States by Hispanic Origin

(1)

Ser ies 21, Number 57 May 2006

Birth and Fertility Rates for

States by Hispanic Origin

Subgroups: United States,

1990 and 2000

(2)

All material appearing in this report is in the public domain and may be reproduced or copied without permission; citation as to source, however, is appreciated.

Suggested citation

Sutton PD, Mathews TJ. Birth and fertility rates by Hispanic origin subgroups:

United States, 1990 and 2000. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 21(57). 2006.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Birth and fertility rates for states by Hispanic origin subgroups: United States, 1990 and 2000 / [edited by Demarius V. Miller].

p. ; cm. — (DHHS publication; no. (PHS) 2006–1935) (Vital and health statistics, data from the national vital statistics system; series 21, no. 57)

Includes bibliographical references.

ISBN 0–8406–0606–0

1. Fertility, Human—United States—Statistics. 2. Childbirth—United States—

Statistics. 3. Hispanic Americans—Population—Statistics. I. Miller, Demarius V.

II. National Vital Statistics System (U.S.) III. National Center for Health Statistics (U.S.) IV. Series. V. Series: Vital and health statistics. Series 21, Data from the national vital statistics system (1997); no. 57.

[DNLM: 1. Birth Rate—United States—Statistics. 2. Hispanic Americans—

statistics & numerical data—United States. 3. Population Growth—United States−Statistics. 4. Socio-economic Factors−United States−Statistics.

W2 A N148vu no.57 2006]

HA211.A3 no. 57 [HB915]

304.6’30973021 s—dc22

[305.868’07309049021] 2006004250

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documents

Mail Stop: SSOP

Washington, DC 20402-9328 Printed on acid-free paper.

(3)

Series 21, Number 57

Birth and Fertility Rates for States by Hispanic Origin Subgroups: United States, 1990 and 2000

Data on Natality, Marriage, and Divorce

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health Statistics

Hyattsville, Maryland May 2006

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2006-1935

(4)

Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D., Director

Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D., Acting Co-Deputy Director Michael H. Sadagursky, Acting Co-Deputy Director Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D., Associate Director for Science Edward L. Hunter, Associate Director for Planning, Budget, and Legislation

Michael H. Sadagursky, Associate Director for Management and Operations

Lawrence H. Cox, Ph.D., Associate Director for Research and Methodology

Margot A. Palmer, Director for Information Technology Margot A. Palmer, Acting Director for Information Services Linda T. Bilheimer, Ph.D., Associate Director for Analysis, Epidemiology, and Health Promotion

Charles J. Rothwell, M.S., Director for Vital Statistics Jane E. Sisk, Ph.D., Director for Health Care Statistics Jane F. Gentleman, Ph.D., Director for Health Interview Statistics

Clifford L. Johnson, Director for Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys

Division of Vital Statistics Charles J. Rothwell, Director

James A. Weed, Ph.D., Deputy Director

Stephanie J. Ventura, Chief, Reproductive Statistics Branch

(5)

Abstract . . . 1

Introduction . . . 1

Sources and Methods . . . 2

Results . . . 5

References . . . 22

Appendix Technical Notes . . . 90

Text Tables A. Live births and fertility rates by Hispanic origin of mother and by race for mothers of non-Hispanic origin: United States, 1990, 2000, and 2003 . . . 2

B. Live births to women of Hispanic origin: United States and each State, 1990, 2000, and 2003. . . 3

Figures 1. Population of Hispanic origin as a percentage of total population: 1990 . . . 5

2. Population of Hispanic origin as a percentage of total population: 2000 . . . 6

3. Population of Hispanic origin by subgroup: United States, 2000 . . . 7

4. Population of Hispanic origin and subgroups: 2000 . . . 8

5. Birth rate: United States, 2000. . . 9

6. Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban populations by age and sex: United States, 2000. . . 10

7. Age-specific birth rates for Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban women: United States, 2000 . . . 11

8. Total fertility rate: United States, 2000 . . . 12

9. Birth rate for Mexican mothers age 15–19 years: 2000 . . . 13

10. Birth rate for Mexican mothers age 20–24 years: 2000 . . . 14

11. Birth rate for Mexican mothers age 25–29 years: 2000 . . . 15

12. Birth rate for Mexican mothers age 30–34 years: 2000 . . . 16

13. Birth rate for Mexican mothers age 35–39 years: 2000 . . . 17

14. Mexican population by age and sex: Georgia and Texas, 2000 . . . 18

15. Total fertility rate for mothers of Hispanic origin: 2000 . . . 19

16. Total fertility rate for Mexican mothers: 2000 . . . 20

17. Total fertility rate for Puerto Rican mothers: 2000. . . 21

Detailed Tables 1. Live births, birth rates, fertility rates, and total fertility rates, by Hispanic origin of mother and by race of mothers of non-Hispanic origin: United States and each State, 1990 and 2000 . . . 23

2. Total fertility rates and age-specific birth rates, by Hispanic origin of mother and by race of mother for mothers of non-Hispanic origin: United States and each State, 1990 and 2000 . . . 32

3. First birth rates by age, by Hispanic origin of mother, and by race of mother for mothers of non-Hispanic origin: United States and each State, 1990 and 2000 . . . 50

4. Total Population by race and Hispanic origin: United States and each State, 1990 and 2000 . . . 68

iii

(6)

Appendix Table

I. Values of L and U for calculating 95 percent confidence limits for numbers of events and rates when the number of

events is less than 100 . . . 93

iv

(7)

This report presents U.S. and State-level data on births, birth rates, and fertility rates for Hispanic origin subgroups for 1990 and 2000. Data for non-Hispanic whites and non-Hispanic blacks are provided for comparison.

Methods

Data are presented in detailed tables, graphs, and maps.

Results

Between 1990 and 2000, the total U.S. Hispanic population increased 58 percent, from 22,353,999 to 35,305,818. Over the same period of time, births to Hispanic mothers increased 37 percent, from 595,073 to 815,868. The smaller increases in births compared with the population resulted in a falling birth rate among Hispanic mothers (26.7 in 1990 to 23.1 births per 1,000 total population in 2000). Birth and fertility rates for Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban mothers all fell between 1990 and 2000. Among the Hispanic subgroups, fertility rates in 2000 ranged from 105.1 births per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years for Mexican women to 49.3 for Cuban women. Differences in fertility exist not only between Hispanic subgroups but also within groups among States. For example, total fertility rates for Puerto Rican mothers, which estimates the number of children a group of 1,000 women will have in their lifetime, ranged in 2000 from 1,616.5 in New York to 2,403.0 in Pennsylvania.

