Vermont's Population Declines. Again.

Fewer people called Vermont home in 2025 than in 2024, according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau estimates. That’s the second straight year of decline. Moreover, Vermont’s 0.3% decline ranked us 50^th in the nation in population growth. Alternatively, if you believe population growth is not a desirable feature , we rank number 1. Five other states experienced declining populations: California, Hawaii, New Mexico, and West Virginia.

Why did Vermont’s population decline? First, Vermont experienced more deaths than births. That’s been the case for nearly a decade. Given the aging of Vermont, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that we had a record number of deaths in 2025. And that trend will continue for quite a while as the baby boom generation ages.

While deaths are increasing, the number of births is declining. The number of births is down 20% from 2000. In 1950 there were 75 percent more babies born than last year’s number, and Vermont’s population was far smaller than it is today.

If you want a good population trivia fact, fewer babies were born in 2025 than in 1857 (no, that’s not a typo).

Out migration also contributed to our population decline, with 700 more people leaving the state than moving in from the other 49 states. That’s not a huge number, but it is still a negative one.

Finally, the Census Bureau estimates that only 600 immigrants moved into Vermont, a number almost, but not quite large enough to counter the outflow of residents.

So why did the state’s population decline? Simply put, we experienced more deaths than births and more people left than moved in from other states or abroad.

Since the 2020 Census, Vermont’s population has risen by only 1,600 people, for a 5 year growth rate of 0.2%. By contrast, the U.S. 5 year population growth was 3.1%. So Vermont is growing at only one-tenth the national rate.

At least we are not number 50 (or number 1). Seven states grew more slowly than Vermont over the past five years.

What’s the problem with slow, or negative, population growth. Just to tick off a few:

· It means a slower, or declining, labor force growth. Where will the state’s firms, non-profits, and governments get the workers they need?

· With an aging population, more people will need assistance—medical and other. Where will those workers come from?

· A declining or stagnant labor force reduces one important source of revenue growth for government—more workers paying taxes.

· Where will the state get the revenues it needs to provide services, especially health care, for a growing elderly population.

· A stagnant or declining population means it is harder for local businesses to grow their revenues and be more successful. The alternative is to grow elsewhere or move the entire business out of state.

· Part of a vibrant economy comes from a growing population.

· A declining number of children, which Vermont has been experiencing for more than 25 years, coupled with people’s desire not to close schools or lay off staff, means increased pressure on property taxes—or whatever tax source is used to fund education.

How can Vermont reverse its trend of the past five years? It won’t be easy. Vermont has almost always had a slow population growth rate. The only decades in its history when we grew faster than the national average were the 1790s, 1800s (1800-1810), the 1960s, ‘70s and ‘80s.

There are some things we can’t change: the weather and climate, the lack of large cities, and our isolated location are big ones. But we can make Vermont a more desirable place to live.

We can lower the cost of living by

· Making it easier for developers to build housing.

· Lowering food prices by making it easier for grocery stores to locate in Vermont. Currently, for example, due to regulatory constraints many Walmarts cannot include a full supermarket in their locations.

· Making sure that energy costs do not get inflated by costly environmental mandates.

· Being cautious and thoughtful about increasing taxes and mandates on businesses.

We can improve Vermont’s desirability as a place to live by

· Improving the state’s poor quality education system (see here and here). What young family wants to move to a state with poor education quality and high property taxes? That’s not a winning combination.

· People want to move to urban areas. Make sure that public policy encourages growth in the state’s urban area, which by national standards means the Greater Burlington area.

Population growth means more opportunities, a more vibrant economy, a growing economy, and it makes it easier to solve many of the problems individuals, families, and society face. If Vermont stays on its current trajectory, we will all be under much more pressure to solve the future problems we will be facing.