What the Census Bureau's recently released population totals mean for Illinois.
There's no question Illinois will lose a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, yet there are some promising trends in the Census Bureau's recently released state-by-state population totals for 2000.
For one thing, Illinois is growing again.
After a two-decade hiatus in which the Prairie State hovered just shy of the 12 million mark, Illinois' population grew by 8.6% during the '90s—to 12,419,293. That bodes well for the health of the economy now and in the future. Growth is good. And this surge need not cause quality-of-life problems—not if we grow sensibly by managing our resources while providing alternatives to haphazard sprawl.
Unfortunately, because several southern and western states grew at a considerably faster clip, Illinois will lose one of its 20 Congressional seats. That's the news that dominated local media reaction to the U.S. Census Bureau's Dec. 28 announcement. Which is understandable, because the need to redraw Illinois' political map—and more pointedly, to squeeze out a member of our Washington delegation—likely will cause more than the usual amount of partisan rancor in the upcoming spring session of the General Assembly.
Hopefully, Senate President James "Pate" Philip (R-Wood Dale) and House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago) will reach agreement and do the deed early in the session. That way the legislature can move on to more substantive issues. From our perspective at the Metropolitan Planning Council, that includes public school funding reform and sensible growth planning incentives championed by the bi-partisan Illinois Growth Task Force.
As for other positives in the first-blush 2000 numbers, solid growth for Illinois raises the likelihood that Chicago has arrested its steady population decline that began around 1950, when the city peaked at little over 3.6 million. Though hard-count municipal figures won't be released until this spring, the Bureau's own interim estimates have shown Chicago gaining ground in the latter half of the decade—on track to have edged above 2.8 million as of census day, April 1, 2000.
This won't surprise anyone who has followed the housing boom radiating from downtown and Near North, a boom that has revitalized many neighborhoods but also tightened the clamp of gentrification on lower-income residents.
On balance, however, the city's numerical rebound, like the state's resurgence, is surely a big plus for the entire region. It is all but impossible for any metropolitan area to thrive while its center city is hollowing out. And on a more pragmatic level, every resident of a state, no matter where they live, means an extra $200-or-so in annual federal spending allocated by population.
One unanswered question, at least until more data arrives, is this: With the city holding its own and newer suburbs obviously booming on the metropolitan fringe, what part of Illinois is losing population? There are two possibilities: the older, inner-ring suburbs of Cook County, where an aging population has meant smaller household size; and southern and central Illinois, where many rural counties have been flat-out losing population for decades. It's entirely possible that Illinois' 19th Congressional District, which already spans 27 counties from Decatur to the Ohio River, is about to get even larger.
But that remains to be decided . . . after local figures are released in a couple of months, and after the state's political heavyweights have their say.
In the meantime, don't believe everything you hear about Illinois' bad census results. Growing by 8.6% is heaps better than barely growing at all. Illinois even passed Pennsylvania to become the 5th most populous state.
Be thankful, moreover, that we don't have to cope with the kind of mega-growth occurring in Nevada (up 66% in the '90s) and Arizona (40%). Or suffer the population anemia that has befallen West Virginia (0.8% growth) and North Dakota (0.5%)
Most of all, we need to be thankful we're a nation of 281.4 million (up 13.2%) that has never been more dynamic or diverse . . . and soon will have the numbers to prove it.
Links: