specific numbers for danbury, because, again, these things, these numbers change daily, and i have facilities, so i don't have the exact numbers for every one of them. >> well, i would appreciate you following up and giving me that answer. do you think you can do it in the next couple of days? >> yes. >> thank you. i have the same question. what percentage of the inmates at danbury have been actually vaccinated? >> again, senator, i don't have the exact number or i can't find it in my notes. the numbers i will say, though, are on public website. they change daily. we updated daily at 3:00 p.m. both those numbers -- >> i'm not asking you to give me that number as of this minute or maybe even as of this day. but my understanding is that it's less than 50% at this

moment. in fact, more like in the low 40's. >> the acceptance rate in general is about 51% for staff. >> you can watch the rest of this on our website. we will take you to a news conference with the census bureau on the 2020 census results. >> some things have changed since we released the results last february. many households learned about the 2020 census online, completed the questionnaire online. today, we come together online to share the results. one thing has not changed. the commitment to protecting the privacy of those who responded to the census and our commitment to provide information to help shape our future.

we will have a brief look back at the 2020 census and then, population results. we will take questions from credentialed media. welcome, madam secretary. >> i am thrilled to join you. the census plays a vital role in our democracy and i am proud of the work census bureau has done to complete the census. it is a wonderful witness of the work that is coming to fruition. i want to thank staff of the census bureau. without you, today would not have been possible. 2020 presented unprecedented challenges, the pandemic, wildfires, the most active hurricane season on record and civil unrest. the census bureau had to adapt operations to confront these

challenges. the civil servants of the census bureau with the assistance of state and local governments and community groups managed to overcome these hurdles and conduct a complete and accurate census count. today, we express our gratitude to you and let you know how proud we are of your work. i want to thank the american people for their participation in the census. the census bureau has worked hard over the last year. a complete and accurate count would not have been possible without those who took the few minutes to respond. to those that responded, thank you for participating in democracy. i know firsthand how critical data is for our community. we know it is used to determine how many representatives each

state has in congress. state and local officials, federal officials, nonprofits use census data to make decisions that have direct impact on our lives. we use it to decide how many teachers we need, how much funding for public housing, where to locate a business or health clinic, where to build new roads. we use the data to make sure the economy is working for everyone. data is vital and we are lucky to have the best and brightest statisticians who have worked tirelessly this past decade. i trust these at experts -- i trust these experts. i had the privilege of transmitting the counts for each state to the president. these counts determine the apportionment of seats in the u.s. house of representatives.

president biden will deliver the count and results to congress as required by law. our work is not over yet. we look forward to delivering the redistricting data no later than september 30. thank you for having me today and congratulations on completing another census. >> thank you. this is a historic moment that happens once every 10 years. it is my honor to represent the hard-working staff who spent countless hours to ensure everyone was counted, especially during the covid-19 pandemic. i want to thank everyone who responded during these times. when the first census was conducted in 1790, congress

expected about 2 million people to be living in the country. when they results came back, the population makes deeded -- the population exceeded over 3.9 million. they had to add on to independence hall to house the new lawmakers. it was a critical step to build the foundation of our democracy. it continues to be a cornerstone of our growing nation. our nation has taken the census every 10 years as directed by our constitution. the census is a massive operation that takes years to plan and it takes a community to see it come to fruition. we had the support of hundreds of thousands of national and local partners and we had the help of our respondents, who spent a few minutes completing

the form. the count began in january 2020 in an alaskan village. we counted the first person in the 2020 census there. march 12, 2020, invitations to respond to the census began to arrive in mailboxes across the country. we knew we needed to adapt. we adapted operations to protect health and safety of staff and public. we adjusted schedules to ensure high-quality statistics. later, we adapted to hurricanes and wildfires. through this, we remain flexible and practical and persistent so we can conduct the 2020 census count. we were pleased to see how two thirds of the nation completed the census on their own. trying to reach as many as possible, we extended the campaign and developed new ads

