A Word on Why Migration Matters—Both Legal and Domestic Migration
Ohio’s future likely is one in which it surpasses Michigan and Louisiana as the most "in-bred" state in America.
Too often these days, we spend our time talking about illegal immigration and its detrimental impacts, as well as the rigged migration of foreigners by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris (i.e., flooding the Springfield, Ohios, of America with foreigners via abusive use of executive action). We rightly focus on those aspects of immigration because of how those actions are undermining our sovereignty, putting Americans at grave risk, and changing the makeup of communities far too quickly for assimilation to occur properly. In this column, I want to focus on legal migration by foreigners and fellow Americans.
Specifically, I want to talk about why both legal and domestic migration matter. By domestic migration, I mean the movement of Americans from one state to another state. Now, before I offend some of you, I want to state clearly that I get how some people don’t move due to (1) family issues (e.g., being around grandkids or taking care of an elderly parent) or (2) owning a business that isn’t moveable. Beyond those people, however, are the Americans who don’t move because of inertia/fear (leaving where you’ve always lived is scary), costs of living/moving (where you live is affordable or where you’d move is not), parochialism (X is the greatest place in America), and attractiveness of where they live (mountains or beaches). I am writing from a certain perspective: (1) I am someone who has lived in other states (Colorado and Virginia) then the state (Ohio) in which I was born and raised, (2) I’ve traveled extensively around America having spent time in 46 out of 50 states so know how many amazing places there are in our huge country, and (3) I will leave Ohio again once my son graduates from high school so I can escape the cold, grey winters (only came back to Ohio because of my ex-wife’s job opportunity back in 2007).
Migration matters because it infuses states that gain migrants with fresh blood, bold risk takers, and new ways of doing things. States that attract foreigners and other Americans do so because they are seen as providing better pathways to prosperity and opportunities than states that don’t bring in new people. States that attract people grow; states that don’t stagnate. One way to measure whether a state is an attractive state or an unattractive state is by the percentage of people in that state who were born there. The lower the percentage of those born in a particular state the better, as it means new people have moved there from abroad and other states. The higher the percentage of those born in a particular state the worse, as it means the state isn’t attracting the type of people that invigorate it.
Not surprisingly, Ohio is one of the most unattractive “in-bred” states. Based on the most recent U.S. Census Bureau data, 73% of eligible voters in Ohio were born here. That percentage is the third highest in America, with only Michigan (75%) and Louisiana (76%) having higher numbers. That means that whenever you meet someone in Ohio, there is roughly a 75% chance they were born here. The ten states with the most eligible voters born there are also among the states with the weakest job and population growth. From 1990 to last month, not one of the bottom ten states made the top twenty-five states for net percentage job growth. Not one. Seven of the ten are in the bottom fifteen spots for net percentage job growth.
Even measuring a shorter span of time results in a similar outcome. From February 2020 to last month, except for Kentucky, the states with the highest number of eligible voters who were born there occupy the bottom half of net percentage job growth, with half of the states in the bottom fifteen for net percentage job growth.
These states also are aging more rapidly than other states. The ten states are also the states with the slowest population growth and are the one projected to lose ground over the next twenty-six years. As I’ve detailed previously, shrinking or stagnant states like Ohio are losing political power as the number of congressional members and Electoral Votes shrink after each U.S. Census. In 1988, Ohio possessed twenty-one members of the U.S. House and twenty-three Electoral Votes. After the 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020 U.S. Censuses, Ohio is down to sixteen U.S. House members and eighteen Electoral Votes, a loss of five members and five Electoral Votes. I estimate Ohio will lose two more U.S. House members and Electoral Votes by 2050. If my projections are correct, from 1990 to 2050, the ten states collectively will have lost thirty-eight Electoral Votes. The only upside is that most of those Electoral Votes will go to Red states in the South and West, which strengthens the chances of Republican presidential candidates.
If states like Ohio want to reverse course, they must become far more attractive to legal foreign migrants and other Americans. The recipe to become more attractive requires bold action by policymakers. I can assure you it isn’t by bribing companies in crises like Intel with $2 billion in taxpayers funds to come here. At the top of the list for Ohio’s policymakers are to enact right-to-work; repeal John Kasich’s Medicaid expansion; eliminate the state income tax; streamline local government to bring down local taxes; and build a world-class airport so people coming to and going from Ohio for business or pleasure can do so on one flight. Unfortunately, the current crop of legislators have no interest in being bold and Mike DeWine and Jon Husted define political timidity. Thus, Ohio’s future likely is one in which it surpasses Michigan and Louisiana as the most in-bred state in America.