Colorado

Summary Demographic State Data (and Source)
Population (2009 CB estimate):	5,024,748
Population (2000 Census):	4,301,261
Foreign-Born Population (2009 CB est.):	486,615
Foreign-Born Population (2000 Census):	369,903
Share Foreign-Born (2009):	9.7%
Share Foreign-Born (2000 FAIR est.):	8.6%
Naturalized U.S. Citizens (2009 CB est.):	160,965
Share Naturalized (2009):	33.1%
Legal Immigrant Admission (DHS 2000-2009):	115,718
Refugee Admission (HHS 2000-2009):	67,735
Illegal Alien Population (2010 FAIR est.):	195,000
Cost of Illegal Aliens (2010 FAIR)	$1,450,500,000
Projected 2050 Population (2006 FAIR)	8,920,000

Colorado : Extended Immigration Data

STATE POPULATION

Using the American Community Survey (ACS), the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that in July 2008 Colorado’s population had increased to 5,024,748 residents. That was an annual average increase of about 77,800 residents since 2000. That is a rate of increase of about 1.8 percent per year compared to a national annual rate of 1.0 percent.

The 2000 Census found 4,301,261 persons resident in Colorado. This was an increase of 779,398 persons above the 1990 Census. The rate of increase was 1.6 percent per year compared to a national rate of increase of 1.2 percent.

The 2000 population was about 280,000 more persons than the Census Bureau had expected to find in the state in 2000 when it issued its state population projections in 1996. The significance of this is that the Census Bureau concluded that much of the shortfall in its population estimates during the 1990s was due to an underestimation of the illegal alien population.

Between the 1980 and 1990 Censuses, the population of Colorado grew at an annual rate of 1.4 percent (from 2,889,735 to 3,294,394 residents). The comparable national rate of increase was 1.0 percent.

FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION

Based on the ACS, the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that the foreign-born population of Colorado was 486,615 persons in 2009. This meant a foreign-born population share of nearly one in every ten (9.7%) residents.

NET INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION (NIM)

Based on the CPS, the Census Bureau estimated that between the 2000 Census and July 2009 the state’s population increased by about 144,860 residents from net international migration (more foreign-born arriving than leaving). That was an annual average increase of about 15,575 residents, i.e., nearly one-fifth (17.9%) of the total annual increase (not including the children born to the immigrants after their arrival in the United States).

FOREIGN-BORN CHANGE

The amount of change since the 2000 Census recorded in the 2009 ACS was an increase of about 116,710 foreign-born residents. This indicates an average annual rate of increase in the foreign-born population of about 12,550 residents, which is about one-sixth (16.1%) of the state’s annual average population increase. Since 2000, the foreign-born population has increased by 31.6 percent compared to a 15.4 percent increase in the native-born population. The annual rate of increase from 2000-2009 was 3.1 percent compared to a national rate of 2.4 percent.

Immigration also contributes to population growth through the children born to immigrants in this country. Nationally the share of births to the foreign-born is about double their share of the population. A 19.4 percent share of the state’s current births is large enough to account for about 13,350 births a year. Combining the increase in the foreign-born population and estimated immigrant births suggests that immigration may account for more than 25,900 persons added to the state’s population annually, i.e., about one-third (33.3%) of the state’s overall population increase.

The 2000 Census found that more than half (54.4%) of Colorado's foreign-born population had arrived in the state since 1990. This was much higher than the national average (43.7%). The 2009 ACS data estimate that nearly half (47.6%) of the state’s foreign-born population has arrived since 2000. That is much higher than the 31.6 percent share of new arrivals nationally.

During the 90s, the increase in the foreign-born population accounted directly for 22.6 percent of the state's overall population increase over that decade. During that decade the annual average rate of increase in the foreign-born population was 10 percent compared to a national rate of 4.6 percent.

FOREIGN-BORN CHARACTERISTICS

An indicator of the change in the immigrant population is data on the share of the population of over 5-year olds that speaks a language other than English at home. Between 1990 and 2000 the share of non-English speakers at home in Colorado increased by nearly one-half, from 10.5 percent to 15.1 percent. Less than half (44.3%) of those who said they spoke a language other than English at home in 2000 also said they spoke English less than very well.

The 2009 ACS estimate put the share of the over 5 population speaking other than English at home at 16.7 percent. Nearly three-fourths (71.2%) were Spanish speakers, and more than three-fourths (76.6%) of those who spoke English less than very well were also Spanish speakers.