reflecting life during the pandemic. we advertised on pizza boxes instead of basketball games. we expanded from 13 non-english languages to 46 languages to assist in reaching undercounted populations. we mailed reminders to respond, households in low responding areas, and worked with colleges and universities to ensure their students were counted. we worked to get more people to respond, especially in historically undercounted areas. census takers have a hard job. trying to count people during a pandemic made it more challenging. in order to count the remaining households, our census takers went out to those addresses equipped with masks and iphones

and collected responses from households or from knowledgeable neighbors. when we could not get a response, we were able to use information households already provided, such as through past responses, tax returns, or other government records. we appreciate the public's patience as we took the appropriate amount of time to ensure the accuracy and quality of the count. let's get to the results you have been waiting for. the 2020 census took a snapshot of all people living in the united states on april 1, 2020. the results are in. according to the census, the number of people living in the united states was 300 31,000,004 hundred 49,281 -- 331,449,281.

this growth rate is lower than the previous growth rate of 9.7% between the 2000 and 2010 census is. the growth rate is the second slowest in u.s. history. the 7.4 percent increase in population this decade was slightly more than the 7.3% increase between 1930 and 1940. the south grew the fastest, with a 10.2 percent increase in population, followed by the west. the northeast grew faster this decade than between 2000 and 2010 while the other three regions grew slower this decade than the last. we see large variations in population sizes. the largest resident population

was california with over 39 million people. the state with the smallest population was wyoming, with 506,000 people. the 10 most populous -- 576,000 people. the 10 least populist states had between 10 million and -- between .5 million and 1.4 million. three states lost population. west virginia having the largest rate of decrease at 3.2%. the district of columbia grew.

puerto rico's population decreased. let's get to the apportionment results. the purpose of the census is congressional apportionment, the process of distributing seats in the u.s. house of representatives amongst the states every year in a way that is proportional to the population. the method of equal proportions will be used to assign house seats to the states. while it does not require the census bureau to calculate the number of seats each state will get, we do it as a courtesy to the president. the 2020 census apportionment population includes the number of people living in the 50

states plus the overseas population, which is a count of federal employees living overseas and dependence living with them -- and dependents living with them who are allocated to a home state. since 1940, the trend has been an increase in the number of house seats in the south and west and a loss of seats for the north and midwest. there has been a combined shift of 84 seats to the south and west. the effect of the 2020 population counts was a shift of seven seats among 13 states, which is the smallest number shifting in any decade since the current method of calculating apportionment was adopted in 1941. six states will gain seats. texas will gain two.

colorado, florida, montana, north carolina, and oregon will gain one seat. seven states will lose one seat in the house. california, illinois, michigan, new york, ohio, pennsylvania, and west virginia. the number of seats for the remaining 37 states will not change. the states that will have the most representatives in congress are california with 52 seats. texas with 38 seats. florida with 28 seats. new york with 26 seats. these states are the most populous in the u.s., each having more than 20 million people. those states will hold about one third of the total seats in the house of representatives. each of the six least populist states will have less than one million people and will have only one seat.

after the first apportionment incurred based on the 1790 census, each member of the house represented roughly 34,000 people. now, the average population size based on the 2020 census will be 761,000, an increase per representative when compared to the average of 710,000 per representative based on the 2010 census. those were the first results of the 2020 census. we have taken the time we needed to produce the statistics that we in the public expects. no census is perfect, but we are confident the results meet our high data quality standards. we would not be releasing them otherwise. the census bureau is committed to sharing what we know when we know it to help the nation understand the quality of the results.

