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

Page Tools

• Email to a Friend
• Print this Page

North Carolina

Summary Demographic State Data (and Source)
Population (2008 CB est.)	9,222,414
Population (2000 Census)	8,049,313
Foreign-Born Population (2008 FAIR est.)	660,455
Foreign-Born Population (2000 Census)	430,000
Share Foreign-Born (2008 FAIR est.)	7.2%
Share Foreign-Born (2000)	5.3%
Immigrant Stock (2000 CB estimate)	577,000
Share Immigrant Stock (1997 est.)	7.2%
Naturalized U.S. Citizens (2006 CB est.)	160,272
Share Naturalized (2006)	26.1%
Legal Immigrant Admission (DHS 1997-2006)	110,094
Refugee Admission (DHS 1997-2006)	11,204
Illegal Alien Population (2008 FAIR est)	385,000
Cost of Illegal Aliens	$1,307,000,000
Projected 2050 Population - (2007 FAIR)	15,205,799

North Carolina: Extended Immigration Data

STATE POPULATION

Using the Current Population Survey, the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that in July 2008 North Carolina’s population had increased to 9,222,414 residents, i.e., an annual average increase of about 41,335 residents since 2000. That is a rate of increase of about 1.8 percent per year.

NET INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION (NIM)

Based on the Current Population Survey, the Census Bureau estimated that between the 2000 Census and July 2008 the state’s population increased by about 192,100 residents from net international migration (more foreign-born arriving than leaving). That was an annual average increase of about 23,145 residents, i.e., about one-sixth (16.4%) of the total increase (not including the children born to the immigrants after their arrival in the United States).

The 2000 Census found 8,049,313 persons resident in North Carolina. This was an increase of 1,420,676 persons above the 1990 Census (21.4%). The amount of increase was the fourth highest in the country. The rate of increase was the ninth fastest increasing population in the country. (See Which States are Experiencing the Greatest Increase in Population? to see how North Carolina compares with other states.)

The 2000 population is about 270,000 more persons than the Census Bureau had expected to find in the state in 2000 when it issued its most recent state population projections in 1996. The significance of this is that the Census Bureau has concluded that much of the shortfall in their population estimates during the 1990s was due to an underestimation of the illegal alien population.

FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION

Based on the American Community Survey (ACS), the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that the foreign-born population of North Carolina was 602,842 persons in 2006. The ACS is a large-scale, continuous sampling process designed to replace the need for a long-form in the 2010 Census. However, because the ACS does not have the same follow-up procedures as the Census to include non-respondents, it may underestimate the foreign-born population.

FAIR estimates that the foreign-born population of North Carolina was about 660,455 residents in July 2008. This meant a foreign-born population share of 7.2 percent. The amount of change since the 2000 Census indicates an average annual rate of increase in the foreign-born population of about 27,765 people, which is nearly one-fifth (19.6%) of the state’s annual average population increase. Since 2000, the foreign-born population has increased by 53.6 percent compared to a 12.4 percent increase in the native-born population.

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 14.4 percent share of the state’s current births is large enough to account for about 17,515 births a year. Combining the increase in the foreign-born population and estimated immigrant births suggests that immigration may account for nearly 45,280 persons added to the state’s population annually, i.e., nearly one-third (32%) of the state’s overall population increase.

The 2000 Census found that 62.4 percent of North Carolina's foreign-born population had arrived in the state since 1990. This demonstrates the effects of the current mass immigration, and it is a much higher share than the national average (43.7%).

A comparison of the increase in the immigrant population from 1990 with the change in the overall population during the same period shows that immigrant settlement directly accounted for 22.2 percent of the state's overall population increase over that decade. The share of the population increase due to immigration would be still higher if the children of the immigrants born here after their arrival were included with their immigrant parents in the calculation. The amount of the overall impact of immigration (immigrants plus their children) on population change is likely to be closer to 27 percent, which is based on the increase in the share of those who speak a language other than English at home in North Carolina.