Speakers of Foreign Languages (at home in Colorado in the 2000 Census)
Spanish	421,670
German	30,815
French	17,940
Vietnamese	12,500
Korean	12,045
Russian	10,735
Chinese	9,660
Japanese	6,605
Italian	5,705
Polish	5,065
(Source: Census Bureau report: Language Spoken at Home for the Population 5 Years and Over, April 2004)

The chart above shows the foreign-born population increasing by 31.6 percent since 2000 and the share of that population from Latin America and the Caribbean increasing by 37.2 percent. That region’s share of the state’s immigrant population rose from 55.6 percent in 2000 to 58 percent in 2009.

NATURALIZATION

Data from the 2009 ACS indicate that 160,965 residents or 33.1 percent, of the foreign-born population in Colorado were U.S. citizens, compared to 116,875 residents, or 31.6 percent, in 2000.

Nationally, 40.3 percent of the foreign-born population was citizens in 2000, and 43.7 percent in 2009.

Limited English Proficient Students

Data are not available nationally on immigrant students (either legally or illegally resident in the United States) who are enrolled in primary and secondary schools (K-12). However, many of these students are enrolled in Limited English Proficiency/English Language Learning (LEP/ELL) instruction programs. Many may be U.S.-born, but the majority of these students may be assumed to be either immigrants or the children of immigrants, with the exception being areas with Native Americans who speak a native language other than English.

In Colorado, overall K-12 enrollment in 2008 (801,867) was 13.2 percent above enrollment in 2000. By contrast, LEP enrollment (82,347) was 37.2 percent higher. The share of LEP enrollment rose from 8.5 percent to 10.3 percent.

Refugees

Colorado has received 67,735 refugees over the most recent ten fiscal years (FY'00-'09) including 1,735 persons in FY’09.

FOREIGN STUDENTS

The 2009/10 annual report of the Institute of International Education (IIE) identifies the number of foreign students enrolled in Colorado schools as 4,574 at the following institutions:

U. of Colorado-Boulder (1,360), Colorado S.U-Ft. Collins (1,127), U. of Denver (1,081), U. of Colorado-Denver (734), U. No. Colorado (272), other institution 2,406. These institutions account for about two-thirds (66%) of all foreign students enrolled in the state.

For information on foreign student issues see: Foreign Students in the United States.

ILLEGAL ALIENS

FAIR Estimate - FAIR’s estimate of the state’s illegal alien population as of 2010 is about 195,000 persons. This is part of an overall estimate of the U.S. illegal alien population of about 12 million persons.

INS/DHS Estimate - The INS (now dissolved into the Dept. of Homeland Security) estimated that the illegal population in Colorado was 144,000 as of January 2000. This number nearly 100,000 higher than the INS' 1996 estimate.

Other Estimates - The Pew Hispanic Center estimated the illegal alien population of the state at 180,000 as of 2010.

COSTS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS

FAIR’s 2010 fiscal cost study, “The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers” estimated the following cost outlays and tax receipts:

Colorado Fiscal Costs In 2009
Due to Illegal Aliens ($M)		(Pct.)
K-12 educ.	$805.3	55.5%
LEP educ.	$161.9	11.2%
Medicaid	$198.6	13.7%
SCHIP	$53.0	3.7%
Justice	$146.9	10.1%
Welfare+	$30.4	2.1%
General	$54.4	3.8%
Total	$1,450.5
Tax Receipts	$50.6
Net Cost	$1,399.9

Source: “The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers,” FAIR 2010.

Population Projection

We projected Colorado’s population in 2050 likely would be between 8.66 million and 8.92 million depending on what happens with immigration policy. See “Projecting the U.S. Population to 2050: Four Immigration Scenarios,” FAIR 2006.

Colorado : Immigrant Admissions

Colorado Immigrant Admissions by Fiscal Year
2000	8,216
2001	12,494
2002	12,060
2003	10,713
2004	10,923
2005	11,977
2006	12,714
2007	11,039
2008	11,039
2009	12,841
Total	115,718

Recent immigrant admissions are at 715 percent of admissions just after adoption of the current immigration system in 1965. During the 1965-'69 period, annual admissions averaged about 1,714 immigrants. During the most recent five years, admissions averaged about 12,260 persons.

The charts below show recent immigrant admissions and the cumulative immigrant admissions data since 1965. The number of annual admissions has ranged from 1,499 in FY'69 to 13,782 in FY'91 (due to the amnesty in 1986). The cumulative total of admissions to Colorado between fiscal years 1965 and 2009 was about 282,200 immigrants.