despite the challenges of the pandemic, the accuracy of these results are comparable to recent censuses. we had numerous quality checks and have conducted one of the most comprehensive reviews during data processing. later today, we will release the next set of metrics and indicators. this afternoon's release will be unprecedented. while our assessments will not change the results, they will inform and influence planning for the next census. we are looking forward to sharing more population results with you later this year, including redistricting data, statistics on age, sex, race, and ethnicity and details on the

center of population. the results for u.s. island areas will be provided in a separate release at a later date. states in the public will receive the data they need to begin redistricting. the census bureau will deliver the data kit. covid-19 related delays and prioritizing the delivering of these results today delayed our previous plan. i want to thank our hard-working staff for everything they have done to ensure the delivery of today's data. i want to thank the millions of people who completed the census on their own or provided information to our census takers. thank you. michael, back to you. >> we will begin taking

questions from credentialed media about the 2020 census population results. members of the media who registered received a phone number from our eventbrite account. when asking a question, include your name and media affiliation. operator, please provide instructions for rolling in. -- for calling in. >> if you would like to ask a question, press star one, state your name and media affiliation. >> thank you to all of the speakers. the results discussed today are available on our website. you will find many materials related [no audio]

let me introduce our census bureau matter experts. we have our acting director of the census bureau, the associate director for -- centers. and our lead technical expert for the 2020 census apportionment in the population development. >> the first line is from mike. your line is open. >> the estimate showed texas was supposed to gain three seats but

only game too. florida was supposed to gain two but only gained one. what is your theory on why these states did not get the extra seats? both have sizable hispanic populations. is there concern hispanics in the states were overlooked? >> i'm going to have ron speak to that. >> we did a thorough job, making sure we counted everybody. we saw from our population estimates that population growth has slowed. some folks, the projections might have been based on slightly higher population growth perspectives.

>> for the state of texas and for the state of florida, the 2020 census counts were below our population estimates. for texas and florida, the difference between the 2020 census count and the estimate was about 1%. they were still close. >> do we have our next caller? >> our next question comes from politico. >> thank you for taking questions. we saw a rhode island did not lose a seat.

do we have estimation on why? what is the level of confidence given everything that has happened, given the changes. >> i will pass that to our demographic experts. specifically your questions that ask about the apportionment results. >> we are confident in the data. we measure the quality in many different ways. one of the ways we measure it is to compare to our population estimates. they are based on estimates, adding births, taking out deaths, accounting for

migrations. >> thank you for that line of questioning. do we have our next caller? >> our next question comes from star tribune. >> i was wondering if someone could talk about how the seats were narrowly affected -- how it held on? in higher participation have contributed? -- could higher participation have contributed? >> our demographic expert will talk about the count. those states that lost a seat or are on the verge of gaining a seat.

>> thank you for that question. when i repeat what my colleagues said, we are confident in the quality of the data and we have worked hard to ensure the data we are using is correct. as far as how certain scenarios may have impacted the results of apportionment, we do not tend to speculate on that. we will look at the quality of the data as we move forward. >> thank you for that question. do we have our next caller? >> the st. louis post dispatch, your line is open.

>> can you tell me what the population of missouri as an the population of illinois is? >> i am going to suggest, if you do not mind, we have population -- public affairs specialists. if you can contact them, we will get you those numbers right away. >> ok. can you still hear me? >> we can. >> is it not searchable on your data portal right now? >> we are conducting a live conference and some of our estimates do not have the database at their fingertips. to expedite getting you that response, i wanted you to reach out to our public information office, if that is all right.

>> i will do that. thank you. >> thank you. operator, can we have our next caller? >> dan, pbs public broadcasting, your line is open. >> can you hear me? >> loud and clear. >> new york specifically, i am not sure if you know, is there any indication of where new york's population is going in terms of which state they are moving to? can any of you tell me how close new york was to losing a second congressional seat? >> we have information on that. i will pass that over to our demographic expert. >> thank you. >> i was going to say we do know

from our population estimate that the state of new york has experienced negative net domestic migration. more people were moving out of the state of new york over the last decade that moving in. i do not have information on which state's people were moving to, -- which states people were moving to. new york were between the 2010 census and the 2020 census by about 4.2%. >> thanks for that. >> i was going to follow-up on the last part of the question. how close new york was. if new york had 89 more people, they would have received one more seat instead of the last

state that received their last seat, the last seat went to minnesota. if you do the equation that determines how many, they would have needed 89 people. that is if you hold the population overall other states -- over all other states constant. >> if we had counted 89 people in new york state and assumed every other state was constant, we would not have lost a seat? >> correct. >> thanks.

>> can you hear us? >> this is jim jacobs. i want to be more california centric. can you talk about that shifting demographics in the state of california, inflow versus outflow, how close were we to losing a potential second seat, or how close were we to not losing one seat, if that makes sense. >> i will turn that back over to our demo experts.

>> with the state of california, what i can tell you is that from our population estimates program, over the last decade, california has experienced natural increase. there were more people moving out of california and then into california. -- than into california. >> do we have our next caller? i'm sorry, go ahead. >> he asked about how close california was. i can tell you there are 430

five seats. if you continue down the rankings, california was at number 441. that is about six steps down from gaining the next seats. >> thank you. do we have our next caller? >> 40/29 news, your line is open. >> i am not sure if you can answer the specifics. i am calling about arkansas and oklahoma, states in the south, states next to texas who have seen an increase in population. have you seen data about growth in those states, why they haven't received congressional seats and why they haven't lost any either?

>> i will pass this over to our demographic experts. >> in terms of why a state has not gained or lost a seat, it depends on the population distribution for any given --. if the population in relation to the other states hasn't changed, they will not gain or lose a seat. >> thank you for that. do we have our next caller? >> politico, your line is open. >> can you talk about the in migration, outmigration of illinois and how dose was it to losing a second seat? will information be released a

little earlier than september? >> we will take this back to our demographic experts for a little explanation. be mindful of the fact that the set of data released today is only down to the state level as far as geography. there will be more to come and more details to come as we disseminate the results. >> illinois he was one of the three states that lost population over the last decade. we know from our population estimates program, the state of illinois had negative net migration.

>> as far as how close they were to losing another seat, i do not have that on me. when i look at the states below, illinois is not among them. they were not close to getting to losing a seat, if that makes sense. >> do we have our next caller? >> i want to follow-up with my colleagues from missouri and the illinois playbook. could you make it clearer -- i

was reading other states had such big games that even if we held steady, we might have lost a seat. was it really our loss or was it because other seats gained or -- gained more that we lost a seat? >> we cannot speculate. it is about the distribution overall. what you are stating could be true, but without digging into it more deeply, we would not know the reason why one state loses or gains. the calculation is done as a whole on all the states together and how they are urgently related. theoretically, if certain states gained a lot more than other states, proportionally, they would more likely --.

>> thank you. do we have our next caller? >> roxanne with wabe news. >> thank you. can you hear me? >> loud and clear. >> how far off was georgia in gaining or losing a seat? >> thank you for that question. we will have our demo experts answering that question. georgia gaining or losing a seat. >> i don't know how close they were above the number seat as to whether they might have lost or not gained one, but when we go below the number 435 to see the

states that almost received another state, -- that almost received another seat, they are not on that list of the next 10 states. they were not close to receiving more than they got. >> thank you for that. do we have our next caller? >> indiana gazette, your line is open. >> it is indiana, pennsylvania. i don't know what specifics you have further key states. did pennsylvania again population but not enough to offset the loss of a seat? >> for all of the callers who are calling about specifics in relationship to totals of

population change and things of that nature, after the news conference, we will be posting our news release that will assist you in finding those variables. if you don't get to ask your question during today's news conference, we are more than happy to help you get those answers. >> for pennsylvania, it was 2.4% increase between 2010 and 2020 census. was there more to the question?

i cannot remember. >> is the caller still there? i think that addresses it. thank you for that. we have our next caller? >> mississippi broadcasting, your line is open. >> which states -- i heard you say the south saw the largest growth in population. which state saw the largest growth in which state saw the lowest rates? >> we will take that data question back to our demo experts to see if they have that information at their fingertips. >> i do not have the list of the states that have the largest

increase, but i have the top five states that had the largest percent increase and that was utah, idaho, texas, north dakota and nevada. they had the largest percent increase between 2010 and 2020. >> thank you. operator, do we have our next caller? >> mark, your line is open. >> want to talk about michigan losing one seat in the u.s. house. how close were they to losing to seats and talk about the -- to losing two seats and talk about what led to losing one seat. >> i do not have what is above

