Maine’s problems are increasingly demographic. The underlying cause for the public policy challenges that face us continue to be the inevitable aging of our current population exacerbated by the emigration of those seeking opportunities elsewhere.

The fact that our governor has threatened to close schools early in order to find money to maintain health care services for those unable to provide for themselves, particularly the elderly, underscores the reality of this pressure.

It is interesting, in that regard, to examine the data provided each year by United Van Lines on the number of moves into and out of Maine. We can’t, of course, glean from these data who is moving into and out of our state. Or why they are moving.

However, simply knowing the numbers and comparing them to national patterns and to those of other states tell us much about our place in the overall churn of people moving here and there within the nation.

The first point to be drawn from the data is that the recession has greatly reduced all moving.

In 2006, United Van Lines reported just over 227,000 moves for the U.S. as a whole. In 2007, that figure fell by 6 percent. In 2008, it fell by another 32 percent to about 145,000 moves and bounced around that number through 2009, 2010 and 2011.

Maine generally mirrored that pattern but at a slower pace. Our number of moves dropped in 2007 and 2008, rose a bit in 2009 and have dropped again in 2010 and 2011.

In 2011, our number of moves totaled 1,338, down about one-third from the 2006 total of 2,003.

The second point to be drawn from the data is that Maine’s net migration picture has been consistently negative.

In 2006, Maine’s 2,003 moves consisted of 963 moves in and 1,040 moves out for an in-to-out ratio of 93 percent. While the total number of moves has generally declined — following the national pattern and reflecting the overall drop in economic opportunity — the number of moves in has fallen more, so that the in-to-out ratio has dropped from 93 percent in 2006 to 79 percent in 2011.

The most troubling fact evident in the data, however, is the divergence that first appears in 2011 between the directions of movement in the “in” and the “out” numbers.

From 2006 to 2010, both directions moved together. When “out shipments” rose, so did “in shipments.” When “out shipments” fell, so did “in shipments.” In moving together they seem both to be responding to national economic forces.

In 2011, however, that pattern changed. Maine’s number of “in shipments” continued to fall, dropping from 633 to 591. But our number of “out shipments” rose, jumping from 735 to 747.

In short, the national churn of migration began to leave us behind.

In this pattern, we joined 10 other states — Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Louisiana and Idaho.

While the reasons for this pattern and the similarities that may exist between Maine and these other states are not obvious, the implication is clear.

If we don’t find ways to both attract more people “from away” and keep more of our own here, we will continue to face the budgetary constraints that are the natural consequence of a demographically unstable population.

Charles Lawton is senior economist for Planning Decisions, a public policy research firm. He can be reached at:

clawton@maine.rr.com