The data for fiscal years 1989-91 were artificially raised slightly by the inclusion of former illegal aliens who were amnestied in 1986. According to INS data (1991) the number of amnesty applicants from Colorado was 22,459 (10,384 pre-1982 residents and 12,075 agricultural workers).

The data for FY'95, FY'97-'99 and FY'03 were artificially low because the government did not issue green cards to all the eligible applicants for adjustment of status who were already in the United States. In those four years, new immigration could have registered as much as 30 percent higher, if the government had kept up with its workload.

Beginning with FY'01, the INS began to increase admissions as a result of reducing the size of the backlog of Section 245(i) adjustment of status cases, i.e., amnesty, for illegal aliens.

INS DATA BY NATIONALITY: FY'96 - FY'05

The table below furnishes INS data on the immigrants who have been admitted for residence in Colorado since 1996 by nationality.

The INS data are for nationals of the countries with the largest number of immigrants admitted or adjusted to legal residence each year since 1996. The absence of data means that the total number of admissions to the United States by nationals of that country was not enough to merit detailed reporting in that year.

The nationalities may change each year, so the totals in some cases will not reflect all the immigrants of that nationality who have become legal immigrants in Louisiana during this period.

The Department of Homeland Security website is has detailed data on immigrant admissions since FY’03 by year and by country. That resource has data for all source countries. (See http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/data/dslpr.shtm).

A dash (-) indicates that the data for that year was not published for that country in the Immigration Statistical Yearbook. * China includes Hong Kong and Taiwan. The Soviet Union includes Russia and former parts of the USSR. Yugoslavia includes Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro-Serbia, Slovakia and Slovenia.

The 31 nationalities above represent nearly four-fifths (78.5%) of all immigrant settlement and adjustment in Colorado during this ten-year period. Nearly one-third (32.4%) of all new "green card" recipients during this period were Mexicans. Mexican immigrants plus those from the former Soviet Union, China and Vietnam account for more than half (50.6%) of all immigrants admitted during that period.

Colorado : Poll Data

Rasmussen Poll: Arizona Law SB 1070
July 2010

Suppose the new Arizona immigration law was being considered for your state. Would you favor or oppose passage of that law in your state?

The U.S. Justice Department has decided to challenge the legality of Arizona’s new immigration law in federal court. Do you agree or disagree with the decision to challenge the legality of Arizona’s new immigration law?

A Denver Post / 9News poll of Colorado voters conducted June 15-17, 2010 found:

61% support an immigration bill modeled on the recent Arizona law. 35% oppose such a law. 62% of Hispanics support an Arizona-style law for Colorado.

A Rasmussen Report poll of likely voters in Colorado on December 12, 2007 found:

75% oppose granting drivers' licenses to illegal aliens.
71% say that when police officers pull someone over for a traffic violation, they should routinely check to see if that person is in the country legally.
59% believe that if an illegal immigrant is discovered in this manner, they should be deported

Colorado : Immigration Impact

Environmental and Quality of Life Profile

Disappearing Open Space: Many families who moved to the area for its open space despise the current pace of development spurred by population growth, feeling that what they moved to get away from is following them.¹ The amount of developed land in Colorado increased by 746,900 acres from 1982 to 2007, growing at a pace of 35,670 acres per year over the last ten years of that period.² Colorado has the second largest growth in housing development in the nation in 2002.³

Southeast Aurora, now a dusty prairie, is rapidly developing and will grow by 80,000 people by 2025, pushing Aurora's population past Boulder's, currently the second most populous city in Colorado.⁴

Traffic: Vehicle traffic on Colorado highways increased by 76 percent between 1990 and 2008, more than double the national average of 36 percent. Unfortunately, the road system in Colorado has been unable to mitigate the consequences of increased traffic. Nearly one-third (31%) of the state's major highways are congested.⁵ According to the Colorado Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers, over 40 percent of roads are rated as having poor pavement condition.⁶ Road conditions cost Colorado drivers over $1 billion each year in additional repair and operating costs, or about $287 for each motorist.⁷