Keywords: Hispanic births c State birth rates c State fertility rates c Vital Statistics Cooperative Program

Birth and Fertility Rates for States by Hispanic Origin

Subgroups: United States, 1990 and 2000

by Paul D. Sutton, Ph.D., and T.J. Mathews, M.S.

Division of Vital Statistics

Introduction

T his report presents 1990 and 2000 births, birth rates, and fertility rates for the United

States, each State, and the District of Columbia. This report shows the considerable variation in birth and fertility rates among Hispanic groups and across States. A number of demographic, socioeconomic, and behavioral factors contribute to this variation; however, the report does not try to provide an explanation of the variation. Rather, the description of the variation and trends that exist between groups and among States is aimed at enriching discussions of Hispanic fertility.

The Hispanic population continues to be the fastest growing group within the United States, reflecting both immigration and the overall higher fertility levels of Hispanics(Table A).

Although births to Hispanic women increased 37 percent between 1990 and 2000 and another 12 percent between 2000 and 2003, increases in some States were much larger than in others

(Table B). National birth and fertility rates and counts of births by State for

Hispanic subgroups are published annually (1). Detailed rates for Hispanic subgroups by State can only be

computed in census years because reliable intercensal population estimates for Hispanic subgroups by State are not available. The detailed rates presented in this report (Tables 1–3) use populations by age, sex, race, and Hispanic

subgroup derived from the 1990 and 2000 decennial census (2–4). The rates presented in this report are the crude birth rate, general fertility rate,

age-specific birth rate, total fertility rate, and first birth rate (for definitions, see

‘‘Measures of Fertility’’). Birth and fertility rates for States by Hispanic origin for 1990, 1995, and 2000–2002 and for Hispanic subgroups by State in 1990 have been published in earlier reports (5,6). Information for

non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black is provided for comparison.

Tables 1–3 present 1990 and 2000 data by Hispanic origin and Hispanic subgroups and for non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black. Table 1 contains the number of live births, birth rate, fertility rate, and total fertility rates. Table 2 contains age-specific birth rates and the total fertility rate. Table 3 shows first birth rates by age of mother.

This report was prepared under the general direction of Charles J. Rothwell, Director, Division of Vital Statistics (DVS), and Stephanie J. Ventura, Chief of the Reproductive Statistics Branch (RSB) of DVS.

Ann Irvine and Martha L. Munson of RSB provided content review. This report was edited by Demarius V. Miller and typeset by Jacqueline M. Davis, and graphics were produced by NOVA contractor Kyung Park, of the Office of Information Services, Information Design and Publishing Staff.

Page 1

(8)

Table A. Live births and fertility rates by Hispanic origin of mother and by race for mothers of non-Hispanic origin: United States, 1990, 2000, and 2003

Fertility rates are live births per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years in specified group]

Hispanic Non-Hispanic

Total Mexican

Puerto

Rican Cuban

Other and unknown

Hispanic¹ Total² White³ Black³

Number of births 2003 . . .

2000 . . . 1990⁴. . .

912,329 815,868 595,073

654,504 581,915 385,640

58,400 58,124 58,807

14,867 13,429 11,311

184,558 162,400 139,315

3,149,034 3,199,994 3,457,417

2,321,904 2,362,968 2,626,500

576,033 604,346 661,701 Fertility rates

2003 . . . 2000 . . . 1990⁴. . .

96.9 95.9 107.7

105.5 105.1 118.9

61.6 73.5 82.9

61.7 49.3 52.6

91.2 85.1 102.7

60.5 61.1 67.1

58.5 58.5 62.8

67.1 71.4 89.0

1Includes Central and South American and other and unknown Hispanic origin.

2Includes races other than white and black.

3Fertility rate includes origin not stated.

4New Hampshire and Oklahoma did not report Hispanic origin in 1990 and are excluded from the 1990 figures.

Data illustrated in the maps and charts (Figures 1–17) are largely based on the tabular data in this report.

Sources and Methods

B irth data shown in this report are based on 100 percent of the birth certificates registered in all States and the District of Columbia. More than 99 percent of births occurring in the United States are registered (7). The data are provided to the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) through the Vital Statistics Cooperative Program (VSCP). VSCP includes all States, the District of Columbia, and the territories.

Data for the territories are not shown in this report because of the large amount of data that are unavailable.

This report presents detailed tabulations of births, birth rates, and fertility rates by Hispanic origin of mother and by place of residence.

Information for non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black is provided for comparison. In tables, race and Hispanic origin are presented in eight categories:

total Hispanic, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, other Hispanic (primarily Central and South American, see ‘‘Technical Notes’’), total non-Hispanic, non- Hispanic white, and non-Hispanic black.

Although all tabulations are by race and Hispanic origin of the mother, text references to Mexican births and

Mexican mothers or non-Hispanic white births and non-Hispanic white mothers are used interchangeably for ease in writing. Tables do not show rates for States or subgroups with fewer than 20 births or fewer than 1,000 women in the specified population.

Rates for 2000 may differ from those published in ‘‘Births: Final Data for 2001’’ (8) and earlier reports, but they are consistent with those published in ‘‘Revised Birth and Fertility Rates for the 1990s and New Rates for the Hispanic Populations, 2000 and 2001:

United States’’ (9) and other more recent reports. U.S. and State-level birth and fertility rates for 2000 are computed using populations that were produced under a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Census Bureau and are based on counts from the 2000 census (4). The 2000 and 1990 populations used to compute the birth and fertility rates shown in this report are presented in Tables 4 and 5.

The 2000 census included an option for individuals to report more than one race as appropriate for themselves and household members, in accordance with the 1997 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidelines (10); see

‘‘Technical Notes.’’ Birth certificates in 2000 only collected one race for the mother in the same categories, as specified in the 1977 OMB guidelines.

Birth data by race (the numerators for birth rates) are thus currently

incompatible with the population data

collected in the 2000 census (denominators by race). To produce birth rates for 2000, it was necessary to

‘‘bridge’’ the reported population data for multiple-race persons back to single-race categories. The procedures used to produce the ‘‘bridged’’

populations are described elsewhere (11,12).