Speakers of Foreign Languages (at home in North Carolina in the 2000 Census)
Spanish	378,940
French	32,925
German	28,500
Vietnamese	13,595
Chinese	12,835
Korean	11,385
Arabic	10,835
Miao, Hmong	7,495
Tagalog	6,520
Greek	6,405
(Source: Census Bureau report: Language Spoken at Home for the Population 5 Years and Over, April 2004)

An indicator of the change 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 non-English speakers at home in North Carolina almost doubled, from 3.9 percent to 7.5 percent. Less than half (49.4%) 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 Census Bureau’s American Community Survey found that in 2006, the foreign born population was 614,198 residents, an increase of 42.8% percent since 2000. In comparison, the foreign-born population changed from 115,077 to 430,000 residents between 1990 and 2000, an increase of 273.7 percent.

The ten countries below constituted approximately 62.5% of the foreign-born population in North Carolina in 2006. Mexico accounted for 41.5% alone.

Foreign-Born Change Since 1980: Top Ten Countries 1980-2000
Rank	Country	1990		Country	2000		Country	2006
1	Germany	11,523		Mexico	172,065		Mexico	254,830
2	United Kingdom	8,788		India	16,264		India	29,825
3	Mexico	8,757		Germany	16,166		El Salvador	19,442
4	Canada	6,630		Canada	14,317		Vietnam	17,059
5	India	5,723		United Kingdom	14,034		Canada	16,708
6	Korea	5,046		Vietnam	13,608		Germany	13,703
7	Vietnam	4,122		China	12,762		Philippines	13,602
8	Japan	3,927		El Salvador	10,838		China	13,417
9	Philippines	3,213		Honduras	10,559		Korea	11,066
10	China	2,557		Korea	9,836		England	10,023
	All Other	54,791		All Others	139,551		All Others	229,873
	Total	115,077		Total	430,000		Total	384,325

THE IMMIGRANT STOCK

The Census Bureau estimated that there were about 577,000 people in North Carolina in 2000 who were "immigrant stock." That is a term that refers to immigrants and their children born here after their arrival. Based on that estimate, and a population of 8,049,313, the immigrant stock share of the state's population was 7.2 percent.

As the graph below shows, the amount and share of North Carolina’s population change due to the increase in the foreign stock is rising rapidly. Over the past 34 years the new immigrants and children born to them have added about 644,000 people to the population. Over this period, the increase in the foreign stock has accounted for 18.8 percent of the state’s population increase.

NATURALIZATION

Data from the 2006 American Community Survey indicate that 160,272 residents, or 26.1 percent, of the foreign-born population in North Carolina were citizens, compared to 112,822 residents, or 26.2 percent, in 2000.

Nationally, 40.3 percent of the foreign-born population was citizens in 2000 and 42.0 percent were citizens in 2006.

REFUGEE SETTLEMENT

North Carolina has received 11,204 refugees over the most recent ten fiscal years (FY'97-'06), with 1,265 arriving in FY’06.

 

Under the Office of Refugee Resettlement's (HHS) assistance funding for FY'02 $874,896 is available for refugee employment training and other services programs in North Carolina based on a three-year refugee settlement program covering 3,486 refugees (an average of $251 per refugee). This allocation does not include a larger share (55%) of funding programs for communities heavily affected by recent Cuban and Haitian entrants, communities with refugees whose cultural differences make assimilation especially difficult, communities impacted by federal welfare reform changes, educational support to schools with significant refugee students, and discretionary grants. ORR grants for FY’05 and FY’06 respectively were $4,352,130 and $4,605,725.

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/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 North Carolina, overall enrollment in 2002 (1,303,928) was 12.5 percent above enrollment in 1993. By contrast, LEP enrollment (52,835 - 4.1% of all enrollment) was 494 percent higher than a decade earlier.

Data on enrollment in LEP/ELL programs are collected by the federal government from school systems that receive Title VII funds for these special instruction programs. The data on LEP/ELL enrollment are understated because data from private schools that do not apply for Title VII assistance are sketchy.

FOREIGN STUDENTS

The 2006/07 annual report of the Institute of International Education (IIE) lists the number of foreign students attending post-secondary school in North Carolina as 10,064. Three schools in North Carolina are listed as having a major concentration of these students:

• Duke University and Medical Center had enrollment of 1,880 foreign students, 13.6% of total enrollment.
• North Carolina Sate University had enrollment of 1,717 foreign students, 5.7% of total enrollment
• University of North Carolina.-Chapel Hill had enrollment of 1,495 foreign students, 5.4% of total enrollment

Below, a chart illustrates the sharp increase of foreign students attending school in West Virginia from 1960-2000.

