• Overview
• National Data
• State and Local Data
• Public Opinion
• Immigration 101
• Historical Perspective
• Suggested Reading
• Quotes Library
• Glossary

Page Tools

• Email to a Friend
• Print this Page

Connecticut

 

Summary Demographic State Data (and Source)
Population (2009 CB est.):	3,518,288
Population (2000 Census):	3,405,565
Foreign-Born Population (2009 CB est.):	459,515
Foreign-Born Population (2000 Census):	369,967
Share Foreign-Born (2009):	13.1%
Share Foreign-Born (2000):	10.9%
Naturalized U.S. Citizens (2009):	211,406
Share Naturalized (2009):	46.0%
Legal Immigrant Admission (DHS 2000-2009):	127,960
Refugee Admission (HHS 1999-2008)	5,634
Illegal Alien Population (2008 FAIR est.):	115, 000
Costs of Illegal Aliens (2010 FAIR)	$957,000,000
Projected 2050 Population (2006 FAIR)	4,881,000

Connecticut : Extended Immigration Data

STATE POPULATION

Using the American Community Survey (ACS), the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that in July 2009 Connecticut’s population had increased to 3,518,288 residents. That was an annual average increase of about 12,120 residents since 2000. That is a rate of increase of about 0.4 percent per year. The comparable national annual rate of increase was 1.0 percent.

 

The 2000 Census found 3,405,565 persons resident in Connecticut. This was an average annual increase of 118,449 persons above the 1990 Census. The annual rate of increase (0.4%) was below the national rate of increase (1.2%).

Between the 1980 and 1990 Censuses, the population of Connecticut grew from 3,287,116 to 3,405,565 residents. The annual rate of increase (0.4%) was below the national rate of increase (1.0%).

FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION

Based on the ACS, the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that the foreign-born population of Connecticut was 459,515 persons in 2009. This meant a foreign-born population share of more than one in every eight (13.1%) residents.

NET INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION (NIM)

Based on the Current Population Survey (CPS), the Census Bureau estimated that between the 2000 Census and July 2009 the state’s population increased by about 112,936 residents from net international migration (more foreign-born arriving than leaving). That was an annual average increase of about 12,145 residents, i.e., nearly nine-tenths (89.4%) of the total population 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 data was an increase of about 89,550 foreign-born residents. This indicates an average annual rate of increase in the foreign-born population of about 9,630 people, which is nearly four-fifths (79.4%) of the state’s annual average population increase. Since 2000, the foreign-born population has increased by 24.2 percent compared to a 0.8 percent increase in the native-born population. The annual rate of increase from 2000-2009 was 2.4 percent, the same as the national rate.

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 26.2 percent share of the state’s current births is large enough to account for about 10,905 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., more than the total (169.4%) of the state’s overall population increase.

The 2000 Census found that nearly two-fifths (39%) of Connecticut's foreign-born population had arrived in the state since 1990. This was lower than the national average (43.7%). The 2009 ACS data estimate that more than one-third (34.5%) of the state’s foreign-born population has arrived since 2000. That was higher than the 31.6 percent share of new arrivals nationally.

During the 1990s the state’s foreign-born population increased by 90,584 from 279,383. That was an increase of 32.4 percent compared to a 0.9 percent increase in the native-born population. On an annual basis, the foreign-born population increased by 2.8 percent compared to a national rate of 4.6 percent.

FOREIGN-BORN CHARACTERISTICS

An indicator of the increase in the immigrant population may be seen in data on the share of the population that speaks a language other than English at home. Between 1990 and 2000 the share of the population in Connecticut that was non-English speakers at home increased from 15.2 percent to 18.3 percent. Less than one-quarter (22.5%) 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 20.4 percent. More than half (50.4%) were Spanish speakers, and more than half (53.9%) of those who spoke English less than very well were also Spanish speakers.

The chart above shows the foreign-born population increasing by 52.9 percent since 2000 and the share of that population from Latin America and the Caribbean increasing by 80.1 percent. That region’s share of the state’s immigrant population rose from 34.7 percent in 2000 to 42.7 percent in 2009.

NATURALIZATION

Data from the 2009 ACS indicate that 211,406 residents (46%) of the foreign-born population in Connecticut were U.S. citizens, compared to 180,267 residents (48.7%) in 2000.

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

REFUGEES

Connecticut has received 5,634 refugees over the most recent ten fiscal years (FY'00-'09) including 485 persons in FY’09

LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY 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 (LEP) 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.