Commuters in the Denver-Aurora urban area lost 45 hours and 30 gallons of fuel due to congestion in 2007, ranking it among the most congested cities in the nation. In Colorado Springs, the typical commuter wasted 23 hours and 14 gallons of fuel. Boulder residents have also felt the effects of congestion, sitting in traffic for an extra 12 hours. Between the three areas, congestion cost Colorado commuters $1.4 billion in lost time and wasted fuel in 2007.⁸ About 14 percent of Colorado commuters had a commute of 45 minutes or longer in 2008.⁹

As the area's population increases by another one million people in the next 20 years, the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) predicts that the number of vehicle miles traveled each weekday in metro Denver will climb by 29 million miles.¹⁰ As a result, the area will have to provide at least 2,300 additional lane-miles to prevent further congestion. Yet DRCOG's long-range transportation plan plans for an increase of less than half that.¹¹

Education: Public school enrollment in Colorado increased by about 119,000 students (17 percent) between 1998 and 2008. Over the same period, the number of students per teacher decreased from 18.4 to 16.8, slightly outpacing the nationwide decrease of 1.4 students per teacher but still leaving Colorado 41st in the nation in this category.¹² By 2025, enrollment is expected to pass one million students.¹³

School overcrowding is becoming a costly issue for Colorado. The expected additional 10,000 public school students per year will mean building at least 20 new schools annually. A planning Committee reported that Douglas County, which has seen a 43 percent increase of students since 1996, will need ten new schools in the next five years to keep up with its booming population. Construction and renovation to ease such school overcrowding could cost upwards of $175 million.¹⁴

Crowded Housing: An estimated 41,412 of Colorado's housing units were classified as crowded in 2008, defined as units with more than one occupant per room. This amounted to 2.2 percent of the state's housing units. 10,300 of those were severely crowded, with at least 1.5 occupants per room.¹⁵ Following the national trend, crowded housing rates were driven upward by immigration. 24 percent of children in immigrant families live in crowded housing, compared to just 7 percent of children with native-born parents.¹⁶

Sprawl: Metro Denver has the fourth worst case of urban sprawl in the nation, according to the Fannie Mae Foundation.¹⁷ Residents are trying to fight back by organizing neighborhood groups to pool private funds and buy up land to protect it from development.¹⁸

However, such solutions are limited because even well-intentioned "smart growth" can't accommodate continual population expansion. With metro Denver's population set to add more than an additional one million people by 2020, many in the area worry that Denver is on its way to becoming the next Los Angeles.¹⁹

Sprawl will have a devastating effect on Colorado's natural resources if it remains unchecked, according to studies conducted by Colorado State University. "Colorado's rapidly growing population and the trend toward more development and sprawl will inevitably lead to more conflicts over natural resources," points out CSU biologist Rick Knight.²⁰

Water: If current growth trends continue, by 2050 the state's population will have reached 8.9 million residents, nearly double the population of 4.8 million in 2006.²¹ Colorado currently has a per-capita demand of 209 gallons of water each day. This means that in 2050, daily, public demand may exceed the 2006 level by up to 833 million gallons per day.

If current growth trends continue, by 2050 the state's population will have reached 8.9 million residents, nearly double the population of 4.8 million in 2006.²⁴ Colorado currently has a per-capita demand of 209 gallons of water each day. This means that in 2050, daily, public demand may exceed the 2006 level by up to 833 million gallons per day.

Limited sources of groundwater and a dwindling Colorado River simply cannot continue to yield adequate water if this growth continues. According to the water manager of Aurora, Peter Binney, "It is wrong to assume that cities could continue to grow without experiencing something akin to a religious awakening about the scarcity of water."²²

Adding to the state's demand-induced water woes, global climate change further aggravates the water conditions. The Colorado River largely depends on runoff from the Sierra Nevada snow pack. Climate change has caused less snow pack to be annually produced, as well as premature melting. This further jeopardizes future supplies by facilitating more evaporation, reducing the river's flows.²³

Indeed, in its current condition, the Colorado River no longer flows all the way to the sea for large portions of the year.²⁴ Lake Mead and neighboring Lake Powell, two large reservoirs which divert water from the Colorado River, have seen declining water levels. A study from the Scripp's Institution of Oceanography states that there is a 50% chance that these two reservoirs will be nothing but mud puddles in as little as 13 years.²⁵ Already, statistical models indicate that Lake Mead will never reach full capacity again.²⁶

Marine research physicist Tim Barnett and climate scientist David Pierce have concluded that collectively, human demand, in addition to natural forces such as evaporation and climate change, are creating a net deficit of nearly 1 million acre-feet of water per year from the Colorado River.²⁷

Hope for Colorado water resources, and the Colorado River Basin, which is essential to much of the Southwest, can only transpire if the demand for water is reduced to the rate at which it is naturally replenished.