the 430 five, but the next 10 states in the ranking that just missed getting another seat, michigan is number 444, which means they could have been closer to not losing a seat. i want to mention that for all of these questions about how close a state was and if you want to see what i am talking about, i don't have in front of me that are above 435, on the webpage, there is a priority values table that should be posted and that will give you the ranking order of all of the seats and the states that just missed below it. >> thank you. it is important for people to be able to see themselves in the

data. >> columbus, ohio experiences significant growth. hound nitty-gritty can you get in terms of where ohio is lagging in population growth -- how nitty-gritty can you get an terms of where ohio is lagging in population growth? >> all of the reporters and media outlets covering the release, the release takes us down to the state level. we talk about populations and values and count.

there is more to come with the 2020 census in the future when we get below the state level, which will give you insights into some of actions you are asking. i will turn it over to demo and allow them to give you information. >> what we can tell you is about ohio's growth as a state. the population grew by 2.3% over the last decade. once we have our next data release, we will be able to look more within the state and look at different areas of growth and see how it developed and make those comparisons at that time. >> ohio matches up with the rest of the midwest? >> we showed information earlier today that shows that the midwest and the northeast, their

growth overall was 3% to 4% over the last decade, in comparison to the south and west where we saw nine point 2% and 10.2% -- 9.2% and 10.2% growth. >> hopefully you can hear me. my colleague in michigan knocked out some of the questions i was curious about. the coronavirus states, the ones impacted more severely, did that lead to a disproportional impact on the ability to accurately record counts in those states? michigan has had a significant struggle with that. >> we can give you a little bit about the data.

if possible, i would like to allow al to give us information about the operation, in particular the impacts due to the pandemic. >> we worked very hard to coordinate data from the cdc, firms date and local governments. we sent people out into the field. we sent them out at a time when the local community would tolerate or be more open to door-to-door enumeration. we found that by delaying some field operations, we were able to go into the field and successfully collect data in areas that have high covert impacts early in the covert outbreak and we feel confident we did a good job of collecting data in spite of the covid-19

outbreak. >> thank you, now. -- thank you, al. do we have our next caller? >> rachel, nbc 26, your line is open. >> thank you for taking questions. i has emailed that email to get data. is there anything wisconsin-specific you can share? just curious if there is any insight you could share about wisconsin. >> let's check in with demo and see what light we can shed on the midwest. >> wisconsin had a 3.6% increase in population between 2010 and

2020, which is in line with the midwest as a whole. do you want to add anything? >> i don't think we have additional data at our fingertips at this moment for wisconsin. >> do we have our next caller? >> olivia winslow, your line is open. >> thank you for taking my call. i got the numbers for the pio office. i wanted the name of the demographer who made the statement. i am in new york. i am concerned, interested in the new york result. new york had 89, just 89 more

people, it would have not lost a congressional seat? confirm that please and tell me the name of the person who said it. >> that was kristen. if you go to our press kit, you will see her name and title. >> 89 people? that 1% differential you were talking about, 89 people would be much less than that. wow. that is a big loss for just 89 people. does anybody want to comment on that? >> i can confirm the number when you calculated is 89. however, it is part of the standard of the method of equal proportions. it depends on the overall proportions of all the states

within the nation. it is not unusual for there to be a small margin like that. in 1970, utah only needed 231 people to move up from 436 to 435. >> thank you for that. do you have our next caller? >> columbia dispatch, your line is open. >> can you hear me? >> loud and clear. >> i wanted to ask about ohio. i know you spoke with a reporter about new york. where did ohio sit on that chart. new york was just below the line, was ohio 6000 people off or closer to we barely kept from

losing two seats, if that makes sense. >> it does make sense. let me toss this over to kristin. we will work on getting that for you from our pio call-in number if she does not. >> ohio was next in line behind new york. they were at ranking 437. they were close, as well, to receiving one more seat than they did. >> thanks for that. >> howard fisher, your line is open. >> thank you. i appreciate you taking calls. a lot of us are waiting for some of the data to be posted. we need to be parochial.

