Are conservatives making a mass migration to conservative States? Will that change the government, or replace one problem with another?
The mass migration argument
Michael Medved, writing in Town Hall, suggested that conservatives really are making a mass migration. He based that on the 2010 United States Census report. That report seems to show that liberal States are losing people, while conservative States are gaining. The best evidence for that is the assignment of Representatives in the House:
- For the first time in several decades of the Census, California will not gain Representatives.
- New York and Ohio will lose two House districts each; New Jersey will lose one. Texas will gain four House seats.
What does this mean?
Medved says that the mass migration will present a practical problem for Barack H. Obama and his allies. He supposes that Republicans will gain more seats in the House, because conservatives, by moving to conservative States, will have the chance to vote for more conservative Representatives. This might not be correct. New Jersey, for example, might go from a 7-6 Democrat advantage to a 7-5 advantage. The Redistricting Commission might simply divide the few remaining conservatives among a group districts with already lopsided liberal majorities. The same might hold in New York—though Anthony Weiner’s old district might “flip” on account of his scandal. But that is a special case.
More likely, the Electoral College will lean Republican, more so than it does today. (That’s all the more reason to oppose plans to form a multi-State compact to tie the Electoral College to the nationwide popular vote.) The Senate will not change. Liberal States will stay liberal, and conservative States will stay conservative. The only change will be to change “leaning” to “solid” in each State’s case.
So what you will have is a conservative House, a liberal-leaning or toss-up Senate, and a conservative President likely to win re-election.
What conservatives really need
Conservatives really need to change the hearts and minds of their neighbors. When they move out, those they leave behind will cling stubbornly to their liberal beliefs. Their States will likely get into worse financial trouble as a result—but what then? When the House refuses to “bail out” those States, they’ll likely sue to force the other States to bail them out. Presidents appoint judges, of course—but a liberal Senate will refuse to confirm any judges or Justices that would be likely to throw out such lawsuits. (States may not sue each other in federal court, but they may still sue the federal government.)
Which is why grassroots education is so important. A peaceful conservative revolution can never succeed until several solidly liberal States “flip.” Mass migration will not make that happen.
Terry A. Hurlbut has been a student of politics, philosophy, and science for more than 35 years. He is a graduate of Yale College and has served as a physician-level laboratory administrator in a 250-bed community hospital. He also is a serious student of the Bible, is conversant in its two primary original languages, and has followed the creation-science movement closely since 1993.
- Christianity Today
- Constitution 101
- Creation Corner
- Entertainment Today
- First Amendment
- Foundation of our Nation
- Guest Columns
- Human Interest
- Ignite the Pulpit
- Let's Talk
- Money matters
- Racial Issues
- Tea Party
- Trump elevator pitch
- World news
Human Interest5 days ago
AI – the next culture war theater?
Constitution4 days ago
Google gets the Twitter treatment
Let's Talk3 days ago
The press v. the President
Executive2 days ago
Ukraine labs – threat reduction or…
Executive23 hours ago
Zelensky and Trump – history
Guest Columns2 days ago
Legislative3 days ago
Florida lawmakers propose bill that would make the Sunshine State the 26th state to adopt Constitutional Carry
News3 days ago
German chancellor says he won’t send fighter jets to Ukraine