Additionally, the Ogallala Aquifer is critical to farming in the center of the nation, including eastern Colorado. However, it is replenished slowly because of the relatively dry area. At least 12 billion cubic meters are being drawn from it every year. It's drying up. At the current rate, the aquifer may be dry in less than 25 years.²⁸ Limited water resources are being exacerbated by growing human consumption When the aquifer finally runs dry, the High Plains Region will be little more than desert.

Solid Waste: Colorado generates 1.12 tons of solid waste per capita.²⁹

Air Quality: Six of the eleven Colorado counties scored in the American Lung Association's 2010 assessment received an "F" for frequency of high ozone days. Denver's grade was "C."³⁰

Poverty: Colorado's immigrants are more likely to be poor than their native-born counterparts. In 2007, 21.8 percent of foreign-born households were below the poverty line, compared to 10.9 percent of native households. An additional 13.7 percent of the foreign-born and 7.5 percent of native households had incomes between 100 and 149 percent of the poverty level.³¹ 28.5 percent of children in immigrant families were poor in 2006, compared to 13.0 percent of native children.³²

Endnotes:

Susan Greene, "Colorado's New Face Front Range Catapults '90s Population Explosion," Denver Post, March 20, 2001.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, "Summary Report: 2007 National Resources Inventory."
"State Rankings by Acreage and Rate of Non-Federal Land Developed," Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture.
Burt Hubbard, "State Growing Despite Woes," Rocky Mountain News, December 21, 2002.
The Road Information Project (TRIP), "Key Facts about Colorado's Surface Transportation System and Federal Funding," May 2010.
Colorado Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers, "Resource Guide to the Colorado Infrastructure Report Card," 2008.
The Road Information Project (TRIP), "Key Facts about Colorado's Surface Transportation System and Federal Funding," May 2010.
Texas Transportation Institute, "Urban Mobility Report 2009."
American Community Survey, 2008 Estimates, Custom Data Table.
Todd Hartman, "Growth, Cars Cast Shadow Over Future Air Quality," Rocky Mountain News, July 29, 2002.
"U.S. Population 2007 Data Sheet," Population Reference Bureau.
NEA, "Rankings and Estimates," 1999 and 2009 editions.
Debra Gerald and William Hussar, "Projections of Education Statistics to 2010," National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
Hector Gutierrez, "Douglas Group Urges 10 New Schools," Rocky Mountain News, June 8, 2000.
American Community Survey, Three-Year Estimates 2006-2008. Data retrieved using ACS Custom Table tool.
Kids Count Data Center, which used 2008 American Community Survey Data.
Randy Capps, "Hardship Among Children of Immigrants: Findings from the 1999 National Survey of America's Families," Urban Institute, 2001.
Steve Raabe and Anne Colden, "Denver's Dubious Rank: No. 4 in Urban Sprawl," Denver Post, November 2, 2000.
Trent Siebert, "Town Stands Against Sprawl," Denver Post, November 29, 2002.
Sean Kelly, "CoPIRG Rips Projects as 'Dumb Growth," Denver Post, July 21, 2000.
Jack Martin and Stanley Fogel, "Projecting the U.S. Population to 2050," FAIR, March 2006.
Daniel J. Weiss, Zoe Brown, "Learning the Worth of Water." Center for American Progress. November 13, 2007.
Mark Jaffe. "Climate Change Hits the West," Denver Post. May 28, 2008.
Sandra Postel and Brian Richter, Rivers of Life: Managing Water for People and Nature.,2003.
Patty Henetz, "Utah's water forecast: Thirsty times are a-brewin'." Salt Lake Tribune, May 31, 2008.
Researchers: Colorado River System is Unsustainable," Water and Wastewater News, February 18, 2008.
Heidi Stevenson. "How Corporations Drain Our Aquifers for Profit (Part 2)." Natural News. June 11, 2008.
Jerd Smith, "Need for Water Going Nowhere But Up," Rocky Mountain News, September 10, 2002.
Report Card for America's Infrastructure 2005," American Society of Civil Engineers.
American Lung Association, "State of the Air 2010."
Migration Information Source State Data (Migration Policy Institute)
Urban Institute, Children of Immigrants Data Tool.

Other Resources

State Local Reform Organizations

State Representatives Voting Record

Updated December 2011

Page Tools