The verdict has been in for some time now: In the centuries-old struggle between free markets and various strains of collectivism/socialism, the former decisively prevails over the latter.

If, in Milton Friedman's wording, people are "free to choose," they will choose economic freedom over state control and allocation of resources.

The farther along that path of socialism nation-states have gone, the worse they have fared, with many collapsing (the Soviet Union, East Germany, etc.), some still clinging to the faith while occupying rungs on world's most impoverished lists (North Korea and Cuba), and others remaining workers' paradises by converting to capitalism without admitting it (post-Mao China and post-unification Vietnam).

Dismal failure is the only common outcome (that, and lots of bodies piled high, too).

Somewhat ironically, given our status as the bastion of global capitalism, the most interesting "left versus right" competition in economic policy is occurring now in our own country between "red" and "blue" states. Under our system of federalism, they have come to offer increasingly distinct economic models, with blue featuring higher taxes and more regulation with more public services, and red featuring lower taxes and less regulation with fewer public services.

This left-right competition can be scored more easily than those of the 20th century because measurable in the most obvious fashion — by migration. Communist states (the Berlin Wall) wouldn't let people escape their misery, but in ours, people are free to move to a place (state) they believe offers better opportunities and quality of life.

"Voting with feet" will always be the most powerful form of ballot-casting and most authoritative barometer of the quality of governance and public policy.

This is, of course, terrible news for the Democratic Party, as a number of recent reports tell us that the long-standing migration from Democratic- to Republican-governed states is not just continuing but accelerating.

The first of these reports, the annual "U-Haul Growth Index," attempts to gauge "how well states, metro and cities are attracting and maintaining residents" (U-Haul language).

Summarizing the latest data for National Review, Dan McLaughlin notes, "the overall pattern remains clear and consistent, and has for some time. States with solidly red governance made up seven of the top 10 states (Texas and Florida being first and second), and six of the next eight; among the top 10, there was only one blue state (Washington), and the two with Democratic governors (North Carolina and Arizona) have long had solidly Republican state legislatures. Florida, as the company notes, has ranked in the top four every year since the index started in 2015."

Such conclusions are further bolstered by the delayed arrival of the annual U.S. Census Bureau report on migration. For the period July 1, 2024, to July 1, 2025, the 22 Republican "trifecta" states (those in which they control the governorship and legislature) gained a net of 345,000 people, whereas the 15 Democratic trifecta states lost just under 500,000. Seven of the top 10 gaining states were Republican trifecta states, while the other three went for Trump in 2024.

In discussing the Census report in City Journal (under the headline "Blue States' Demographic Nightmare"), Steven Malanga notes that such population shifts have already had significant political consequences. In his words, "In the last 20 years, Florida and Texas alone have gained nine electoral votes, while New York, Illinois, and California have lost six. Projections based on current population trends suggest that, in the next Census, Texas and Florida may each pick up two or more votes, while California and New York could each lose two or more electors."

Adding insult to injury, the Democratic plight is also worsened by lower fertility rates. According to Malanga, "In 2023, nine of the 11 states with a birth rate of 1.5 children per woman or less were Democratic states. The blue state with the highest rate, New Jersey, ranks only 18th nationally, behind such Republican trifectas as South Dakota, Texas, Arkansas and Utah."

In short, people are leaving blue states in droves and those staying behind aren't having enough kids.

But it isn't just that red states are attracting more people and thereby enhancing their political power; they are also economically outperforming over-regulated and taxed blue states.

From the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, for instance, we learn that the six states with the highest percentage of private-sector job growth in this decade all went for Donald Trump in 2024 and the eight with the lowest for Kamala Harris. A Wall Street Journal editorial persuasively argues that this is strongly correlated with state income-tax rates (the nine states with the highest such taxes are each solid blue, seven of the eight states without income taxes tilt red).

Alas, the more people leave badly governed blue states, the stronger the Democratic Party's hold within them grows, thereby guaranteeing more taxes and regulations and thus more departures.

An avuncular colleague and I once took a wrong turn on a student field trip to St. Louis and ended up in East St. Louis. That colleague then turned to the students in the van and said, "Kids, take a look around; this is what happens when you vote Democrat."

He sorta had a point.

Freelance columnist Bradley R. Gitz, who lives in Batesville, received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Illinois.

© Arkansas Online