America's older population is growing as its younger cohort shrinks
America's older population is growing while its younger cohort is shrinking, per new census data.
Why it matters: This demographic trend presents big policy and economic challenges — more older Americans means we'll need more care workers, for instance.
Driving the news: The U.S. population aged 65 and up grew by 13% between 2020 and 2024, the Census Bureau says, while the number of those under 18 fell by 1.7%.
The U.S. median age hit a new record high of 39.1 in 2024, up from 38.5 in 2020.
The big picture: These latest figures continue a longstanding trend of an aging America.
The share of the U.S. population 65 and up increased from 12.4% in 2004 to 18% in 2024, the bureau notes, while the share of children fell from 25% to 21.5%.
Zoom in: The number of people 65 and up increased in all states between 2020 and 2024, while that of people under 18 increased in only a handful, including Texas and Florida.
Stunning stat: There are now 11 states with more older adults than children, up from only three in 2020.
They include Maine, Vermont, Florida, Delaware, Hawai'i, Montana, New Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and West Virginia.
What they're saying: The gap between children and older adults "is narrowing as baby boomers continue to age into their retirement years," Lauren Bowers, chief of the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Branch, said in a statement accompanying the new data.
"In fact, the number of states and counties where older adults outnumber children is on the rise, especially in sparsely populated areas."
Between the lines: The latest findings could fuel "pronatalist" beliefs driven partially by fears of economic decline.
Pronatalism — increasingly common especially in — frames procreation as a patriotic act and civic duty.
Yes, but: Having kids is an expensive affair, especially for those who need full-time care, don't get parental leave, and so on.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Trump's passport policy was lifted, but these Americans are still in the dark
It took nearly five months, a federal lawsuit, and the postponement of big international travel plans before Ashton Orr received the news he'd been waiting for: his passport finally arrived in the mail with the accurate gender marker on it. This moment felt like a "huge relief" to the West Virginia resident, who told USA TODAY in early March he wasn't sure he'd ever receive a passport matching his gender identity as a transgender man following the Trump administration's January policy acknowledging just the male and female sexes, assigned at birth. The LGBTQ+ advocate received his passport on June 12 as one of the seven plaintiffs in the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts, and law firm Covington & Burling LLP's lawsuit Orr v. Trump, which was brought to the courts in February. The suit alleged that the policy violates the right to travel and privacy and discriminates against LGBTQ+ people. Last Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick in Boston expanded the preliminary injunction that blocked the policy, granting passports to the plaintiffs and any impacted Americans. Orr had applied on Jan. 16 to renew his passport with an updated gender marker for an upcoming trip to Ireland for a medical procedure to avoid any issues at airport security, which he'd experienced before since his driver's license still listed him as female. Days later, the U.S. State Department suspended the processing and issuing of all passports seeking a binary gender change or the "X" gender marker under Trump's policy. Thousands of transgender, intersex and nonbinary Americans were left in limbo, unable to travel internationally, and without a critical ID document to secure jobs, housing and other opportunities. To many in the transgender community, the policy also felt like another attack by the current administration to erase them from public spaces and deny their existence. "When your basic right to move freely is denied, it's a message: 'You don't belong here.' It's bigger than bureaucracy. It's systemic erasure," transgender drag artist and RuPaul's Drag Race All Stars 10 contestant Aja previously told USA TODAY. Her passport renewal was rejected despite her current passport and other documents matching her gender identity. While the judge's latest motion offers some relief, the battle is far from over. Many of those affected are still caught in a holding pattern, trying to figure out how to receive their passports, while others have conflicting emotions as the policy's impact went far deeper than just not having a passport. "I think the first time in years, I really felt like the legal system actually saw us, you know, as trans, nonbinary, intersex people as real and as deserving of dignity," Orr said about the judge's action. 'I am exactly who God made': Why travel is a battleground for drag and trans performers Can transgender, intersex and nonbinary Americans get their passports? Legally, yes. As of June 17, the State Department is obligated to process passports requesting the "X" gender marker or a binary change and is taking immediate steps to implement the court order, said a State Department spokesperson. However, many Americans have yet to receive accurate passports and are left in limbo. "We're waiting on the State Department to tell us – and to tell everyone publicly – how they're planning on processing all of these passports that need to be processed," said Aditi Fruitwala, an ACLU senior staff attorney on the lawsuit. The ACLU has received numerous inquiries from people who need to travel internationally urgently but don't know if they need to resubmit a new application or fill out a form for an error correction. "From what we can tell, there are class members who are still unable to update the sex designation on their passport, which indicates that they have not implemented the court order," she said. Although temporary, the judge's ruling is optimistic, according to Fruitwala. "That was sort of exciting to see, that none of (the government's) arguments really carried any water," she said. The State Department told USA TODAY it does not comment on ongoing litigation. Mixed emotions for the trans community Despite the positive direction, the continued reality of not having