In Connecticut, overall enrollment in 2008 (570,626) was 3.0 percent above enrollment in 2000. By contrast, LEP enrollment (30,001) was 48.6 percent higher. The share of LEP enrollment rose from 3.6 percent to 5.3 percent.

FOREIGN STUDENTS

The 2009/10 annual report of the Institute of International Education (IIE) identifies the number of foreign students enrolled in Connecticut schools as 9,268 at the following institutions:

• U. of Bridgeport (2,250)
• Yale U. (2,174)
• U. Conn.-Storrs (1,993)
• U. New Haven (602)
• U. Hartford (402)

These institutions accounted for about four-fifths (80.1%) of the state’s foreign student enrollment.

 

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

ILLEGAL ALIENS

FAIR Estimate- FAIR estimated the state’s illegal alien population as of 2010 at 120,000 persons. This was 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 in February 2003 that the resident illegal population in Connecticut was 39,000 as of January 2000. This number was 10,000 higher than the INS' 1996 estimate.

Other Estimates - The Pew Hispanic Center estimated the illegal alien population of the state at 110,000 as of 2010.

COST 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:

Connecticut Fiscal Costs In 2009
Due to Illegal Aliens ($M)		(Pct.)
K-12 educ.	456.1	47.7%
LEP educ.	$91.7	9.6%
Medicaid	$72.8	7.6%
SCHIP	$30.8	3.2%
Justice	$61.0	6.4%
Welfare+	$87.6	9.2%
General	$156.8	16.4%
Total	$956.8
Tax Receipts	$32.3
Net Cost	$924.5

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

POPULATION PROJECTION

We projected Connecticut’s population in 2050 likely would be between 4.722 million and 4.881 million depending on what happens with immigration policy. See “Projecting the U.S. Population to 2050: Four Immigration Scenarios,” FAIR 2006.

Back to Top

Connecticut : 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 Rasmussen Report poll conducted 500 Likely Voters in Connecticut on December 12, 2007 found:

• 69% oppose granting drivers’ licenses to illegal aliens.
• 61% 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.
• 48% believe that if an illegal immigrant is discovered in this manner, they should be deported

Back to Top

Connecticut : Immigrant Admissions

Recent immigrant admissions are at 165 percent of admissions just after adoption of the current immigration system in 1965. During the 1965-'69 period, annual admissions averaged about 8,810 immigrants. During the most recent five years, admissions averaged about 14,558 persons.

The charts below show recent immigrant admissions and the cumulative immigrant admissions data since 1965. The number of annual admissions has ranged from 5,855 in FY'74 to 18,700 in FY'06. The cumulative total of admissions to Connecticut between fiscal years 1965 and 2009 was about 407,760 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 Connecticut was 6,229 (3,274 pre-1982 residents and 2,955 agricultural workers).

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

The table below furnishes INS data on the immigrants who have been admitted for residence in Connecticut 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 Connecticut 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 three-quarters (75.3%) of all immigrant settlement and adjustment in Connecticut during this ten-year period. Immigrants from Poland, Jamaica, former Soviet Union, India and China accounted for nearly one-third (32%) of all immigrant admissions and adjustments since 1996. 

Back to Top

Connecticut : Immigration Impact

ENVIRONMENTAL AND QUALITY OF LIFE PROFILE

Water: By 2050 the state's population is projected to rise from 3.5 million in 2006 to 4.9 million.¹ Connecticut has a daily, per-capita water demand of 124.5 gallons.² This implies that by 2050 public water usage may increase by 174.3 million gallons each day.

Schools: Between 1990 and 2008, Connecticut's public enrollment increased by over 100,000, or 21 percent.³ Suburban schools are becoming increasingly strained. Disputes over residency have become more common as urban families look for better education and suburban schools struggle to handle the influx of students.⁴ In some areas, like Litchfield, classes are held in converted locker rooms, gyms double as cafeterias, and students start eating lunch as early as 10:30 a.m. because of lack of space.⁵

Disappearing Open Space: The amount of developed land in Connecticut increased by 228,600 acres from 1982 to 2007, growing at a pace of 9,280 acres per year over the last ten years of that period.⁶ A study of urban sprawl between 1970 and 1990 that calculated the impact of population increase and per capita land use found that 11.9 square miles of additional land were consumed by urban sprawl in the Bridgeport-Milford area, and 1.6% percent of that sprawl was attributable to population increase. In the New Haven-Meriden area sprawl consumed an additional 80.4 square miles and population increase accounted for 46.4 percent of the increase.⁷