ILLEGAL ALIENS

FAIR estimates the state’s illegal alien population as of 2008 is as many as 385,000 persons. This is part of an overall estimate of the U.S. illegal alien population of about 13 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 North Carolina was 206,000 as of January 2000. This number 184,000 higher than the INS' 1996 estimate. In Novemebr 2006, DHS updated the estimate of the state's illeagl alien population to 360,000, making a whopping 338,000 ten year increase .The most recent estimate by DHS put the illegal alien population in the state at 385,000 in 2006.

Other Estimates - The Pew Hispanic Center estimates the illegal alien population of the state at 300,000 to 400,000 as of 2005.

COSTS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS

Incarceration Costs - The INS estimated in February 2003 that the illegal alien population in North Carolina was about 206,000 residents. That was nearly ten times the last previous INS estimate that there were about 22,000 illegal alien residents in the state as of October 1996. The latter estimate was 5,000 higher than the previous estimate of 17,000 illegal aliens in October of 1992.

The current INS estimate means that North Carolina has the ninth largest illegal alien population in the country.

North Carolina has received partial compensation under the federal State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) that was established in 1994 to compensate the states and local jurisdictions for incarceration of "undocumented," aliens who are serving time for a felony conviction or at least two misdemeanors.

The recent SCAAP amounts that North Carolina has received were:

The amount of SCAAP awards has been declining in both total distributions and even more as a share of the state’s expenses. In FY’99 the state received 38.6% of its costs for 420 prisoner years of detention. By FY’02, the state’s reported illegal alien detention more than doubled to 958 prisoner years, while compensation rose by 40 percent and since has decreased sharply.

Medical Costs Under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, hospitals with emergency rooms are required to treat and stabilize patients with emergency medical needs regardless whether or not they are in the country legally or whether they are able to pay for the treatment. Congress in 2003 enacted an appropriation of $250 million per year (for 4 years) to help offset some of the costs due to use of this service by illegal aliens. This amount has been allocated among the states based upon estimates of the illegal alien population and data on the apprehension of illegal aliens in each state. This amount compensates only a fraction of the medical outlays. For North Carolina, the proposed payment in fiscal year 2004 is $4,912,466.

Educational Costs - In our study Breaking the Piggy Bank: How Illegal Immigration is Sending Schools into the Red, we estimated based on 2004 data that educational expenditures for illegal immigration were costing the North Carolina taxpayer $771.1 million dollars annually. This cost was partially for educating students who were themselves illegally in the country ($321.3 million) and in part for the education of their siblings born in the United States to illegal residents ($449.8 million).

Projected Fiscal Costs - In 2006 we estimated that North Carolina  taxpayers are currently burdened with annual costs of about $997 million because of illegal aliens residing in the state. That estimate was based on only expenditures for education, emergency medical care and incarceration. We projected that those costs will rise unless we gain control over our borders and our worksites. If a new amnesty and increases in immigrants and guest workers were enacted, as proposed by business and ethnic advocacy groups, we project that the cost to the state’s taxpayers for those same programs would rise to $1.721 billion per year in 2010 and to $3.027 billion per year in 2020

LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS

You can view a listing of local immigration reform organizations here.

STATE CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION VOTING RECORD

You can view the voting record of your representatives in Congress regarding immigration issues in our voting report section.

Back to Top

North Carolina: Immigrant Admissions

North Carolina Immigrant Admissions by Fiscal Year
1997	5,935
1998	6,415
1999	5,795
2000	9,251
2001	13,918
2002	12,910
2003	9,451
2004	10,718
2005	16,715
2006	18,989
Total	110,094

Recent immigrant admissions have slightly increased by 808 percent since adoption of the current immigration system in 1965. During the 1965-'69 period, annual admissions averaged about 1,515 immigrants. During the 2002-'06 period, admissions averaged about 13,755 immigrants.

The charts below show recent immigrant admissions and the cumulative immigrant admissions data since 1965. The number of annual admissions has ranged from 1,395 in FY'65 to 18,989 in FY'06. The cumulative total of immigrant admissions to North Carolina between fiscal years 1965 and 2002 was about 227,370 immigrants.