a passport isn't lost on those impacted. Patrick, who is identified by his first name only out of safety and privacy concerns, is one of those Americans stuck in uncertainty. At the end of 2024, he applied for a passport renewal as a transgender man so he and his wife could go on a long-awaited honeymoon. In March, he received his passport with his gender listed as female on it, rendering it nearly unusable. "That's six months with a passport that I don't know that I'll ever be able to use, and it puts me in danger," he said. Not only does Patrick feel stuck in case he needs to seek asylum, but his home state of Texas recently passed a bill that bans gender marker changes on medical documents unless due to a clerical error, so any accurate ID documents are vital. He also doesn't feel comfortable sending in his medical documents, knowing they can't be replaced if unreturned. He also isn't in a place to pay the fees again. "With Texas doing what Texas is doing, it's making it to where I won't have any accurate IDs," he said. "You know, if Texas reverts my driver's license, will I ever be able to get a passport that reflects my gender identity? Because then it'll say F on there." Knowing so many others in his community are experiencing what Patrick is going through, Orr said he feels conflicted between guilt and gratitude. "I am very eager and just very thankful that I have this privilege to be able to finally leave and get the medical care that I need, when there are still so many that, you know, are navigating the system and this latest order," he said. His trip to Ireland is back on and coming up soon. After everything, Orr admits he's worried about returning to the U.S. borders. "I don't think anybody wants to make a plan for what if I'm detained, what if I'm denied entry into a country where I'm a citizen?" he said. "No one wants to have to make those plans. But again, that is the unfortunate reality of trans travelers right now." Fruitwala said it's a reasonable fear and common question for the transgender, nonbinary, and intersex community since the policy went into effect, even though valid passports are technically usable. Although it would be considered harassment to be denied entry back into the U.S., it's a good idea for travelers to write down the names of civil rights advocates and attorneys, plus to educate themselves on their rights at the border. "Again, I'm refusing to allow this country to continue to dictate my operations," he said. "You know, I am a citizen. I have rights just as everyone else, and I'm going to travel."
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Federal judge weighs whether Alabama's anti-DEI law threatens First Amendment
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) — Professors and students at the University of Alabama testified on Thursday that a new an anti-diversity, equity and inclusion law has jeopardized funding and changed curriculum, as a federal judge weighs whether the legislation is constitutional before the new school year begins. The new state law, SB129, followed a slew of proposals from Republican lawmakers across the country taking aim at DEI programs on college campuses. Universities across the country have shuttered or rebranded student affinity groups and DEI offices. The law prohibits public schools and universities from using state funds for any curriculum that endorses or compels assent to viewpoints about eight 'divisive concepts' related to race, religion, gender identity and religion. Instructors are also prohibited from encouraging a person feel guilt because of those identities. Schools are still allowed to facilitate 'objective' discussions on those topics, according to the law. Dana Patton, a political science professor at the University of Alabama, was one of six professors and students who sued the school and Republican Gov. Kay Ivey in January, arguing that the law violates the First Amendment by placing viewpoint-based restrictions on educators' speech. The lawsuit also argued that the law unconstitutionally targets Black students because it emphasizes concepts related to race and limits programs that benefit Black students. Shortly after the law took effect in October, Patton said that school officials told her that five students had made complaints suggesting that the interdisciplinary honors program she administered had potential conflicts with the new legislation. The program focuses on social justice and community service. University officials said a 'powerful person' in the state Capitol was behind the five student complaints, Patton testified. The complaints alleged the program 'promoted socialism' and focused on 'systematic racism" and 'producing engaged global citizens as opposed to patriotic Americans,' according to evidence presented at the hearing. The complaints also said students 'feel unsafe' because 'the leadership of the program has a clear view of the world from a divisive perspective." 'I was completely shocked, stunned," Patton said. After weeks of meetings where Patton exhaustively laid out the content of her courses to administrators, she said she was introduced to Alabama Republican Rep. Danny Garrett at a school football game. Garret told her that 'we need compromise here' because the legislators involved in the complaints are 'tenacious' and 'not going to let this go.' He then sent her links to work he had done with Black Democratic state legislators after the death of George Floyd to address racial tension. Patton said the conversation 'very much felt like a threat' because Garrett is the chair of the Alabama House Ways and Means Education Committee, which is one of two legislative committees that oversees the university's funding. The tenured professor said she has since removed some course material from her syllabus and is no longer posting slides of her lectures online, out of fear that her lessons might be misinterpreted. Garrett declined to comment on the pending litigation. University lawyer says law hasn't caused harm Jay Ezelle, the defense attorney for the University of Alabama Board of Trustees, said the school had an obligation to investigate if students complain about being tested on an opinion, not on a performance. 