Sometime late last year, at least according to experts who estimate these sorts of things, Montana surpassed 1 million residents. The milestone was met with both delight and dejection, even if the number is largely symbolic.
We have now joined 44 other states that have at least that many people. The six below that mark are Alaska, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming.
What does it mean for our state? In terms of federal resources or representation, not much. There is no impact on funding or statewide programs and the state will still have just one U.S. congressman who represents, by far, the most constituents of anyone in the House of Representatives (on average, each member represents about 700,000).
Gov. Brian Schweitzer did say that he is setting up a scholarship fund for Montana kids born between Dec. 25, 2011 and Jan. 1, 2012, who will study math or science in the Montana University System. Besides that, the number is simply the perception it conjures up, if any at all. To some, however, it is indicative that the state is no longer rural, even that there are too many people here.
But its size still dwarfs every other state with fewer residents, save for Alaska. It is still a “small town with long roads” and is filled with wide-open spaces. And that’s why most of us live here. It’s why I live here.
Although I grew up in Spokane, I’ve been lucky enough to live in two other sparsely populated states (North Dakota and Wyoming), in towns where it’s a big deal when Taco Bell opens up a franchise on the strip and where most amenities are a 20-minute drive away to the closest bigger, small town.
It’s the lack of everyday amenities that has my friends and family wondering how anyone could live outside the comforts of the big city, especially in the winter when they think we are simply hunkered down in caves and fattening up on protein. It’s also fun for them to criticize my passive driving tendencies when I visit. In traffic, aggression is the key to quickly getting from one place to another.
But any lack in entertainment opportunities, I tell them, is made up in relationships and familiarity. Big cities are filled with more disconnected populations, where it’s not unusual to go several days without seeing a recognizable face outside of work. Here, it’s difficult to do the opposite. And the common complaint, “everyone knows everyone else’s business,” is also an asset. Especially when the alternative is not knowing anything about anyone.
True, Montana has had a bit of a growth spurt over the last 10 years, but not nearly as brisk as many believe. Between 2000 and 2010, Nevada was by far the fastest-growing state in the country, at 35.1 percent, followed by Arizona, Utah, Idaho and Texas. Our growth was tepid in comparison: 9.7 percent and ranked 21st in the country. And according to U.S. Census data, our population growth has slowed in recent years.
While we can no longer tell people fewer than 1 million residents live here, which was a fact that included some mysticism, we can also point out that our state has grown at a healthy clip without living outside our means. Montana’s budget is projected to have a $426.7 million surplus by mid-2013, which can largely be credited to the balanced-budget amendment in our constitution. Meanwhile, other states, including many of those that have experienced high growth, have been forced to make deep cuts to pay their bills.
Montana’s march to 1 million was largely steady, much like the people who live here. And, yes, it’s still rural.