 

 

The data for fiscal years 1989-91 were artificially raised by the inclusion of former illegal aliens who were amnestied in 1986. According to INS data (1991) the number of amnesty applicants from North Carolina was 17,090 (2,902 pre-1982 residents and 14,188 agricultural workers).

The data for FY'95 and FY'97-'99 were artificially low because the INS 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 INS 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'93 - FY'02

The INS data below are furnished for nationals of the countries with the largest number of immigrants admitted or adjusted to legal residence each year since 1993. 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 Wyoming during this period.

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

Immigrant Admissions by Fiscal Year
Country	FY'93	FY'94	FY'95	FY'96	FY'97	FY'98	FY'99	FY'00	FY'01	FY'02	Total
Bangladesh	-	-	-	29	20	45	49	50	3	23	216
Canada	517	429	286	356	291	266	217	499	807	503	4,171
China *	1,003	614	356	446	539	427	338	664	798	751	5,936
Colombia	62	39	46	74	53	68	64	126	200	210	942
Cuba	7	7	19	53	110	78	34	54	94	74	530
Dom. Rep.	23	32	27	40	28	33	37	42	65	65	392
Ecuador	22	-	40	23	23	42	47	48	66	75	386
El Salvador	42	31	40	80	52	68	83	152	265	245	1,058
Germany	203	210	143	-	126	141	142	158	265	179	1,567
Guatemala	30	22	33	38	42	61	86	109	149	184	754
Guyana	37	18	17	11	13	8	30	25	-	43	202
Haiti	9	13	13	37	13	15	21	24	25	44	214
Honduras	47	-	-	-	47	74	56	85	-	125	434
India	526	426	423	682	493	618	525	785	1,021	1,005	6,504
Iran	87	77	69	77	88	86	69	102	123	108	886
Ireland	78	94	-	-	3	7	4	9	-	12	207
Jamaica	26	42	51	38	36	40	25	51	76	92	477
Japan	-	65	-	-	64	70	53	99	140	96	587
Korea	233	225	250	278	155	166	145	204	240	172	2,068
Mexico	341	477	407	661	466	880	931	1,390	2,103	2,247	9,903
Nicaragua	-	-	-	-	19	13	31	137	218	139	557
Nigeria	-	-	131	191	125	153	128	173	-	139	1,079
Pakistan	59	85	91	119	113	188	134	196	224	187	1,396
Peru	36	45	37	36	32	48	34	69	81	84	502
Philippines	290	209	262	298	241	151	117	386	419	456	2,829
Poland	62	53	35	45	23	43	44	25	47	68	445
Sov. Un. *	261	245	241	183	232	334	304	485	741	916	3,944
Trin.& Tob.	-	28	-	-	16	30	24	50	-	49	197
U. Kingdom	369	270	223	290	180	188	176	286	513	331	2,826
Vietnam	749	855	623	582	499	310	258	352	652	615	5,495
Yugo. *	-	-	88	141	111	69	48	209	361	721	1,748
Other	1,773	1,593	1,666	2,203	1,682	1,695	1,538	2,205	4,225	2,913	21,493
Total	6,892	6,204	5,617	7,011	5,935	6,415	5,792	9,251	13,918	12,910	79,945

A dash (-) indicates that the data for that year were not published for that country in the INS Statistical Yearbook.
* China data include Hong Kong and Taiwan. Former USSR data continued since break-up (except FY'96-'97 and ‘01 include only Russia and Ukraine). Former Yugoslavia data continued since break-up.

The 31 nationalities above represent nearly three-quarters (73.1%) of all immigrant settlement and adjustment in North Carolina during this ten-year period. Mexico accounted for nearly one-eighth (12.4%) of North Carolina's new immigrants during the period. With immigrants from India, China, and Vietnam added to those from Mexico, they total more than one-third (34.8%) of all immigrant admissions during the period. 

Back to Top

North Carolina : Poll Data

A Rasmussen Reports in partnership with FOX Television Stations, Inc. conducted on October 18, 2007 of 500 Likely Voters found:

• 71% of the state’s voters say it is “very important to for the government to improve border enforcement and reduce illegal immigration.”
• If given a choice, 53% believe the state should deport all the illegal immigrants it can as opposed to “accept the illegal immigrants who are already here and then preventing more from entering the state.”