'If that's violated, the university has to investigate, correct?' Ezelle asked during cross-examination. He added that the law had not created any measurable harm against the plaintiffs, because no faculty had been terminated or formally disciplined, and school administrators had sourced private funding for some affinity groups, who still have access to campus facilities. Professors said they had to remove class assignments Other professors testified that they felt compelled to pull class assignments or stop offering classes altogether based on Patton's experience, as well as formal instruction from the university about the 'risks' of testing students on divisive concepts. Rising senior Sydney Testman said she lost her scholarship because it was tied to her job at the Social Justice Advocacy Council, which was terminated after the anti-DEI legislation went into effect. 'No one wants to say it's disproportionately affecting Black people,' she said. 'The vibes are kind of 'everyone fend for yourselves.'' Federal U.S. Chief Judge R. David Proctor said the case will largely hinge on whether classroom speech is protected under the First Amendment and whether the state has a right to influence curriculum. Proctor will also consider if the six students and professors who brought the lawsuit against the University of Alabama have been harmed by the new law. ___
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Mailbag: Urge Rep. Kim to vote ‘no' on taking basic health care away from people
Americans will live sicker and die sooner if Congress approves massive cuts to Medicaid, marketplace plans and private insurance. But it's not too late for Rep. Young Kim to stand up for her constituents, including the nearly 358,000 people in her district who rely on Medicaid. This week, I joined the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network to deliver a clear message at Rep. Kim's Anaheim office: Vote 'no' on taking basic health care away from nearly 11 million people nationwide. Instead of working to lower costs, Congress is moving quickly to slash at least $793 billion over 10 years from Medicaid and raise the costs of premiums and services for millions of people. As a cancer survivor who relies on Medicaid for lifesaving care, I call on Rep. Kim to vote against these devastating cuts that make it more difficult and more expensive for people to get the care they need. Dolly LinFullerton When I was 18, spending the summer in Corona del Mar with friends from USC, my goal was simple: to be the darkest person on the beach. I don't know if I succeeded, but I tried. After two-plus months of surfing and laying in the sun almost every day — without sunblock — I was extremely tan. Back then, in 1967, no one ever suggested I didn't belong here. But if Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had been rounding up thousands of people a day like they are now, I easily could have been mistaken for an undocumented immigrant. That possibility never crossed my mind back then but it certainly would today. Imagine living legally in the U.S. for 30 years — working, paying taxes, and raising a family — only to be detained or arrested at a car wash or Home Depot because of how you look. It's no wonder thousands of day laborers have gone into hiding. The fear of being wrongfully deported without due process isn't just stressful — it's paralyzing. When Donald Trump ran for office, he promised to deport the 'worst of the worst.' I naively assumed he meant convicted drug lords, killers, and rapists — not mothers and fathers trying to support their families. Yet, this is exactly what's happening. Because arrest and deportation numbers are lagging behind White House expectations, aides have convinced the president that a sweeping crackdown is necessary — even if it pushes the bounds of constitutionality. The last line of the Pledge of Allegiance reads, 'with liberty and justice for all.' I wish more Americans understood that living in fear, as millions are doing now, is not liberty. And being rounded up in an ICE raid, as so many are today, is not justice. Denny FreidenrichLaguna Beach I agree with Councilmember Twining that 'There is a clear need to turn down the rhetoric and restore civility during Huntington Beach Council meetings.' What has led to this incivility is the frustration that the City Council has taken a MAGA ideological position on most issues. These include anti-LGBTQ, anti-DEI and human rights, book banning and elimination of citizen committees. Since the citizen comments at council meetings require no response from the council, there is no exchange of points of view, nor any way to hold the council members accountable. In the past, my husband and I have volunteered on citizen committees. They offer opportunity for two-way exchanges. Despite the fact that more than half of H.B.'s population are not MAGA devotees, the City Council has chosen to simply not listen to the 'other side.' Their disdain for opposing opinions is evident in their voting. 'My way or the highway' is the council meeting undercurrent. In other words, community members from the left and center know they are speaking to deaf ears. If Twining and other council members want civil interchanges, then they need to stop their autocratic decision-making and actions and do what is best for all Huntington Beach residents, not just their MAGA constituents. Judith A. Lewis Retired Los Angeles County sheriff's captainHuntington Beach I am so disgusted. The mayor of Huntington Beach, Pat Burns, was caught on hot mic calling a constituent 'Another f—ing cow' during Tuesday's City Council meeting. Instead of being grateful to a courageous young woman for sharing her thoughts during public comments, he chose to disparage her. Burns also called other council members who were not on the side of the conservative council majority 'pieces of s**t' last year. My personal experience speaking to the council has not been quite this dramatic. When I have spoken, which is often, the mayor yawns, chats with others or stares at the ceiling. He leans far back in his chair to make it clear that he isn't listening. My input is unwanted. Burns rigidly supports an extreme MAGA agenda. He clearly doesn't care about the people of Huntington Beach. I call for the resignation of Pat Burns in his failure to represent all of us, to treat all constituents with respect and to behave professionally as he represents our beleaguered city. Goodbye, Pat Burns. Nora PedersenHuntington Beach
