New Federal DOT Policy Would Disadvantage Connecticut, Especially Our Urban Centers
Transportation infrastructure shapes not just how we move, but the economic opportunities and daily costs faced by residents. According to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, transportation remains the second largest household expense after housing, consuming 15% of average household spending. The burden falls heaviest on lower-income households, who spend 30% of their after-tax income on transportation costs.
The newly confirmed U.S. Transportation Secretary, Sean Duffy, issued a memo (pdf) on January 16th that could significantly affect the transportation landscape of the country. The directive instructs the DOT to give preference to communities "with marriage and birth rates higher than the national average." Tying transportation funding to such demographic trends is unusual, and has been alarming policy makers; in fact, Connecticut’s Senator Blumenthal described the directive as "deeply frightening."
In this post, we examine the potential impacts of such a demographically-driven policy on Connecticut, where long-term transportation needs are estimated at $100 billion (pdf). We'll analyze which communities would benefit, and which would be left behind, in a scenario where high marriage and birth rate communities are given preferential treatment in funding.
This analysis is inspired by researchers Yonah Freemark and Lindiwe Rennert at The Urban Institute, who examined this question on a national level. The maps and graphs presented in this piece were also created by CTData’s Senior GIS & Data Analyst, Jill Walsh.
Defining “High Marriage and Birth Rate” Communities (“HMB” Communities):
Following the logic of the DOT memo, we identified communities with both marriage and birth rates higher than the national median. To do this, we used data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2023 American Community Survey (ACS), the most recent ACS dataset available (see our recent blog post for more information on the ACS). We reviewed Connecticut data at the Census tract level (2).
To examine marriage rate, we looked at the percent of households in each community that were occupied by a married couple. To measure birth rate, we measured the percent of women aged 15 – 50 who had a child within the past year. A Census tract was considered high-marriage and birth rate (“HMB”) if it scored above the national median on both.
How does Connecticut rank in terms of marriage and birth rates overall?
Connecticut’s marriage rate is similar to the U.S. overall. The percent of households occupied by a married couple in Connecticut is 47.1%, which places it 26th out of 52 localities (50 states plus D.C. and Puerto Rico). For comparison, the highest ranked state is Utah, with 59.5%.
Connecticut’s birth rate is relatively low, at 4.5%, which places it at 46th out of the 52 localities. It ranks similarly to the neighboring New England states of Rhode Island (44th) and Massachusetts (49th). This places Connecticut far below the leading states in birth rate: South Dakota (6.5%) and North Dakota (6.4%).
When combining these marriage and birth metrics into a composite score (3), Connecticut ranks 45th out of 52 localities, highlighting how severely the state would be disadvantaged under the proposed funding approach.
What do Connecticut’s high marriage and high birth rate (HMB) communities look like, geographically and demographically?
There are 885 Census tracts in Connecticut, of which 872 have sufficient population and data for meaningful analysis. Only 157 of these tracts (18.0%) qualify as HMB communities, as shown in the interactive map below.
The distribution of HMB communities across Connecticut reveals a noticeable pattern. Rather than being evenly spread, these communities are predominantly found in wealthier and more rural areas, while notably absent from urban centers like New Haven, Bridgeport, Waterbury, and Hartford.
HMB communities are, in many ways, demographically distinct. These areas have higher proportions of white residents and lower proportions of Black and Hispanic residents. Reflecting an overall higher income, HMB communities also tend to have lower rates of poverty. In fact, the poverty rate in Connecticut’s HMB communities is roughly half that of non-HMB communities. These demographic patterns are detailed in the summary graph below, and you can explore how HMB communities correlate with poverty rates using the interactive map above.
Insert graph: https://www.datawrapper.de/_/88mSq/
Moving funding toward HMB communities would therefore have clear implications: it would effectively redirect resources away from communities with larger Black and Hispanic populations, and would further disinvest from communities with average to high poverty rates.
Transportation needs of HMB vs. non-HMB communities
While most Connecticut households have access to at least one vehicle, significant disparities exist between communities. Statewide, approximately 9% of households lack access to a car. But in HMB communities, only 4% of households are without a vehicle, compared to nearly 10% in non-HMB communities. That distinction is graphed below.
In the interactive map, it’s also apparent there is very little overlap in communities with low access to a car and HMB communities.
This disparity reflects fundamentally different transportation needs and priorities. Communities with higher rates of car-free households typically have a greater reliance on – and need for – robust public transportation and walkable infrastructure. By prioritizing HMB communities, resources would be directed toward areas where residents are more likely to have personal vehicles, likely favoring road and bridge projects over public transit investments. This would further disadvantage communities where buses, trains, and other public transportation options are most critical.
Tying transportation funding to high marriage and birth rates will likely disadvantage Connecticut as a whole, and increase divisions that already exist within the state. The analysis shows that such a policy would favor whiter, wealthier communities that rely on personal cars versus public transit, while reducing support for communities with greater racial diversity, higher poverty rates, and higher use of public transit - precisely the communities that have already been harmed by disinvestment.
The full data by Census tract is provided here for all readers who would like to explore.
To learn more about the Census and resources provided by CTData, head to our Census Data Portal. Explore other data sets and analysis at data by topic and data projects. You can stay up-to-date on the latest data and tools by subscribing to our newsletter and following CTData on Linkedin, Instagram, and Bluesky.