An Elon University poll taken from April 16-19, 2007 of 476 adults found that:

• 93% believe that illegal immigration is either a very important issue (65.3%) or a somewhat important issue (27%).
• 63% disagree (34% strongly disagree) with proposals that would allow undocumented immigrants to stay in the country for several years as long as they have employment.
• 56% think that immigrants are a burden on the state because of the jobs, housing and health care they take.
• 50.4 agree that Hispanic and Latinos have had a negative impact on North Carolina.
• Controlling immigration tied with improving public education as the issue that needs the most attention from the state government. (September, 2006, Civitas Institute poll of 800 registered voters)
• Nearly 80% of North Carolina residents believe the state should not give illegal immigrants driver’s licenses.
• Nearly 60% believe illegal immigrants who commit crimes should be deported.
• 90% of those polled this month believe North Carolina has an illegal immigration problem.
• Nearly 80% believe companies who hire illegal immigrants should be fined if caught. (August, 2005, Civitas Institute poll of 800 registered voters.)

According to the Raleigh News and Observer newspaper, a poll by the Civitas Institute, a conservative North Carolina group, found in a state-wide poll released June 29, 2005 that 20% of North Carolinians identified immigration control as a top issue (exceeded only by jobs, lower health care costs and public education). The poll also found that three-fourths of the respondents are opposed to in-state tuition for illegal aliens according to a news account by Raleigh-Durham’s TV Channel 14 news.

A poll conducted in November 2003 by Research 2000 for The News & Observer (sampling error margin +/- 4%age points) found large majorities in favor of reducing legal immigration and against allowing illegal aliens to stay in the country. Asked about the level of legal immigration, 74% responded that it is too high. Asked if illegal Mexican workers should be allowed to stay, 73% said no. ("Welcome mat not out for state's immigrants, poll shows", The News & Observer November 24, 2003)

• 74% of North Carolinians think the United States admits too many legal immigrants.
• 73% said illegal aliens should not be allowed to remain in the United States. (News & Observer Poll, November 2003)

Back to Top

North Carolina: Immigration Impact

State Population (2006 CB estimate)	8,856,505
State Population in 2000	8,078,909
Average Annual Change 2000-2006	1.6%
Foreign Born Population 2006 1	589,295
Foreign Born Share 2006	6.7%
Foreign Born Population 2000	430,000
Foreign Born Share 2000	5.3%
Average Annual Change 2000-2006	5.9%
Population Projection 2010	9.3 million
Population Projection 2025	11.4 million
Population Projection 2050 (FAIR)	13.8 million

All numbers are from the U.S. Census Bureau unless otherwise noted. Additional Census Bureau, INS, and other immigration-related data are available for North Carolina. 

 

POPULATION CHANGE

North Carolina population increased by 29.1 percent between 1990 and 2000, and by 9.2 percent between 2000 and 2006, bringing North Carolina’s total population to approximately 8.6 million. 

In 2006 North Carolina was the 7^th fastest growing state in the United States, and accounted for the 6th largest increase in population size. ²

Approximately 20.5 percent of the total population increase between 2000 and 2006 in North Carolina was directly attributable to immigrants.

FAIR estimates the illegal alien population in 2005 at 405,000, which ranks 8th in the U.S. for the FAIR estimate. This number is 96.6% above the U.S. government estimate of 206,000 in 2000, and a striking 1457.7 above the 1990 estimate of 26,000.

According to an estimate of the Pew Hispanic Center, in 2005 there were an estimated 300,000 to 400,000 illegal aliens living in North Carolina. This estimate ranks 9^th among illegal alien populations in the United States for the PEW estimate.³

FAIR estimates in 2004 that the taxpayers of North Carolinaspent $771.1 million per year on illegal aliens and their children in public schools.⁴

FAIR’s projected annual fiscal costs to North Carolina taxpayers for emergency medical care, education and incarceration resulting if an amnesty is adopted for illegal residents.
Current	2010	2020
$997,000,000	$1,721,000,000	$3,027,000,000

POPULATION PROFILE

 

 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND QUALITY OF LIFE PROFILE

Water: Between 2000 and 2006, the foreign-born population of North Carolina rose by 42.8 percent.⁵ This was much greater than an 8.2 percent growth in the native-born population (which includes births to immigrant parents). When the U.S.-born children of immigrants are included, immigration accounts for over a one-third (35.2%) of the state’s growth.⁶ If the current growth trend continues, by 2050 the state’s population is expected to top 14.5 million. This will be a 64 percent increase from the state’s 2006 population of approximately 8.8 million.⁷ North Carolina has a per-capita water usage of 117.4 gallons each day.⁸ This means that by 2050 human use of water will increase by 666 million gallons each day.⁹

