‘Barack’ and ‘Obama’ Surging In Baby-Name Popularity In Trump’s New America

Former President Barack Obama had an impactful name well before his presidency. (Photo by Isa Foltin/WireImage )

New data from the Social Security Administration reveals the name “Barack” is on the rise again after popularity dipped after 2009.

In 2016, 19 baby boys were named Barack, which is up from eight in 2015, according to May data obtained by The Huffington Post. The name had been on the decline in the years after Barack Obama was sworn in as the first Black president in 2008, peaking with 69 babies sharing his first name in 2009. The 44th U.S. president’s surname also hit a peak in 2009, with 16 Obama babies being born.

After the first year of Obama’s presidency, the number of babies sharing the name dropped below five. As for the name Barack, babies with that moniker dropped from 52 in 2008 to 28 in 2010 and declined steadily until his last year in office.

Yet, even before Obama’s presidency, some wanted the name Barack to be included in their family.

“In the year 2000, my husband and I had a chance to hear Barack Obama speak at the office of then-Alderman Arenda Troutman,” Linda Troutman told NBC News in January of how she came up with her now 10-year-old son’s name, Barakbanyaham. “He was very charismatic. I wondered how a Black guy with such a different name could run against the ‘Mighty’ Congressman Bobby Rush. When I heard him speak, I understood.

“I told my husband then that this guy was going to do big things.”

Democracy needs journalism it can trust.

This election season, the stakes are higher than usual — and so is the pressure on newsrooms to soften their coverage, stay quiet, or just disappear. Independent reporting, the kind that answers to readers instead of advertisers or political pressure, matters more in a moment like this, not less.

For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed independent and reader-funded. We have no corporate owner and no shareholders telling us what to cover or how to cover it. That independence is also our biggest vulnerability: nothing protects it except readers choosing to fund it directly.

Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under in a moment like this, it's rarely the independent, reader-funded ones that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top