Measures of Fertility

The crude birth rate, often simply referred to as the birth rate, relates the number of births to the total population residing in the area. The birth rate is expressed as the total number of live births per 1,000 population, without regard to the age or sex distribution of the population. For example, the birth rate of 26.8 for Hispanic mothers in Arizona (Table 1), in 2000, means that for every 1,000 residents of that State, there were 26.8 births.

The primary use of the birth rate is

to indicate the contribution of births to

the growth of the population area. It is

limited as an analytical tool when

comparing fertility levels among areas

because these comparisons are affected

by differences in the demographic

composition of the population. Measures

of fertility that take into account such

differences from one population to

another are more useful for most

interarea and intergroup comparisons of

fertility.

(9)

Table B. Live births to women of Hispanic origin: United States and each State, 1990, 2000, and 2003 [By place of residence]

Percent change

1990 to 2000 to

State 2003 2000 1990 2000 2003

United States¹. . . 912,329 815,868 595,073 37 12

Alabama. . . 2,904 1,901 344 453 53

Alaska . . . 770 597 328 82 29

Arizona . . . 39,780 34,695 19,663 76 15

Arkansas . . . 3,278 2,343 414 466 40

California . . . 269,705 258,105 245,592 5 4

Colorado . . . 21,387 18,237 9,278 97 17

Connecticut . . . 7,547 6,472 5,318 22 17

Delaware . . . 1,380 1,022 323 216 35

District of Columbia . . . 962 876 890 –2 10

Florida . . . 54,857 45,856 27,570 66 20

Georgia . . . 18,262 13,363 2,263 490 37

Hawaii . . . 2,617 2,302 2,437 –6 14

Idaho. . . 2,939 2,599 1,434 81 13

Illinois . . . 42,460 39,313 24,245 62 8

Indiana. . . 6,779 5,456 1,856 194 24

Iowa . . . 2,519 2,135 623 243 18

Kansas . . . 5,442 4,761 1,954 144 14

Kentucky . . . 1,959 1,089 274 297 80

Louisiana . . . 1,675 1,532 941 63 9

Maine . . . 166 141 127 11 18

Maryland . . . 6,976 4,812 2,523 91 45

Massachusetts . . . 9,800 9,279 8,425 10 6

Michigan. . . 7,670 6,949 4,326 61 10

Minnesota . . . 4,932 3,952 1,050 276 25

Mississippi . . . 543 623 116 437 –13

Missouri . . . 3,483 2,661 970 174 31

Montana . . . 379 330 292 13 15

Nebraska . . . 3,453 2,596 802 224 33

Nevada . . . 12,198 10,195 3,261 213 20

New Hampshire . . . 528 373 - - - 42

New Jersey . . . 26,534 22,457 16,972 32 18

New Mexico . . . 14,843 13,941 12,193 14 6

New York . . . 55,281 53,847 53,140 1 3

North Carolina . . . 16,080 12,557 1,754 616 28

North Dakota . . . 168 132 123 7 27

Ohio . . . 5,352 4,150 2,427 71 29

Oklahoma . . . 5,733 4,357 - - - 32

Oregon . . . 8,439 7,401 2,974 149 14

Pennsylvania . . . 10,832 7,549 5,636 34 43

Rhode Island . . . 2,483 2,103 1,560 35 18

South Carolina . . . 3,662 2,261 571 296 62

South Dakota. . . 340 223 113 97 52

Tennessee . . . 4,934 3,220 444 625 53

Texas . . . 183,139 166,931 115,845 44 10

Utah . . . 7,069 5,938 2,043 191 19

Vermont . . . 59 33 30 10 79

Virginia . . . 10,401 7,725 3,459 123 35

Washington . . . 13,320 11,367 5,700 99 17

West Virginia . . . 104 50 73 –32 108

Wisconsin . . . 5,539 4,493 1,866 141 23

Wyoming . . . 667 568 511 11 17

- - - Data not available.

1New Hampshire and Oklahoma did not report Hispanic origin in 1990 and are excluded from the 1990 figures.

The general fertility rate, frequently age—those most likely to give birth. (Table 1) indicates that in 2000 there referred to as the fertility rate, is one of The fertility rate is the number of live were 113.3 births per 1,000 women aged the most common measures of fertility. births per 1,000 women in that age 15–44 years residing in that State.

It relates the total number of births in an group. For example, the fertility rate of The fertility rate controls for

area to women 15–44 years of 113.3 for Hispanic mothers in Arizona differences among areas in the

(10)

proportion of women of childbearing age in the population. However,

differences in the age distribution within the childbearing years can influence the level of this rate, just as differences in the age-sex composition of the total population can affect the crude birth rate.

Age-specific birth rates relate the number of births to mothers of a given age group to the female population of that age group. In this report, the rates are expressed as the number of births to mothers in an age group per 1,000 women in that age group. For example, the rate of 196.1 for Hispanic women aged 20–24 years in Arizona (Table 2) means that in 2000 there were 196.1 births per 1,000 women 20–24 years of age residing in Arizona. In this report, birth rates for women aged 15–17 and 18–19 years are computed as well as rates for 5-year age groups 10–14 through 45–49 years.

The total fertility rate (TFR) summarizes a set of age-specific birth rates for the entire childbearing span.

TFR is computed as the sum of the age-specific birth rates for 5-year age groups 10–14 through 45–49, each multiplied by 5. It is an age-adjusted rate because it is based on the assumption that there are the same number of women (1,000) in each 5-year age group. Therefore, it controls for differences among areas in the distribution of women within the childbearing years. The 2000 TFR for a specified area indicates the number of children 1,000 women would bear if they experienced the 2000 age-specific birth rates throughout their childbearing period (10–49 years). For example, the rate of 3,141.0 for Hispanic mothers in Arizona (Tables 1 and 2) means that if 1,000 women were to have the same birth rates at each 5-year age period that were observed for Hispanic women in Arizona in 2000, these women would bear a total of 3,141 children by the time they reached the end of their childbearing years. TFRs were only computed for subgroups that had at least 1,000 births and 2,500 women aged 15–44 years in the population.

