular annual inflation adjustments to the maximum SNAP benefit exceeded those set by ARRA.  The maximum SNAP benefit levels for each household size, which are set each October 1, are equal to the cost of the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) from the preceding June scaled to each household size.  The TFP is the cost of U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) food plan for a family of four to purchase and prepare a bare-bones diet at home.  At the time ARRA was enacted, food price inflation was expected to be high and the TFP cost was expected to exceed the ARRA level in fiscal year 2014.  Food price inflation, however, turned out to be lower than expected over the 2009 to 2013 period, resulting in the pushing out of the date that the TFP was expected to exceed the ARRA level.

In August 2010, Congress passed and the President signed P.L. 111-226, which accelerated the sunset of the ARRA benefit increase to April 2014 and used the estimated savings for state fiscal relief through additional federal funding for school districts to maintain teachers’ jobs and maintaining a higher federal match for Medicaid costs.  Four months later, the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act (P.L. 111-296), which reauthorized Child Nutrition programs, further accelerated the sunset date of ARRA to October 31, 2013, to offset the cost of the legislation.  As a result, beginning on November 1, 2013, SNAP benefit levels will be based on the cost of the June 2013 TFP, which is lower than the ARRA levels.

The impact of this change will be seen as the country heads forward. In the meantime here are annual data for1970, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2010 on how much program funding was provided to the total recipients in each county in New York State. This data comes from the USDA website on SNAP .

Veterans of Herkimer and Oneida County

Veterans Day originated as "Armistice Day" on Nov. 11, 1919, the first anniversary of the end of World War I. Congress passed a resolution in 1926 for an annual observance, and Nov. 11 became a national holiday beginning in 1938. President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed legislation in 1954 to change the name to Veterans Day as a way to honor those who served in all American wars.


According to this release from the US Census Bureau:

There were 21.2 million military veterans in the United States in 2012.

• Of those, 1.6 million were females.
• About 11.3% of 2012 veterans were black. Additionally, 5.7 percent were Hispanic; 1.3 percent were Asian; 0.8 percent were American Indian or Alaska Native; 0.2 percent were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; and 79.6 percent were non-Hispanic white.
• There were 9.6 million veterans age 65 and older in 2012. At the other end of the age spectrum, 1.8 million were younger than 35.
• Vietnam-era veterans numbered 7.4 million in 2012. Moreover, there were 5.4 million who served during the Gulf Wars (representing service from August 1990 to present); 1.6 million who served in World War II (1941-1945); 2.3 million who served in the Korean War (1950-1953); and 5.3 million who served in peacetime only.
• The number of veterans that served during World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam era, totaled about 50,000.
• Three states were home to more than a million veterans in 2012: California (1.9 million), Texas (1.6 million) and Florida (1.6 million).
• The annual median income of veterans in 2012 was $36,264, compared with $26,278 for the population as a whole
• There were nearly 9 million veterans aged 18 to 64 in the labor force in 2012.
• About 3.6 million veterans had a service-connected disability rating in 2012. Of this number, 881,981 had a rating of 70 percent or higher. A "service-connected" disability is one that was a result of a disease or injury incurred or aggravated during active military service. Severity of one's disability is scaled from 0 to 100 percent, and eligibility for compensation depends on one's rating.

Below is a table showing a range of data about our region's veterans.

Click To Enlarge