A state that has been plagued by drought in recent years, North Carolina is not prepared to handle the increasing demand for water. Currently 97 percent of the state is in some form of drought.¹⁰ Substantial parts of 39 counties are suffering from extreme or severe drought.¹¹The water table is very depleted with 79 percent of North Carolina's topsoil conditions considered “very dry”.¹²

Throughout the state, sweeping efforts to save water have been made, as the severity of the shortage has become acute. For example, the city of Durham has made the switch to a tiered water rate system, charging higher per-gallon rates for those who consume more water.¹³On a state level, pending legislation, if passed, would enforce uniform conservation measures across the state. This would oblige some regions to transfer water to others in greater need, as well as establishing government accountability for water pumped by farmers.¹⁴

Last year, North Carolina lost approximately $500 million in crops due to the water shortage. Additionally, drought-fueled wildfires destroyed roughly 37,000 acres last year, nearly double the 10 year average.¹⁵

Exacerbated by population growth, North Carolina’s water resources are being stretched ever scarcer.

Disappearing Open Space: North Carolina developed 1.7 million acres between 1982 and 1997, making it one of the fastest developing states.¹⁶ Since 1982, North Carolina has developed 156,000 acres a year, ranking it in the top five states for acres of rural land lost to development.¹⁷ ,¹⁸ During the past nine years, North Carolina’s Costal Plains region lost 187,000 acres of timberland to urban uses.¹⁹ A federal study estimated that the state could lose 5.5 million acres of timberland by 2040 due to urban growth.²⁰ North Carolina was ranked 4^th by the American Farmland Trust for farm acreage loss. ²¹

A recent two-year federal study of Southern forests found that North Carolina stands to lose the most timberland to urban growth—nearly 5.5 million acres by 2040.²²

School Overcrowding: School crowding, particularly at the high school level, has become a statewide issue. Between 2000 and 2006 the student population of North Carolina’s k-12 students increased by over 140,000 students, ²³ , ²⁴ ,  and is projected to grow by an additional 143,000 students by the year 2015. ²⁵

During the past decade, North Carolina was home to three of the fastest-growing school districts in the nation.²⁶ The growth in North Carolina’s high school enrollment during the next decade will be fourth largest in the country, according to the U.S. Department of Education.²⁷

One in every ten students, or 3,000 students, in Durham attend class in mobile trailers, many of which are decades old and dilapidated. The district’s rate of growth could fill up a new elementary school every year. ²⁸ Some schools have even run out of room for more trailers.²⁹ Asheboro and Randolph have spent more than $150 million in the past ten years building schools, renovating schools, and adding classrooms to deal with increased enrollment.³⁰ Chapel Hill expects its high schools to reach 126 percent of their capacity in the next three years. ³¹

In Iredell-Statesville, one elementary school is so overcrowded; the fifth-graders were shifted to a middle school. A Union County elementary is now larger than two of the district's high schools. And crowding has forced some Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools to hold classes in computer labs or libraries. Growth continues to overwhelm schools across the Charlotte region, recently released data show, and the problem will likely worsen. Districts cannot add mobiles or build schools fast enough, and the number of newcomers is still ballooning. "Next year, (classes) will be in the cafeteria and the auditorium -- I will not have a choice," said Joel Ritchie, principal of Butler High School in Matthews. "I'm just not going to have additional space". ³²

Traffic: As population growth put more traffic on the roads, the average commute for North Carolina residents increased 21 percent during the 1990s, to 24 minutes in 2000. This was a much faster rate of increase than the national average of 14 percent. ³³, ³⁴ 42% of North Carolina's major urban roads are congested. 34% of North Carolina's major roads are in poor or mediocre condition, and vehicle travel on North Carolina's highways increased 50% from 1990 to 2003. Driving on roads in need of repair costs North Carolina motorists $1.7 billion a year in extra vehicle repairs and operating costs --- $282 per motorist. Congestion in the Charlotte metropolitan area costs commuters $791 per person per year in excess fuel and lost time, and congestion in the Raleigh metropolitan area costs commuters $460 per person per year in excess fuel and lost time. ³⁵

