America appears to be in the midst of an unusual migration phenomenon that has little to do with people slipping across the Southern Border or so-called chain migration. According to reports, U.S. citizens are relocating at lower rates than 10 years ago. However, major metropolitan areas are experiencing significant population decline and a debate over the reason why has surfaced.
Until recently, a reported 40 million U.S. citizens or approximately 14 percent of the country’s legal population relocated a minimum of once annually. Much of this migration stemmed from young people moving from city to city for work and professional reasons.
People under 30 tend to have fewer roots planted such as homeownership and children, which provides increased flexibility to pursue job opportunities. But according to data from Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, interstate migration dipped by one percent each of the previous three years and it now stands at only 11 percent. The U.S. Census Bureau’s Population Estimate Program information complicates the trend because it demonstrates higher than usual migration away from metropolitan areas.
If one were to look at this phenomenon from a geopolitical lens, it appears Americans are fleeing largely Democrat and liberal-leaning cities. Reports indicate that the Northeast and West Coast have been hard hit by mass exodus and Midwestern cities are also seeing prominent population losses.
Liberal cities in some parts of the country have lost tens of thousands of residents. Many of the largely Republican regions are showing signs of more promising economic growth than their Blue State counterparts. So, this trend could just come down to jobs.
Although migration has been offset in some areas by births outpacing deaths, migration numbers paint a changing U.S. population map. Consider these top 10 areas of population loss as outlined by Brookings Institution demographics expert William Frey from 2010-2017.
1: Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin
Population decrease due to migration: -296,320
Population change: +0.8 percent
Natural growth: 869,178 births; 501,469 deaths
2: Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, California
Population decrease due to migration: -93,959
Population change: +4.1 percent
Natural growth: 1,202,115 births; 578,750 deaths
3: Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, Michigan
Population decrease due to migration: -54,640
Population change: +0.4 percent
Natural growth: 364,121 births; 293,091 deaths
4: St. Louis, Missouri-Illinois
Population decrease due to migration: -39,894
Population change: +0.7 percent
Natural growth, 2010-2017: 246,280 births; 186,111 deaths
5: Cleveland-Elyria, Ohio
Population decrease due to migration: -33,117
Population change: -0.9 percent
Natural growth, 2010-2017: 168,361 births, 153,138 deaths
6: Memphis, Tennessee-Mississippi-Arkansas
Population decrease due to migration: -30,000
Population change: +1.8 percent
Natural growth: 136,058 births, 82,670 deaths
7: Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, Wisconsin
Population decrease due to migration: -27,959
Population change: +1.3 percent
Natural growth: 144,429 births, 95,601 death
8: Flint, Michigan
Population decrease due to migration: -22,658
Population change: -4.3 percent
Natural growth: 35,720 births, 31,707 deaths
9: El Paso, Texas
Population decrease due to migration: -21,829
Population change: +5.1 percent
Natural growth, 2010-2017: 98,803 births, 36,570 deaths
10: New York-Newark-Jersey City, New York-New Jersey-Pennsylvania
Population decrease due to migration: -21,503
Population change: +3.9 percent
Natural growth: 1,811,927 births, 1,035,505 deaths
One of the arguments put forth by Frey has been that people are being unusually affected by the weather and that consideration has prompted North to South relocations.
“The story of the broader migration pattern in the U.S. is from Snow Belt to Sun Belt,” Frey reportedly said. “That migration has slowed a little bit in the early part of the decade when we were still dealing with the aftermath of the recession, but it’s coming back.”
But his conclusion doesn’t appear to jibe with his hard data. Migration from Chicago to sunny Florida might make sense, but Los Angeles, El Paso, TX, Bakersfield, CA, Fresno, CA, and other fair weather areas would not be subject to bird-like migration. Despite the inconsistency, New York’s Gov. Andrew Cuomo recently floated the same excuse for people leaving his state. His Republican gubernatorial rival in the midterm elections was quick to push back.
“Andrew Cuomo is confusing New York’s miserable business climate with the weather,” Marc Molinaro reportedly said. “The governor’s claim that it’s all about the weather doesn’t hold water.”
Gov. Cuomo’s and Frey’s claim also don’t stack up against places such as Maine that endure rugged winters that not seeing similar levels of population loss. A more logical conclusion would be that people are leaving metropolitan areas that are largely liberal-leaning for a variety of reasons that may trail back to economic opportunities. Other cities on Frey’s Top 50 list include Rochester, NY, Hartford, CT, New Haven, CT, Syracuse, NY, and Toledo, OH.
~ Christian Patriot Daily
