Republicans Benefit from Long-term Population Shifts

For decades Democrats told us that they are the party that is rising and that Republicans and conservatives are dwindling in power as old white conservative voters die off.

The current makeup of American politics contradicts this. Republicans now majority-control 67 out of 98 state legislative bodies, 33 governorships, the White House, the US House by 46 votes, the US Senate, along with federal judicial appointments including the Supreme Court.

And in the coming November elections Republicans are expected to make major gains in the US Senate.

In short Democrat power is at its lowest ebb in 100 years and this is why leftists are so hysterical about president Trump.

Population shifts shows things getting even better for the GOP. All of the growing, optimistic and prosperous states are Republican/conservative places or started out that way – Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, New Hampshire, Colorado, Florida, etc. These states are growing in population, wealth and political clout. They also are role models for conservative ideas, as is the roaring Trump Economy.

Population numbers are falling in liberal states as younger, skilled and educated people flee while those remaining behind are older, sicker, less skilled and educated, and poorer and thus less likely to vote or to become engaged politically.

As liberal states lose population they not only lose their own economic clout and taxpayer revenue but they lose national political power. A smaller population means fewer congressional seats and thus less influence and even fewer electoral votes in presidential elections. There is one electoral vote for each US House seat and for each US senator in a given state. For instance tiny Vermont has one US House member and two US senators, and thus 3 electoral votes.

This is a double whammy since liberal states are losing political power precisely as conservative states gain. This is frightening to Democrats. It should be. It is mathematical armageddon.

The Democrat pollster and strategist Doug Schoen has written a column that explains it all. Below are excerpts from Schoen’s column Democrats face trouble from population losses in high-tax blue states. After each excerpt is a Nikitas3.com comment:

Schoen writes: States with high taxes are at risk of losing people, business and money. In fact, conservative economists Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore argue that up to 1.3 million people will leave California, Connecticut, New Jersey, Minnesota and New York over the next three years and move to states with lower taxes.

Nikitas3.com comment: 1.3 million people in just three years? That is not just an exodus, that is a rout, particularly since those moving are the ones with the wherewithal to move, i.e., are successful enough to move, young enough, motivated enough, etc.

These liberal states are in something of a freefall and this will accelerate on itself as productive, taxpaying citizens leave. And it is happening for one basic reason…. their high-tax economic policies are coupled to widespread Democrat corruption.

Schoen writes: In one high-profile example of the impact of high taxes, professional golfer Phil Mickelson recently slammed California’s taxes and threated to leave the state. “If you add up all the federal and you look at the disability and the unemployment and the Social Security and the state, my tax rate’s 62, 63 percent,” Mickelson said.

Nikitas3.com comment: Ouch! When a famous person says something like this it is very harmful. Mickelson’s comment has become famous. These numbers stick in the public mind. And this comes on top of an existing middle-class exodus from California and a general recognition that California is failing. It now has the highest poverty rate in the US despite being the richest state in America. California is slightly wealthier than the entire nation of Britain.

Schoen writes: With the 2020 elections on the horizon, Democratic presidential hopefuls – particularly those from high-tax states – are taking notice of these concerns.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo – seeking re-election this year and a potential 2020 Democratic presidential contender – recognizes the threat that tax migration may pose. “If you lose the taxpayers, you lose the revenue,” Cuomo said in December. If Cuomo is able to find an agreeable solution to this issue, it could greatly increase his chances of success if he embarks on a 2020 run.

Nikitas3.com comment: Sure there is a solution, but it is not ‘agreeable’ to Cuomo. He would have to cut taxes and cut spending in his state and he won’t do either. It runs against his ideology. If Cuomo should become the candidate for president in 2020 Trump will hammer him over the disastrous policies in New York whose economy has suffered under 7+ years of Cuomo. New York state is bleeding jobs and people. Trump would beat Cuomo easily.

Schoen writes: Facing a similar predicament, California Lt. Gov. and gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsom, another potential 2020 Democratic hopeful, has attempted to demonstrate to voters that even though their taxes are high, they are well-served.

Newsom has defended increases to the state gasoline tax and vehicle fees. He has said taxes are funding necessary transportation projects in California.

Nikitas3.com comment: So how do low-tax states keep their roads up as well as attract new citizens and businesses and then sustain and increase their vibrant economies? Newsom has no answer for that.

California also has wasted tens of billions on every type of government boondoggle including a high-speed passenger train project that probably is going to be canceled. This looks very bad. Newsom could even lose the gubernatorial election to Republican John Cox who is focusing on out-of-control taxes and spending. Cox could win. Don’t doubt it.

Schoen writes: Ultimately, trying to win over voters by blatantly advocating for higher taxes – even if the taxes fund projects that benefit residents – is an uphill battle that no candidate or party wants to fight. Just ask Democratic former Vice President Walter Mondale, who announced he would raise taxes if elected president and wound up losing the race to Ronald Reagan in a historic landslide in 1984. Reagan carried 49 states.

Nikitas3.com comment: I remember the 1984 election well. I watched the returns on TV. It was fantastic.

Schoen writes: “Pro-growth policies, such as lighter tax and regulatory burdens, boost state economic activity and attract citizens looking to enhance their well-being,” said Jonathan Williams, the chief economist at the American Legislative Exchange Council.

Ultimately, Democrats need to focus on putting forth a pro-growth economic agenda that has demonstrable benefits for all Americans…

Nikitas3.com comment: Like Trump did in his campaign. But Democrats won’t do it since their party has moved too far to the left.

Schoen writes: In California, high-earners in theory keep 46.6 percent of their incomes, down from 55.4 percent just six years ago. However, if the high-earners move to Florida or Texas, they could keep 60.6 percent of their earned income.

Put simply, the average American has to pay for the chance to live in states like New York and California.

Nikitas3.com comment: And considering all of the other insults you have to put up with in these states – like liberal loudmouths everywhere – the decision to leave is easy.

Schoen writes: The impact of tax migration is palpable and will only become more so, as states with no income tax are experiencing a notable growth in population. Florida is expected to gain two electoral votes, while Texas is expected to gain as many as three.

At the same time, both California and New York are expected to lose one electoral vote each.

Nikitas3.com comment: This is making it easier and easier for Republicans to win the White House. Trump will easily win re-election in 2020, predicts Nikitas3.com. And the shift in the Electoral College may make it impossible for Democrats to win the presidency for the foreseeable future unless they make major reforms to their platform, which they won’t.

Schoen writes: The impact of tax migration is particularly interesting to examine in a state such as Florida, a low-tax swing state that is expected to pick up two Electoral College votes. While the northern area around Orlando contains large communities of conservative-leaning Midwestern migrants, Fort Lauderdale and Boca Raton see just as many left-leaning Democrats from the Northeast.

… Democrats are certainly hoping that left-leaning migrants to Florida from New York, Connecticut and New Jersey – who hold liberal beliefs but are looking for a tax break – will offset those moving to the state with conservative beliefs.

Nikitas3.com comment: This is a major travesty. Liberals flee their liberal states for economic reasons and then try to impose their failed liberal ideas on the conservative states that they have moved to.

Schoen writes: Ultimately, in order for Democrats to overcome the issue of tax migration at the ballot this November and in 2020, the party will need to once again define itself as the party with a pro-growth economic platform that benefits all Americans.

Nikitas3.com comment: Uh, sorry Mr. Schoen, but there already is a party doing that. It is called the Party of Trump.

This entry was posted in Current Events (More than 1,500 previous editorials!) and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.