Traffic: Vehicle travel on Connecticut highways was 19 percent higher in 2008 than in 1990. As population growth put more traffic on the roads the average commute for Connecticut residents increased 16 percent during the 1990s, from 21 minutes in 1990 to 24 minutes in 2000.⁸ About 13 percent of Connecticut commuters had a commute of 45 minutes or longer in 2008.⁹

Bridgeport-Sanford commuters suffered an annual delay of about 33 hours due to traffic congestion in 2007, resulting in 27 extra gallons of fuel used per commuter.¹⁰ Hartford commuters wasted 21 hours and 15 gallons of gas, and in New Haven, 19 hours and 14 gallons of gas. Between these three urban areas, congestion cost commuters $670 million in lost time and wasted fuel. In the Springfield, MA area, which includes part of Connecticut, commuters waited 11 hours in 2007. Connecticut commuters were also impacted by congestion from the New York and Philadelphia urban areas.¹¹ Overall, 58 percent of Connecticut's major urban highways are congested.¹²

Road maintenance has been unable to keep up with growth in Connecticut, where nearly half (47 percent) of roads are in poor or mediocre condition.

Crowded Housing: An estimated 22,784 of Connecticut’s housing units were classified as crowded in 2008, defined as units with more than one occupant per room. This amounted to 1.7 percent of the state’s housing units. In addition, 5,173 units were severely crowded, with at least 1.5 occupants per room.¹³ Nationally, crowded housing rates are driven upward by immigration, where 27 percent of children in immigrant families live in crowded housing compared to 9 percent of children with native-born parents. In Connecticut, the shares are 13 percent of children in immigrant families are in crowded housing compared to 5 percent of those in native-headed households.¹⁴

Sprawl: The Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk-Danbury suburban area of Connecticut has the seventh worst sprawl in the country, according to a report by Smart Growth America. Each year, Connecticut loses 7,900 acres due to development.¹⁵

Air Pollution: The seven Connecticut counties scored by the American Lung Association in 2010 received an "F" for ozone pollution. All eight counties received an "F" in 2005.¹⁶ As population increases, pollution usually rises along with it.

Solid Waste: Connecticut generates 1.4 tons of solid waste per capita each year.¹⁷

Poverty: Connecticut's immigrants are more likely to be poor than their native-born counterparts. In 2007, 8.8 percent of foreign-born households were below the poverty line, compared to 7.8 percent of native households. An additional 7.9 percent of the foreign-born and 5.0 percent of native households were not in poverty but had incomes less than 1.5 times the poverty level.¹⁸ 15.5 percent of children in immigrant families were poor in 2006, compared to 9.9 percent of native children.¹⁹

Endnotes:

1. Jack Martin and Stanley Fogel. "Projecting the U.S. Population to 2050." FAIR. March 2006.
2. U.S. Geological Survey 2000.
3. NEA, "Rankings and Estimates," 2009, and U.S. Census Bureau, 1990.
4. John Christoffersen and Kathryn Masterson, "You May Already be a Loser," Associated Press, January 29, 2002.
5. Andy Thibault "Litchfield at the Crossroads: Quality of LIfe and Property Value Issues, " Voice News, February 29, 2002.
6. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, "Summary Report: 2007 National Resources Inventory."
7. Beck, Roy and Leon Kolankiewicz, "Weighing Sprawl Factors in Large U.S. Cities," NumbersUSA, March 2001
8. "Table DP-1-4, Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000," Census 2000, U.S. Census Bureau. "Table DP-1-4, Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 1990," 1990 Census, U.S. Census Bureau. "Data Set: 2005 American Community Survey: Connecticut 2005," American Factfinder, U.S. Census Bureau.
9. American Community Survey, 2008 Estimates, Custom Data Table.
10. Texas Transportation Institute, "Urban Mobility Report 2009."
11. Texas Transportation Institute, "Urban Mobility Report 2009."
12. The Road Information Project (TRIP), "Key Facts about Connecticut's Surface Transportation System and Federal Funding," May 2010.
13. American Community Survey, Three-Year Estimates 2006-2008. Data retrieved using ACS Custom Table tool.
14. Kids Count Data Center, which used 2008 American Community Survey Data.
15. Genaro Armas, "Riverside-San Bernadino, Calif., is Nation's Most Sprawling Area, Advocacy Group Says," Associated Press, October 18, 2002
16. The American Lung Association, "State of the Air," 2005 and 2010
17. Report Card for America's Infrastructure 2005," American Society of Civil Engineers
18. Migration Information Source State Data (Migration Policy Institute)
19. Urban Institute, Children of Immigrants Data Tool.

 

Other Resources  

State Local Reform Organizations

State Representatives Voting Record

 

Updated January 2012

Back to Top

Back to Top