Travelers in the Charlotte, NC-South Carolina area experience an annual delay of 51 hours, a number that ranks 13^th in the U.S. In the Raleigh-Durham area, travelers experience an annual delay of 27 hours. ³⁶ 12 percent of commuters have a commute that is 45 minutes or more. ³⁷

Between 1989 and 1998, the number of vehicle miles driven in the state increased 37 percent. The number of congested intersections quadrupled in Greensboro during the 1990s. ³⁸ In the Triad, the number of miles driven is expected to jump from 2.8 million miles per day in 1994 to 40 million miles per day in 2025.³⁹

Sprawl: North Carolina is one of the states most threatened most by sprawl, according to an American Planning Association report. North Carolina developed 1.7 million acres from 1982 to 1997; the 37 percent increase was the eighth highest in the country. Almost 15 percent of the state’s developable land had been built on as of 1997, the tenth highest percentage in the country. Since 1982, North Carolina has consistently ranked in the top five states in the number of acres converted each year to urban uses (about 240 square miles a year).⁴⁰

A study of urban sprawl between 1970 and 1990 that calculated the impact of population increase and per capita land use found that 241.7 square miles of additional land were consumed by urban sprawl in the Charlotte metropolitan area, and 59.1 percent of that sprawl was attributable to population increase. In the Raleigh metro area sprawl consumed an additional 105.4 square miles and population increase accounted for 76.3 percent of the increase. ⁴¹

Air Pollution: More people means more traffic and more development, leading to more air pollution. Mecklenburg and Wake counties (which grew by 36 and 48 percent, respectively) are among the 25 counties in the country with the worst air pollution, according to the American Lung Association. ⁴² In the Triad, which the American Lung Association has added to its list of the 25 most ozone-polluted regions in the U.S., the number of unhealthy air quality days nearly doubled in the last decade. ⁴³

26 of North Carolina’s 100 counties received a grade of “F” from the American Lung Association in their “State of the Air 2005 “report. Three other counties received a grade of “D”. ⁴⁴

Waste: North Carolina’s trash generation could double to 13 million tons by 2010 if current growth rates continue, according to the state’s annual solid waste report. ⁴⁵  North Carolina currently produces 1.08 tons of solid waste per capita. ⁴⁶

Poverty: In 2005 21.8 percent of immigrants in North Carolina had incomes below the poverty level, an increase of 50.7 percent since 2000. Among the foreign born the poverty rate climbs to 26.3 percent. ⁴⁷

Crowded Housing: Studies show that a rise in crowded housing often correlates with an increase in the number of foreign-born.⁴⁸, ⁴⁹  In 2005 over 67,0000 of the state’s households were defined as crowded or severely crowded by housing authorities. ⁵⁰ In Chatham County, an Affordable Housing Coalition study found that an influx of low-income and often illegal immigrants has put pressure on the rental market and led to crowding problems and substandard housing.⁵¹

ILLEGAL RESIDENTS

The Raleigh-Durham area is currently growing as a major immigrant gateway. ⁵² The INS says that the chances of it apprehending illegal aliens in the state are slim. The agency has only a token staff to enforce employer sanctions in North Carolina; between 1994 and 1998, the INS did not fine a single North Carolina employer for hiring illegal workers.⁵³

Endnotes:

1. FAIR estimate based on the 2006 Current Population Survey.
2. Table A. Leading States/Equivalents by population Changes: July 1, 2005, to July 1, 2006. U.S Census Bureau.
3. "Estimates of the Unauthorized Migrant Population for States based on the March 2005 CPS", Pew Hispanic Center.
4. Martin, Jack. “Breaking the Piggy Bank: How Illegal Immigration is Sending Schools into the Red,” A Report by the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
5. U.S. Census 2006.
6. Jack Martin. “Issue Brief: Estimation of Foreign Born Birthrate.” FAIR. 2008.
7. Jack Martin and Stanley Fogel. “Projecting the U.S. Population to 2050.” FAIR. March, 2006.
8. U.S. Geological Survey 2000.
9. U.S. Drought Monitor. June 2008.
10. Amy Pickle. “The new normal: managed water.” News and Observer. June 21, 2008.
11. Ulbrich, Suzanne. “Onslow, Carteretfeel drought.” Jacksonville News. June 20, 2008.
12. Carolina News 14. “Durham changes to tiered water rate.” June 23, 2008.
13. John Hood. “Wait For Facts on Water Regulations.” Lincoln Tribune. June 22, 2008.
14. Jim Sparks. “NC Drought Deepens in Just a Week.” Winston-Salem Journal. June 20, 2008.
15. Associated Press, “Study Says Sprawl Threatens N.C. as Rapid Development Continues,” Herald-Sun, December 2, 2000.
16. Ibid.
17. Kenwyn Caranna, “Drivers in Triad Rack up the Miles,” News & Record, January 4, 2001.
18. Allen Breed, “Sprawl, Not Logging, Top Threat to Forests,” Associated Press, May 25, 2002.
19. Ibid.
20. American Farmland Trust, “Farming on the Edge.”
21. Allen Breed, “Sprawl, Not Logging, Top Threat to Forests,” Associated Press, May 25, 2002.
22. "Overview of Public Elementary and Secondary Schools and Districts: School Year 1999-2000," National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
23. "Public Elementary and Secondary School Student Enrollment, High School Completions, and Staff From the Common Core of Data: School Year 2005-06', National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, June 2007.
24. Projections of Education Statistics to 2015, National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
25. Cynthia Jeffries and Phillip Reese, “High School Enrollment Crisis Grows,” News & Record, February 10, 2001.
26. Cynthia Jeffries and Phillip Reese, op. cit.
27. Rebecca E. Eden, “Leaders Meet on School Crowding,” Herald-Sun, May 1, 2001.
28. Editorial, “Crowded Schools Require Rejiggering,” Wilmington Star-News, March 14, 2001.
29. Cynthia Jeffries and Phillip Reese, op. cit.
30. Neil Offen, “City High Schools Going Mobile,” Chapel Hill Herald, October 6, 2002.
31. Report Card for America's Infrastructure 2005," American Society of Civil Engineers.
32. “Table DP-1-4, Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000,” Census 2000, U.S. Census Bureau.
33. “Table DP-1-4, Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 1990,” 1990 Census, U.S. Census Bureau.
34. Report Card for America's Infrastructure 2005," American Society of Civil Engineers.
35. Paul Muschick, “Rough Riding,” News & Record, September 30, 2002.
36. “U.S. Population 2007 Data Sheet,” Population Reference Bureau.
37. Kenwyn Caranna, “Drivers in Triad Rack up the Miles,” News & Record, January 4, 2001. 31 “North Carolina Among Fastest-Developing States,” Associated Press, December 1, 2000.
38. Paul Muschick, “Growth and the Environment,” News & Record, September 30, 2002.
39. Beck, Roy and Leon Kolankiewicz, “Weighing Sprawl Factors in Large U.S. Cities,” Numbers USA, March 2001.
40. “North Carolina Among Fastest-Developing States,” Associated Press, December 1, 2000.
41. Paul Muschick, “Growth and the Environment,” News & Record, September 30, 2002.
42. “State of the Air 2005: North Carolina”, American Lung Association.
43. Report Card for America's Infrastructure 2005," American Society of Civil Engineers
44. Report Card for America's Infrastructure 2005," American Society of Civil Engineers.
45. “North Carolina State Factsheet,” Migration Information Source, Migration Policy Institute.
46. Randy Capps, “Hardship Among Children of Immigrants: Findings from the 1999 National Survey of America’s Families,” Urban Institute, 2001.
47. Haya El Nasser, “U.S. Neighborhoods Grow More Crowded,” USA Today, July 7, 2002.
48. Selected Housing Characteristics: 2005 Data Set- 2005 American Community Survey, American Fact Finder, U.S. Census Bureau.
49. Geoffrey Graybeal, “Chatham Coalition Begins Housing Study,” Chapel Hill Herald, October 18, 2002.
50. Statement of Dr. Audrey Singer, Immigration Fellow The Brookings Institution before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law. House Judiciary Committee U.S., House of Representatives, Washington, D.C., Hearing on “The Impact of Immigration on States and Localities” May 17, 2007.
51. Raleigh News and Observer. Nov. 29-30, 1998.

Back to Top

Back to Top