TFR reflects the combined

childbearing experience of women of all ages in a given year. It therefore can be interpreted as representing the

implications of current levels of fertility for completed family size. TFR also can be used to judge if replacement level fertility has been reached. This is the level of fertility required for a

population to exactly replace itself under projected mortality rates and in the absence of migration. In the United States this level is about 2,100. A TFR of less than 2,100 for an area is an indication that current fertility is below the level needed for long-term

population replacement.

Order-specific birth rates are another useful method for analyzing fertility. The first birth rate, for example, provides a measure of the rate of family formation. Live-birth order refers to the number of children born alive to the mother, including the present birth. The order-specific birth rate for an area relates the number of births of a given live-birth order to the number of women aged 15–44 years residing in the area.

When computing order-specific rates, births of unknown order are proportionately distributed according to births of known order. The rate of 41.3 for first births of Hispanic mothers in Arizona (Table 3) means that there were 41.3 first births for every 1,000

Hispanic women 15–44 years of age

residing in that State.

(11)

Results

Figure 1. Population of Hispanic origin as a percentage of total population: 1990

In 1990, Hispanics were 9 percent Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, found in the Southwest and West.

of the total U.S. population. By State, Tennessee, Vermont, and West Virginia However, New York and Florida were the percentage of the population that to over 20 percent in California, New notable exceptions to this pattern, each was Hispanic varied widely from less Mexico, and Texas. Most States with having a population over 10 percent than 1 percent in Alabama, Arkansas, large Hispanic populations relative to Hispanic.

Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, North their total population in 1990 were

(12)

Figure 2. Population of Hispanic origin as a percentage of total population: 2000

By 2000, the total U.S. population growth of the Hispanic population was In fact, the seven States with the most

was 13 percent Hispanic (up from 22.4 most rapid in the Southeast, with the rapidly growing Hispanic population, as

to 35.3 million). States in which expansion of North Carolina’s Hispanic a proportion of the total population,

Hispanics make up the largest population leading the way, nearly were all in the Southeast: North

proportion of the population were still in quadrupling from 1.2 to 4.7 percent of Carolina, Arkansas, Tennessee, Georgia,

the Southwest and West. However, total population between 1990 and 2000. Alabama, South Carolina, and Kentucky.

(13)

Figure 3. Population of Hispanic origin by subgroup: United States, 2000

The Hispanic population is and Cuban makes up 4 percent. A relatively diverse. The largest Hispanic significant proportion, 21 percent, is in group in the United States is Mexican, the group other Hispanic, which consists which makes up 66 percent of all primarily of persons of Central and Hispanics. Puerto Rican makes up South American decent.

9 percent of the Hispanic population,

(14)

Figure 4. Population of Hispanic origin and subgroups: 2000

The actual size and composition of the Hispanic population varies

considerably from State to State. In terms of absolute numbers, California has the largest Hispanic population with nearly 11 million Hispanics in 2000. Of these 11 million, 77 percent or 8.5 million are Mexican, 1 percent are Puerto Rican, less than 1 percent are Cuban, and 21 percent are other

Hispanic. Texas has the next largest Hispanic population with 6.7 million and a distribution very similar to that of California. New York and Florida follow with 2.9 and 2.7 million, respectively;

however, these two States differ dramatically in the composition of their Hispanic population. New York’s distribution is similar to other States in the Northeastern United States, with a

relatively small Mexican population (9 percent), large Puerto Rican

population (37 percent), modest Cuban

population (2 percent), and large other

Hispanic (52 percent). Florida is unique

with its very large Cuban population

relative to other States, representing

31 percent of Hispanics in Florida and

nearly two-thirds of all Cubans in the

United States.

(15)

Figure 5. Birth rate: United States, 2000

Birth rates vary among race and Hispanic origin groups. Although birth rates for the Hispanic population are considerably higher than for non- Hispanics, most of the difference is attributable to much higher birth rates

for Mexicans. The birth rate for Cubans

is lower than that of non-Hispanic

white and non-Hispanic black, and the

Puerto Rican birth rate is comparable to

the rate for non-Hispanic black.

(16)

Age structure is one (but not the only) factor contributing to observed differences in birth rates among Hispanic subgroups. Populations with large proportions of their population in the childbearing years will tend to have higher birth rates. The Mexican population is a good example of this, with 21 percent of the total population in their twenties, when birth rates tend to be their highest. By comparison, 18 percent of Puerto Ricans are in their twenties, and just 12 percent of Cubans.

Figure 6. Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban populations by age and sex: United States, 2000

(17)

Figure 7. Age-specific birth rates for Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban women: United States, 2000

Mexicans, when compared with Ricans, the highest age-specific birth

Puerto Ricans and Cubans, had the rate was for women aged 20–24 years,

highest age-specific birth rates in each whereas for Cubans the highest rate was

age group. For Mexicans and Puerto for women aged 25–29 years.

(18)

Figure 8. Total fertility rate: United States, 2000

Difference in fertility among Hispanic groups persists even when the effect of the populations’ sex and age composition is controlled. Total fertility rates adjust for different age structures by providing an indicator of how many children a hypothetical cohort of 1,000

women would have in their life given

current age-specific birth rates. Fertility

rates for Mexican women continue to be

much higher than for any other group,

reflecting the higher birth rates for

Mexican women in every age group.

(19)

Figure 9. Birth rate for Mexican mothers aged 15–19 years: 2000

Mexican mothers aged 15–19 years 110 per 1,000 (California, Illinois, had the highest teenage birth rate of any Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, group. Among the 35 States for which Missouri, New Mexico, Ohio,

statistically reliable rates could be Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Virginia)

computed, rates ranged from less than to 190 in North Carolina and Georgia.

(20)

Among Mexicans, the birth rate was highest for those aged 20–24 years.

Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina,

North Carolina, and Tennessee had rates

exceeding 240 per 1,000 for Mexicans

in this age group.

(21)

High birth rates for Mexican mothers aged 25–29 years are found in both the South (Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas) and the West (Arizona, Utah, and

Oregon).

(22)

North Carolina, Georgia, Nebraska,

Utah, and Oregon have the highest birth

rates for Mexican mothers aged 30–34

years. New Mexico, Ohio, and

Massachusetts had the lowest.

(23)

Mexican mothers had high birth rates for all age groups in North Carolina and Georgia (see Figures 9–

12), including those aged 35–39 years.

Rates for those aged 35–39 years were

also high in Arkansas, Utah, and

Oregon.

(24)

Figure 14. Mexican population by age and sex: Georgia and Texas, 2000

Georgia and Texas represent recent are most likely to move for employment

immigrant and well-established Mexican opportunities and women are in their

populations, respectively. Recent peak reproductive years. In contrast,

immigrant populations, like the Mexican large but well-established Mexican

population in Georgia, tend to have populations, like that in Texas, tend to

more men than women. This is have lower fertility rates, with the ratio

particularly true for those in their of men to women being more even both

twenties and thirties, which is when men overall and by age.

(25)

Figure 15. Total fertility rate for mothers of Hispanic origin: 2000

Total fertility rates (TFR) are

consistently above replacement level

(2,100.0) for Hispanic mothers. The

TFR was highest in North Carolina and

Georgia.

(26)

Figure 16. Total fertility rate for Mexican mothers: 2000

Mexican mothers had total fertility

rates (TFR) well above replacement

level in all States where rates could be

calculated. North Carolina and Georgia

had TFRs more than double replacement

level (4,200.0).

(27)

Figure 17. Total fertility rate for Puerto Rican mothers: 2000

Among the 10 States in which total fertility rates for Puerto Ricans could be calculated, 6 had rates above

replacement level. Rates were highest in

Pennsylvania and Massachusetts (see

Tables 1 and 2).

(28)

References

1. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, et al. Births: Final data for 2003. National vital statistics reports; vol 54 no 2.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2005.

2. U.S. Census Bureau. 1990 populations prepared for the National Center for Health Statistics by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin subgroup. Washington:

U.S. Census Bureau. July 20, 1992.

3. U.S. Census Bureau. Census 2000 summary file 2—United States.

Washington: U.S. Census Bureau. 2001.

4. National Center for Health Statistics.

Bridged April 1, 2000, population counts for the four race groups (White, Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Asian or Pacific Islander) by county, single year of age, sex, and Hispanic origin. File br040100.txt (ASCII). Released January 12, 2003. Available from http://

www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/dvs/

popbridge/popbridge.htm.

5. Sutton PD, Mathews TJ. Trends in characteristics of births by State:

United States, 1990, 1995, and 2000–2002. National vital statistics reports; vol 52 no 19. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2004.

6. Clarke SC, Ventura SJ. Birth and fertility rates for States: United States, 1990. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 21(52).

1994.

7. National Center for Health Statistics.

Technical Appendix. Vital statistics of the United States, 2002, vol I natality.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. Hyattsville, MD.

Available from http://www.cdc.gov/

nchs/data/techap02.pdf.

8. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Menacker F, Park MM, Sutton PD.

Births: Final data for 2001. National vital statistics reports; vol 51 no 2.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2002.

9. Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, Ventura SJ.

Revised birth and fertility rates for the 1990s and new rates for Hispanic populations, 2000 and 2001: United States. National vital statistics reports;

vol 51 no 12. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2003.

10. Office of Management and Budget.

Revisions to the standards for the classification of Federal data on race and ethnicity. Federal Register 62FR58781–58790. October 30, 1997.

Available from http://

www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/

ombdir15.html.

11. Ingram DD, Parker JD, Schenker N, Weed JA, et al. United States census 2000 with bridged race categories.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 2(135). 2003.

12. Schenker N, Parker JD. From single-race reporting to multiple-race reporting: Using imputation methods to bridge the transition. Stat Med.

22:1571–87. 2003.

13. Mathews TJ, Ventura SJ, Curtin SC, Martin JA. Births of Hispanic origin, 1989–95. Monthly vital statistics report;

vol 46 no 6 supp. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

1998.

14. National Center for Health Statistics.

Technical Appendix. Vital statistics of the United States, 1990, vol I natality.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. Hyattsville, MD.

Available from http://www.cdc.gov/

nchs/data/vsus/nat90_1acc.pdf.

15. National Center for Health Statistics.

Technical Appendix. Vital statistics of the United States, 2000, vol I natality.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. Hyattsville, MD.

Available from http://www.cdc.gov/

nchs/data/techap00.pdf.

16. Office of Management and Budget.

Race and ethnic standards for Federal statistics and administrative reporting.

Statistical Policy Directive 15. 1977.

17. U.S. Census Bureau. Age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin information from the 1990 census: A comparison of census results with results where age and race have been modified. 1990 CPH-L-74. Washington: U.S.

Department of Commerce. 1991.

18. U.S. Census Bureau. Census 2000 modified race data summary file.

Available from http://www.census.gov/

popest/archives/files/MR-CO.txt.

19. Bailer JC, Ederer F. Significance factors for the ratio of a Poisson variable to its expectations. Biometrics.

20:639–43. 1964.

20. Schenker N, Gentleman JF. On judging

the significance of differences by

examining the overlap between

confidence intervals. Amer Stat

55:182–6. 2001.

(29)

Table 1. Live births, birth rates, fertility rates, and total fertility rates, by Hispanic origin of mother and by race of mothers of non-Hispanic origin: United States and each State, 1990 and 2000

[By place of residence. Birth rates are live births per 1,000 population in specified group, enumerated as of April 1; fertility rates are live births per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years in specified group, enumerated as of April 1; total fertility rates are sums of birth rates by 5-year age groups multiplied by 5]

State, Hispanic origin of mother, and

race of non-Hispanic mother 2000

Live births 1990

Birth rate

2000 1990

Fertility rate

2000 1990

Total fertility rate

2000 1990

United States¹

Hispanic . . . Mexican. . . Puerto Rican. . . Cuban. . . Other and unknown Hispanic². . . . Non-Hispanic^3,4. . . White⁴. . . Black⁴. . .

815,868 581,915 58,124 13,429 162,400 3,199,994 2,362,968 604,346

595,073 385,640 58,807 11,311 139,315 3,457,417 2,626,500 661,701

23.1 25.0 18.1

9.7 21.8 13.2 12.2 17.3

26.7 28.7 21.6 10.9 27.5 15.7 14.4 23.0

95.9 105.1 73.5 49.3 85.1 61.1 58.5 71.4

107.7 118.9 82.9 52.6 102.7

67.1 62.8 89.0

2,730.0 2,906.5 2,178.5 1,528.0 2,563.5 1,931.5 1,866.0 2,178.5

2,959.5 3,214.0 2,301.0 1,459.5 2,877.0 1,979.5 1,850.5 2,547.5 Alabama

Hispanic . . . Mexican. . . Puerto Rican. . .