we did not gain an anticipated seat. how off or we in terms of having that whatever it was to get a 10th seat? >> i will let demo speak to that line of questioning about your state. >> for arizona, they were ranking 440 as far as the states that were just below the cut off to receiving one more seat. i do not have the number in front of me as far as how much they would need. >> we were not as close as ohio and new york. it is not even a question that we were just below the line.

we just did not get there. >> correct. >> great. when we get this posted -- i keep hitting refresh on the kit -- we will have the specifics in terms of all of that state-by-state? >> there is a table called priority values for the 2020 census. it will be closer to the bottom of the 2020 census apportionment results which should be live soon and you should be able to get to it from the press kit webpage. that will show you all of the rankings. the rankings from seat 51 to about 460. >> and to the extent that somebody in the office will get

that posted, you might end up avoiding a lot of these questions. thank you. >> operator, do we have our next caller? >> michelle, your line is open. >> i have a few questions. >> are you there? are you there, michelle? >> looks like she may have gotten disconnected. >> ok. next caller please. >> the next question comes from

univision. your line is open. >> can you hear me? >> loud and clear. >> there was an increase in texas population. do we know if the hispanic population increased too? >> i will let demo shed some light on that data for the population of texas. >> at this point, we have processed population totals and we are beginning a process of processing the characteristics data collected in the 2020 census, data on race, hispanic origin, age and sex. at this point in time, we do not have final numbers to share about the hispanic population at

this time. >> thank you for that question and response. we are going to take our last question. >> our last question comes from frank lockwood. your line is open. >> i was wondering if you could talk about what the south is seeing as far as immigration, live births, and also, you have a chart that shows priority values for the 2020 census apportionment, there are three arkansas places on there. can you explain how the priority value system works? >> thank you for that line of questioning about priority values. >> i think it is kristin that is the expert.

>> i can answer the part about the priority values. the priority values, the way the map works is we calculate numbers, priority values, based on each states population and the number of potential seats each state could receive and we calculate as many of those could potentially be received up to 70. we rank all of those values and take number 51 through 435 and assigned to each state. any state that had a number below that for 35 did not get another seat. -- below that 435 did not get

another seat. you can read more about this in the blogs we put out today about how we calculate apportionment. >> in terms of the population growth in the south, there are different reasons for the growth. i don't have aggregated statistics just for the south. there are states like texas and florida that are experiencing natural increase. these types of states are also experiencing a lot of net migration via people moving internationally into those states or people moving domestically into those states. there are more moving into the state than people moving out of the state. >> thank you to all of the speakers.

all of the results are available on our website at census.gov. you will find many materials related to the results including a blog, news release and links. in about two hours, we will release the next set of metrics through an interactive dashboard along with a blog. additional quality indicators will be available. please visit census.gov to access information. members of the media, please contact pio@census.gov or call for additional questions. a live presentation in spanish will follow the news conference. media interested in spanish-language soundbites should remain on this livestream. thank you for joining us. we are proud to bring you the first results of the 2020 census. we will take a break before our

spanish-language presentation. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> president biden will give his first address to a joint session of congress wednesday night. coverage begins at 8:00 p.m. eastern with the address at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, online, or listen live on the c-span radio app the. . go to c-span.org for the federal response to the coronavirus pandemic. if you miss coverage, it is easy to find the information. go to c-span.org/coronavirus. ♪

>> the supreme court heard oral argument in americans for prosperity foundation versus rodriguez, a consolidated case challenging the constitutionality of california's law requiring charitable nonprofits to disclose their big donors names to the attorney general for oversight purposes. the justices have through june, 2021, to decide whether this law violates the right to free association. this oral argument is about one hour and 45 minutes.

the honorable, are admonished to give their attention for the court is now sitting. >> we will hear argument first this morning and case 19 251, americans for prosperity foundation versus bonta and the consolidated case. mr. schafer. mr. schafer: thank you, mr. chief justice, and may it please the court? we are here because of a demand to disclose nationwide, cast in profound nationwide chill and it does so for no good reason.