Is exurbia really solid GOP territory—so dominated by conservative white voters that the Democrats have no chance of competing successfully there? This report takes a careful look at the data and concludes that view is incorrect. Exurbia is changing rapidly and the most important part of exurbia—America’s emerging suburbs—is definitely accessible to Democrats. A serious effort by Democrats to reach these voters should result in significantly compressed GOP margins in these areas which, in turn, should make Democratic electoral success more likely in 2006 and beyond.

In this report, exurbia is divided into two parts—borderline rural “true exurbs” and borderline suburban “emerging suburbs”. Today’s true exurbs contain only 2 percent of the nation’s population. Emerging suburbs on the other hand contain 13 percent of the nation’s population and, on average, are growing faster than any other type of county in the US, including true exurbs. Emerging suburbs are therefore the most politically significant and salient part of exurbia by a wide margin.

Analysis of Census data indicates that the emerging suburbs are rapidly becoming more diverse and are considerably more downscale than generally believed. In terms of diversity, between 1990 and 2000, emerging suburbs declined from 85 percent white to 79 percent white, a rate of decrease of about six-tenths of a percent per year. This decline occurred despite solid growth in the white population in that decade (by 21 percent). But the minority population of the emerging suburbs exploded: the black population of these counties grew by 50 percent and the Hispanic and Asian populations grew at the blistering rate of 117 percent and 111 percent, respectively. Overall, the minority population in these counties grew by 89 percent, substantially faster than minority growth in any other category.

In terms of class, about 58 percent of emerging suburban residents are white working class–that is, are whites without a four year college degree. Only 23 percent are college-educated whites. Looked at by occupation, a very strong majority (65 percent) of emerging suburban workers do not hold professional or managerial jobs. There are more construction and production workers than professionals and way more sales and office workers than managers. And by income, 70 percent of emerging suburban households have incomes under $75,000 and only 17 percent have incomes over $100,000.

Looking at past voting patterns, true exurban counties voted 62-37 for Bush over Kerry, a lop-sided result, to be sure, and a 10 point gain in GOP margin over 2000. But the Bush-Kerry split in emerging suburban counties was significantly closer and represented only a 5 point gain in margin over 2000, when the Bush-Gore split was 52-44. And, in 1996, Dole had only a slim one point margin over Clinton in these counties (45-44).

Emerging suburban counties are particularly accessible to Democrats in areas of the country that are most critical to their future electoral success. For example, Kerry in 2004 lost emerging suburban counties in the solidest blue states by only 51-48. And in both purple states that lean blue (Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin) and purple states that lean red (Florida, Missouri, Nevada, Ohio), he did just a bit worse in these counties, losing 53-46.

Moreover, while Democrats in 2006 do need to improve over their 2004 presidential performance in the emerging suburbs in most states, they typically need not win these counties outright to triumph. Significantly narrowing the GOP advantage in the emerging suburbs should suffice, as indicated by analysis of the vote in key states like Missouri, Ohio and Colorado.

Numerous public opinion surveys conducted from 2004 to 2006 support the idea that emerging suburban voters are potentially accessible to Democrats. Together, these surveys indicate that emerging suburban voters are tax-sensitive and concerned about government waste, but not ideologically anti-government. Similarly, while they tend to be religious and family-oriented and hold some conservative social views, they are socially moderate in comparison to rural residents. They are also not anti-business, but do hold populist attitudes toward corporate abuse and people who game the system. And these voters worry more about concrete issues like public education than they do about whether politicians have the “correct” stance on various values issues.

Looking at views that are likely to be particularly salient today, emerging suburban voters are now distinctly negative on President Bush and the Iraq war. They also believe the country is off on the wrong track and indicate a desire to move in a significantly different direction.

One particular issue where residents of the emerging suburbs are open to Democratic approaches is health care. Not only do they strongly prefer Democrats over Republicans on the issue, they overwhelmingly say they support reforming the system to provide affordable health care for all Americans (87 percent). Even more impressive, almost three-fifths (58 percent) in the emerging suburbs said they would support such reform even if it meant paying more in taxes and a much larger government role in the health care system.

On the economy, views in the emerging suburbs are also distinctly negative. Most disapprove of Bush’s handling of the economy and believe the economy is going in the wrong direction. And 55 percent in the emerging suburbs now agree that “Most people today face increasing uncertainty about employment, with stagnant incomes, paying more for health care, taxes, and retirement, while those at the top have booming incomes and lower taxes”, compared to 42 percent who think “Our economic faces ups and downs, but most people can expect to better themselves, see rising incomes, find good jobs and provide economic security for their families”.

So there is clearly fertile ground in the emerging suburbs for a Democratic message. But competing in exurbia necessarily means that Democratic field operations will have to venture into areas where they feel less comfortable and where finding Democratic votes takes a bit more effort. To succeed in these areas, they will have to develop new models of voter mobilization that go beyond traditional precinct-based methods and reach out to the newer voters and others who lean their way, but who are dispersed throughout their communities, rather than conveniently concentrated within specific precincts. New models and methods developed in successful Democratic campaigns like Tim Kaine’s in Virginia’s 2005 gubernatorial contest show great promise along these lines and now need to be refined and generalized. The 2006 election should provide the laboratory Democrats need to do this and enter the 2008 election season prepared to turn exurbia if not blue, at least a much lighter red.