1,901 1,411 81

344 160 57

25.1 31.7 12.8

14.0 16.8 16.0

113.8 152.5

52.6

57.2 72.5

*

3,068.0 3,885.5

*

* Cuban. . .

Other and unknown Hispanic². . . . Non-Hispanic^3,4. . . White⁴. . . Black⁴. . .

21 388 61,349 40,154 20,498

12 115 63,104 40,778 21,830

8.9 17.1 14.0 12.8 17.7

* 11.4 15.7 13.8 21.5

* 71.9 64.3 61.6 71.6

* 43.9 67.4 60.9 84.9

*

* 2,007.5 1,949.0 2,121.0

*

* 1,990.5 1,819.5 2,402.0

Alaska

Hispanic . . . Mexican. . .

597 269

328 200

23.1 20.2

18.4 21.5

95.6 85.1

74.7 87.5

*

Puerto Rican. . . 51 39 19.3 20.1 * * * *

Cuban. . . Other and unknown Hispanic². . . . Non-Hispanic^3,4. . . White⁴. . . Black⁴. . .

9 268 9,018 5,770 383

7 82 11,567 7,779 529

* 28.8 15.6 13.5 17.1

* 13.1 21.7 19.1 24.3

* 115.2 69.4 60.5 75.3

* 51.5 86.7 75.6 97.5

*

* 2,296.5 2,040.0

*

* 2,633.5 2,345.0

*

Arizona

34,695 33,145 241

19,663 18,943 163

26.8 31.1 13.7

28.6 30.7 19.7

113.3 133.1

57.2

118.7 128.5

81.4

3,141.0 3,665.5

*

3,232.0 3,491.5

* Cuban. . .

56 1,253 49,451 39,873 2,602

20 537 49,256 39,775 2,527

10.6 6.0 13.2 12.2 16.3

9.6 8.7 16.6 15.1 24.0

50.4 24.1 65.0 61.7 73.4

* 34.0 73.3 68.0 101.5

* 694.5 2,048.5 1,962.0 2,221.0

*

* 2,158.5 2,008.0 2,847.0

Arkansas

2,343 1,953 38

414 246 32

27.0 31.9 15.4

20.8 19.7 27.2

120.1 146.8

*

89.5 89.3

*

3,202.5 3,831.5

*

* Cuban. . .

8 344 35,339 26,657 7,950

2 134 35,925 27,055 8,492

* 15.5 13.7 12.6 18.8

* 23.5 15.5 14.0 22.8

* 64.0 65.2 62.2 77.5

* 89.3 70.0 64.9 93.9

*

* 2,037.5 1,973.5 2,242.5

*

* 2,090.5 1,963.0 2,601.0 California

258,105 225,633 2,070

735 29,667 270,591 171,552 33,835

245,592 200,129 2,015

913 42,535 362,993 255,913 48,004

23.5 26.7 14.7 10.2 12.9 12.0 10.6 14.6

31.9 32.7 15.9 12.7 31.0 16.6 15.2 23.0

97.1 111.9 60.3 49.9 49.9 55.8 52.6 63.0

128.4 134.4 64.0 60.8 112.8 69.7 65.5 90.1

2,771.5 3,160.0 1,799.5

* 1,468.5 1,736.0 1,658.5 1,978.0

3,463.5 3,592.0 1,797.5

* 3,131.5 2,044.0 1,926.0 2,593.0 See footnotes at end of table.

(30)

Table 1. Live births, birth rates, fertility rates, and total fertility rates, by Hispanic origin of mother and by race of mothers of non-Hispanic origin: United States and each State, 1990 and 2000—Con.

Live births 1990

Birth rate

2000 1990

Fertility rate

2000 1990

Colorado

18,237 13,618 213

9,278 4,668 121

24.8 30.2 16.4

21.9 16.5 16.7

105.3 130.2 64.1

89.2 67.8 64.7

2,952.5 3,535.0

*

2,509.0 1,896.0

* Cuban. . .

36 4,370 47,158 41,822 2,902

24 4,465 44,159 39,791 2,832

9.7 16.3 13.2 12.9 16.7

11.7 33.7 15.4 15.0 22.1

* 67.8 59.2 58.1 74.4

* 136.0

62.5 61.0 89.0

* 2,014.5 1,868.5 1,842.0 2,295.0

* 3,871.5 1,874.5 1,827.0 2,548.0 Connecticut

6,472 570

5,318 169

20.2 24.3

25.0 20.1

79.1 106.4

93.8 80.4

2,284.5

*

2,535.5

* Puerto Rican. . .

4,118 77 1,707 35,588 28,785 4,946

3,869 78 1,202 40,381 34,207 5,199

21.2 10.8 17.9 11.8 11.0 16.4

26.3 12.2 23.3 14.6 13.6 23.7

81.8 51.0 69.4 57.0 55.0 66.4

97.1 53.9 90.7 61.9 58.9 87.8

2,325.0

* 2,027.0 1,786.5 1,720.5 2,038.0

2,563.5

* 2,528.5 1,776.5 1,675.0 2,475.5

Delaware

1,022 494

323 84

27.4 38.0

20.4 27.2

113.9 169.9

83.9

*

3,073.5

*

Puerto Rican. . . 320 186 22.8 22.5 89.9 92.3 * *

9 199 10,009 6,999 2,606

7 46 10,785 8,055 2,564

* 21.3 13.4 12.2 17.1

* 12.2 16.6 15.3 23.1

* 86.6 60.9 57.9 68.3

*

* 68.6 64.6 87.1

*

* 1,931.5 1,846.5 2,128.5

*

* 1,974.0 1,841.0 2,485.5

District of Columbia Hispanic . . .

Mexican. . .

