Every year, the federal government distributes grants to states for some 1,274 programs, including programs that serve some of government’s most important pur￾poses: public education, income support for the poor, highway maintenance, nutritional assistance for new mothers, and health insurance for low-income house￾holds (Lawhorn 2019, 10–11, Table 4). Such grants-in￾aid reflect the belief that communities of differing fiscal capacities—that is, poor and not—should be able to pro￾vide vital services for their citizens.Such grants, not surprisingly, vary by state. States with larger populations receive larger grants; the opposite is also true, although some programs guarantee a min￾imum for any state, no matter its size. What’s more—as common sense would dictate—when a state’s popula￾tion declines, that may influence the magnitude of the federal aid it receives.This approach mirrors representation in Congress; because the total number of seats in Congress is capped (at 435), when a state loses population, it can lose con￾gressional seats. Indeed, in light of the 2020 federal census’s findings, California, Illinois, and New York each lost population and one seat in Congress. Because of population gains, Colorado, Florida, Montana, North Carolina, and Oregon each gained one seat; Texas gained two seats.