The maxim that “demography is destiny,” commonly attributed to French philosopher Auguste Comte, remains as relevant now as it did in the early 19th century, especially here in the Golden State.

Even before the catastrophic fires inflicted billions in damage, as well as the tragic loss of life, California was drifting toward demographic purgatory – not quite hell, but certainly not the direction that a vibrant state should be headed.

For a few recent years, California was actually losing population, something that hadn’t happened since 1900. The trend started in 2020 and continued through 2021 (loss of 343,000) and 2022. Not until 2023 did California reverse the trend with a modest increase.

The usual defenders of California’s progressive policies attribute the successive string of population losses to the pandemic, more restrictive immigration policies and fewer births. Each of these is partially true. But other states, mostly more conservative, continued to see year-over-year increases, albeit at a reduced rate during the same period.

Demographic trends can be complex, with a mix of variables such as international migration (both legal and undocumented), domestic migration, and the ebb and flow of births versus deaths. Broad simplistic pronouncements, either positive or negative, to advance a political agenda should be viewed with suspicion.

For that reason, much of the recent backslapping about California staunching the population bleeding needs to be taken with a large grain of salt. First, as acknowledged by the California Department of Finance, most of the good news is based on international immigration which has been a major contributor to both population and economic growth in the state. Unless one has been living in a cave, it’s obvious that there are changes afoot when it comes to both illegal immigration and the thornier issue of legal immigration. Like it or not, there are big constraints as to both happening right now.

In addition to immigration from other countries, there is more bad news regarding domestic migration. California is the perennial loser when it comes to the number of Californians moving out of state relative to those moving in from other states.

In the ever popular annual U-Haul statistical report, California ranked last in the nation for net U-Haul move-ins for the fifth consecutive year in 2024. This is solid evidence of continued domestic out-migration in contrast with those states, mostly in the South, that are attracting citizens from progressive states like Illinois, Connecticut, and California.

Progressives like to ignore this trend, pointing to the fact that California has an economy equal to that of large nations. True, but how long can California continue to lose high-income citizens who are being replaced by immigrants who are more likely to be low-income and in need of more public services?

In a phenomenon known as “taxodus,” the out-migration of citizens with higher incomes and substantial pensions is starting to have a real impact on the state budget.

This migration of high earners to other states continues to accelerate, according to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

The final insult to defenders of California progressive policies is the inevitable loss of political influence in Washington.

After the most recent census, California lost a seat in the House of Representatives, which determines the size of a state’s delegation based on its proportion of the national population.

That is the first time that has happened since statehood. If the current trend line continues, we are on course to lose as many as 4 seats in Congress after the 2030 census.

Maybe California’s loss of political influence will prove to be a benefit to the rest of the nation.

Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.