876 70

890 44

19.5 13.7

27.2 14.8

74.1 52.7

94.4

*

Puerto Rican. . . 5 20 * 9.1 * * * *

6 795 6,757 1,463 5,108

8 818 10,904 1,640 9,030

* 21.8 12.9 9.0 14.8

* 31.1 19.1 9.9 22.8

* 83.3 51.5 31.4 65.2

* 107.7

70.3 32.9 88.8

*

* 1,511.5

986.5 1,997.5

*

* 2,049.0 986.5 2,602.0

Florida

45,856 10,851 8,460 9,319 17,226 158,053 106,200 46,233

27,570 5,003 4,295 7,380 10,892 171,594 123,514 45,362

17.1 29.8 17.6 11.2 17.2 11.9 10.0 19.6

17.5 31.0 17.4 10.9 22.2 15.1 13.0 26.7

73.3 136.6

71.1 57.7 64.8 60.9 55.2 80.1

74.4 137.7

68.3 54.0 80.9 71.0 64.0 104.9

2,212.0 3,648.0 2,131.5 1,782.0 1,949.0 1,967.0 1,805.5 2,418.5

2,116.5 3,581.5 1,952.5 1,528.0 2,285.5 2,114.5 1,898.0 2,980.0 Georgia

13,363 10,471 510

2,263 1,311 277

30.7 38.0 14.4

20.8 26.7 15.9

134.1 180.1 53.9

86.8 127.3 62.9

3,528.5 4,525.0

*

2,323.0 3,157.5

* Cuban. . .

156 2,226 117,480 70,521 43,418

58 617 109,961

68,005 40,412

12.4 19.9 15.4 13.8 18.6

7.4 17.9 17.3 15.0 23.3

52.5 76.6 66.3 63.4 72.1

31.3 64.8 69.4 62.4 86.1

* 2,129.0 2,063.5 1,987.0 2,191.0

*

* 2,055.0 1,862.5 2,460.5 See footnotes at end of table.

(31)

Live births 1990

Birth rate

2000 1990

Fertility rate

2000 1990

Hawaii

2,302 453

2,437 348

26.2 22.9

29.9 24.2

110.1 101.1

124.3 97.6

3,134.0

*

3,383.5

*

Puerto Rican. . . 750 628 25.0 24.4 110.4 112.1 * *

9 1,090 15,232 3,285 440

16 1,445 18,050 5,472 651

* 29.3 13.6 10.2 16.2

* 35.5 17.6 15.7 25.1

* 114.8 65.5 51.7 76.8

* 140.2

75.5 65.4 107.0

* 3,396.0 2,035.5 1,587.5

*

* 3,876.5 2,224.5 1,900.0

* Idaho

2,599 2,242 16

1,434 1,195 11

25.6 28.3

*

27.1 27.7

*

112.6 127.1

*

124.9 130.2

*

3,120.0 3,495.0

*

3,372.5 3,464.5

* Cuban. . .

3 338 17,655 17,021 74

1 227 14,968 14,521 42

* 16.5 14.9 14.8 11.5

* 25.5 15.7 15.7 13.1

* 68.0 69.7 69.8 62.0

* 108.5

71.4 71.4

*

* 2,227.5 2,238.5

*

* 2,220.5 2,227.0

*

Illinois

39,313 33,206 2,894 184 3,029 145,634 103,267 34,079

24,245 17,653 3,406 241 2,945 169,681 122,854 41,808

25.7 29.0 18.3 10.0 14.5 13.4 12.1 18.0

26.8 28.3 23.3 13.2 25.3 16.3 14.4 25.7

105.5 120.6 69.7 47.5 58.3 61.5 57.6 75.2

110.5 120.5 87.1 63.4 98.5 69.6 63.3 99.2

2,901.0 3,260.5 2,054.5

* 1,671.0 1,925.0 1,814.5 2,288.5

3,002.0 3,230.5 2,400.0

* 2,792.5 2,043.5 1,832.5 2,861.5

Indiana

5,456 4,622 320

1,856 1,355 248

25.4 30.2 16.3

18.8 20.3 17.7

109.2 133.3 65.1

77.3 85.6 68.9

2,928.5 3,504.0

*

2,152.5 2,372.5

* Cuban. . .

30 484 81,922 71,214 9,447

13 240 84,057 73,933 9,386

10.9 12.4 14.0 13.6 18.0

* 14.8 15.5 14.9 22.0

* 49.6 64.6 63.4 76.4

* 57.3 66.3 64.5 86.9

*

* 2,036.5 2,015.5 2,280.0

*

* 1,959.5 1,910.0 2,491.0

Iowa

2,135 1,679 40

623 379 8

25.9 27.5 14.9

19.1 15.5

*

114.8 127.2

*

82.0 69.1

*

3,116.0 3,412.0

*

* Cuban. . .

10 406 35,897 33,608 1,203

2 234 38,758 37,080 1,038

* 22.7 12.7 12.4 18.0

* 36.0 14.1 13.9 21.8

* 90.1 61.0 59.9 83.7

* 140.3

64.5 63.9 91.8

*

* 1,969.0 1,950.0 2,307.0

*

* 1,910.5 1,896.5 2,468.5 Kansas

4,761 3,970 91

1,954 1,595 73

25.3 26.8 17.4

20.9 21.0 20.4

109.2 118.3

70.2

90.8 93.4

*

2,955.5 3,178.0

*

2,429.0 2,487.0

* Cuban. . .

15 685 34,462 30,181 2,820

17 269 36,827 32,629 3,318

* 20.7 14.0 13.5 17.5

* 20.9 15.5 15.0 23.6

* 81.4 65.8 64.7 77.9

* 81.0 69.5 67.7 98.4

*

* 2,120.0 2,105.5 2,332.5

*

(32)

Live births 1990

Birth rate

2000 1990

Fertility rate

2000 1990

Kentucky

1,089 767

274 178

18.2 24.4

12.5 20.5

88.0 130.4

52.3 90.2

2,347.5

*

Puerto Rican. . . 97 47 15.0 12.8 64.8 * * *

42 183 54,893 49,133 5,107

2 47 54,021 48,574 5,065

11.9 9.9 13.8 13.5 16.8

* 5.5 14.8 14.4 19.4

* 43.9 62.7 62.1 71.1

* 22.0 62.8 61.6 77.6

*

* 1,966.0 1,952.5 2,124.5

*

* 1,870.5 1,840.0 2,220.5 Louisiana

1,532 671

941 202

14.2 20.8

10.1 8.6

61.1 93.1

41.8 36.6

1,787.5

*

Puerto Rican. . . 97 57 12.6 9.2 51.1 37.8 * *

62 702 66,278 36,592 28,298

52 630 71,221 40,547 29,688

7.3 11.8 15.2 13.0 19.4

6.1 11.5 17.3 14.6 23.0

37.6 49.0 67.6 60.5 79.9

28.3 46.1 72.8 63.5 91.4

*

* 2,094.5 1,918.0 2,346.5

*

* 2,132.0 1,877.0 2,579.0

Maine

141 32

127 28

15.1 11.6

18.6 13.0

62.6

*

72.6

*

Puerto Rican. . . 27 13 11.9 * * * * *

1 81 13,425 13,019 104

3 83 16,397 16,081 83

* 21.0 10.6 10.5 12.8

* 27.0 14.1 14.0 18.8

*

* 50.7 50.4 68.1

*

* 60.5 60.3 90.7

*

* 1,702.0 1,696.5

*

* 1,819.5 1,814.5

*

Maryland

4,812 971

2,523 547

21.1 24.3

20.2 29.7

83.0 105.3

74.3 119.6

2,400.5

*

2,037.0

*

Puerto Rican. . . 344 218 13.5 12.4 49.4 45.4 * *

50 3,447 69,266 41,013 24,676

83 1,675 75,637 49,463 23,716

7.4 22.1 13.7 12.4 16.5

13.0 20.2 16.7 15.2 21.0

32.3 85.7 61.4 59.5 65.7

54.2 72.6 67.0 63.9 74.9

* 2,488.0 1,942.5 1,885.5 2,080.5

* 2,002.0 1,956.5 1,843.5 2,210.5

Massachusetts

9,279 388

8,425 286

21.6 17.4

29.3 22.5

81.4 61.6

108.4 80.4

’’2,297.0

*

2,864.5

* Puerto Rican. . .

4,537 79 4,275 71,780 60,419 6,436

4,872 120 3,147 83,509 72,261 7,585

22.8 8.9 21.6 12.2 11.5 17.8

32.2 14.8 27.2 14.7 13.8 27.4

86.3 37.1 80.7 55.3 53.5 70.9

119.3 59.9 100.5

59.8 56.6 101.1

2,392.5

* 2,294.0 1,660.0 1,608.0 2,127.0

3,065.5

* 2,683.5 1,698.5 1,604.0 2,818.0 Michigan

6,949 5,574 438

4,326 2,560 383

21.5 25.2 16.3

21.5 18.5 20.7

92.4 110.9 66.3

88.0 76.6 81.6

2,551.5 3,013.5

*

2,420.0 2,109.0

* Cuban. . .

79 858 120,551

92,551 23,868

62 1,321 143,083 109,182 31,440

10.9 12.4 13.4 12.7 16.8

12.0 33.4 16.4 15.0 24.8

50.3 51.1 62.1 60.2 71.4

55.7 133.2

69.0 64.4 94.1

*

* 1,971.5 1,943.5 2,155.0

* 3,685.5 2,032.5 1,887.5 2,723.0 See footnotes at end of table.

(33)

Live births 1990

Birth rate

2000 1990

Fertility rate

2000 1990

Minnesota

3,952 3,179 109

1,050 781 56

27.6 33.2 16.5

19.5 22.5 17.0

115.3 141.9

64.7

83.0 98.0

*

3,061.5 3,685.5

*

2,238.0

*

* Cuban. . .

27 637 61,116 52,098 4,378

13 200 63,845 58,476 2,211

10.7 16.5 13.3 12.5 23.4

* 13.9 15.5 14.9 27.5

* 65.7 60.7 57.5 96.1

* 55.2 66.1 63.5 112.3

*

* 1,940.5 1,861.0 2,733.5

*

* 1,893.5 1,815.0 3,032.5 Mississippi

623 343

116 47

15.7 15.9

7.3 7.0

75.6 83.7

30.4 29.9

*

Puerto Rican. . . 27 9 9.4 * * * * *

7 246 43,407 22,879 19,889

3 57 43,418 22,161 20,748

* 18.1 15.5 13.2 19.2

* 7.7 17.0 13.7 22.8

* 78.1 69.3 63.6 77.2

* 31.3 73.2 61.6 90.9

*

* 2,114.0 1,996.0 2,228.0

*

* 2,123.0 1,841.5 2,485.0

Missouri

2,661 1,932 115

970 728 66

22.4 24.8 17.2

15.7 19.0 16.7

94.9 107.9

66.6

64.3 79.1 63.6

2,638.0 2,946.5

*

* Cuban. . .

45 569 73,740 60,502 11,437

16 160 78,108 63,574 13,538

14.9 18.4 13.5 12.8 17.8

* 9.2 15.5 14.3 24.8

* 72.9 62.6 60.8 73.6

* 36.1 68.0 64.0 97.2

*

* 1,989.0 1,948.5 2,231.0

*

* 2,008.5 1,887.5 2,793.5

Montana

330 155

292 145

18.3 13.2

24.0 17.3

77.3 58.5

103.1 77.9

*

Puerto Rican. . . 10 7 * * * * * *

4 161 10,256 8,835 34

1 139 10,916 9,373 35

* 31.4 12.0 11.2 10.2

* 42.7 14.4 13.3 16.0

* 121.6

58.7 55.4

*

* 65.3 60.8

*

* 1,959.0 1,867.0

*

* 2,044.5 1,913.0

*

Nebraska

2,596 2,077 27

802 517 9

27.5 29.2 13.5

21.7 17.4

*

121.1 132.4

*

93.7 77.2

*

3,271.5 3,530.0

*

* Cuban. . .

7 485 21,551 19,200 1,355

2 274 23,310 21,332 1,376

* 23.6 13.6 13.1 18.8

* 48.4 15.3 14.8 24.2

* 95.6 64.2 62.2 81.1

* 186.8

68.5 66.8 97.4

*

* 2,052.0 2,010.5 2,393.5

*

* 2,017.5 1,968.5 2,711.0 Nevada

10,195 8,398 162

3,261 2,483 55

25.9 29.4 15.5

26.2 29.1 12.9

109.9 126.2 66.3

111.1 124.8 54.6

3,053.5 3,439.5

*

2,988.5 3,280.0

* Cuban. . .

174 1,461 20,317 15,724 2,283

93 630 18,305 15,378 1,887

15.1 16.9 12.9 12.0 16.3

15.5 21.8 17.0 16.3 24.7

75.5 68.0 62.3 60.2 72.7

76.6 86.9 73.6 71.9 97.3

* 1,971.5 1,985.5 1,935.5 2,232.5

*

States by Hispanic Origin

Ser ies 21, Number 57 May 2006

Birth and Fertility Rates for