People are voting with their feet

OPINION:

I began a recent column by noting that over the last decade, the state of New York had lost approximately 2 million people while New Jersey and Illinois had each lost around 500,000. That is not accurate, and I apologize for the mistake. To be more precise, New York has had 2 million more residents leave the state than have entered it (net out-migration) in the past decade. Similarly, New Jersey and Illinois each have had about 500,000 more residents leave their states for other states than vice versa. The only thing that is propping up the population of these states is immigration (legal or otherwise) from foreign countries. More on that in a bit.

The events in the United States over the past decade have been remarkable. Millions of people have decided that things are so bad and so unlikely to change in their home states that they have given up and moved away. It turns out that, despite the significant costs (both personal and financial) associated with relocating one’s family, state governments can be so misguided as to drive people to that point.

It has not been confined to just the past 10 years.

In the 1960 census, my home state of New York was the most populous in the union, a distinction it had held for 150 years. That was about to come to an end. Somewhere in the 1960s, that long run ended as California overtook the Empire State (by more than 1 million people) in the 1970 census. In the 2000 census, Texas surpassed New York, and — the ultimate embarrassment — by Florida in the 2010 census.

More concerning, over those same years, New York stopped growing along with the nation. In 1970, approximately 18.2 million people were living in New York, accounting for about 9% of the total population of about 203 million Americans. Fifty years later, 20.2 million people lived in New York, accounting for about 6% of the then 331 million Americans.

At the same time, places such as Texas and Florida experienced significant growth. In 1970, about 11 million people lived in Texas. By the 2020 census, almost 30 million people lived there. In 1970, about 7 million people lived in Florida; by 2020, that number had tripled. Places such as North Carolina and Tennessee doubled their populations in 60 years, while places like Illinois and Pennsylvania barely managed to maintain their status quo.

This is important for several reasons. Obviously, over the past two generations, the citizenry has sorted itself out based on political preferences or, if you prefer, governmental competence (it all leads to the same conclusion). That sort of geographical dispersion (or collection) seems to be more likely to lead to circumstances in which the federal government will be unable to reconcile the competing preferences of the states. In other words, it increases the chances of conflict between the states.

Think about immigration for a moment. Which states have reacted most strongly and negatively to the idea of restoring our southern border and, perhaps more important, repatriating those in the United States illegally? California, New York and Illinois come to mind immediately. Is it possible that leaders in those states would rather that those in the country illegally are allowed to hang around long enough to be counted in the 2030 census, which will, of course, be used to determine representation in the House of Representatives and to divide up all sorts of federal spoils?

It is not only possible but also likely. How should the other states approach such a likelihood?

Voting with one’s feet — leaving home for greener pastures elsewhere — is the most definitive judgment that a person can render on a political jurisdiction. It is the best, most complete and honest assessment of the competence and promise of a political jurisdiction.

It is not an accident, for example, that the United States, should it decide to, could open the gates, and millions of immigrants would flood in from every direction. Nor is it accidental that residents are fleeing sclerotic places such as California, New York and Illinois.

• Michael McKenna is a contributing editor at The Washington Times. He was born in New York City.