In the early 20th century, two of England’s intellectual giants engaged in a series of debates. Playwright George Bernard Shaw was the resident apologist for income redistribution and central planning. G.K. Chesterton, a Catholic writer, argued in favor of property rights and the decentralization of political power. “I found they were utterly insensate and grotesque,” Shaw said of arguments for wealth inequality. “Eventually, I was convinced we ought to be tolerant of any sort of crime except unequal distribution of income.” Shaw’s words were a distillation of what is, with less elegance and more stridency, the central thesis of the modern day Democratic Socialist. “There ought to be in the world a great mass of scattered powers, privileges, limits, points of resistance, so that the mass of the Commons may resist tyranny,” responded Chesterton. “There is a permanent possibility of that central direction, however much it may have been appointed to distribute money equally, becoming a tyranny.” Chesterton wasn’t finished. “Shaw proposes to distribute wealth,” Chesterton summarized. “We propose to distribute power.” Chesterton sounded a lot like 21st-century Constitutional conservatives who believe dispersal of power is the root of liberty and prosperity—That federalism and free markets are the antidote to redistributionist claims. It’s been a debate raging in America since our founding: How do we best distribute power? From the top down or the bottom up? With the individual—and, as Chesterton argued, God—as sovereign? Or the state and its credentialed central planners, as Shaw argued? While Democratic Socialists in New York City, Denver, and other locales are resoundingly winning primaries—and seemingly the debate within the Democrat Party—federalism has been piling up substantive policy wins. And unlike the splashy media headlines generated by the recent socialist political victories, those victories are compounding quietly over time. The American Legislative Exchange Council recently released its annual “Rich States, Poor States” index. In it, the leading policy group in America tracking economic performance among and between the states (and the policies that drive that performance) reported that red states once again dominated the top 10 performers. Utah topped the list, and not for the first time. Blue states once again dominated the bottom 10, with New York besting New Jersey for last place. “As laboratories of democracy, the top states in this year’s report are demonstrating that low-tax, light-touch regulatory policies attract families, businesses, and opportunity,” said ALEC President and Chief Economist Jonathan Williams. “Meanwhile, states at the bottom of the rankings continue to lose residents to those embracing economic freedom. If you don’t trust ALEC’s report, ask Jamie Dimon, who runs one of the biggest banks in the country, employing over 200,000 Americans. His letter to shareholders of JP Morgan this past April said it all: “While New York City is still our company’s global headquarters, we have shrunk our headcount in the city from 30,000 a decade ago to 24,000 today, and increased our headcount in Texas from 26,000 in 2015 to 32,000 today. This trend will likely continue.” If you don’t believe Dimon, maybe you’ll trust U-Haul, which knows a thing or two about where working-class Americans are moving from—and to. “Texas reclaims the title of No. 1 U-Haul growth state for the seventh time in 10 years,” the company reported in their annual Growth Index released in early 2026. Topping the list of outflow migration was the Golden State. “California’s exodus of do-it-yourself movers was greater than any other state,” the U-Haul report added. Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois rounded out the bottom five of the index. And if you don’t believe U-Haul, the United Van Lines Annual National Movers Study in December of 2025 had similar findings, with New Jersey leading the nation in net outflow migration for the 8th straight year. How bad is it in The Garden State? A Monmouth University poll in 2024 revealed that nearly 50% of New Jersey residents hoped to one day leave the state: confiscatory taxes topped the list of things that drove the result. The state had the nation’s highest property taxes, the fourth highest income tax rate, cracked the top ten corporate tax list—and  the gasoline tax, too (50 cents per gallon as opposed to 20 in Texas). The fact is that American businesses and the American people are fleeing blue states that treat their work, families, homes, and businesses poorly and racing to red states that treat them well. In short, what blue states have excelled at in the past two decades is creating American refugees. Red states have excelled in attracting them. And moving isn’t something that ranks high on the list of things Americans love to do. A survey by OnePoll reported that 64% of Americans believe it’s the most stressful thing they go through, a percentage point above divorce. These numbers matter on more than just the economic front. This mass migration is having a profound impact on the electoral college, too. In 1960, Illinois had 27 electoral votes. By 2000, Illinois had dropped from 27 to 22, Massachusetts from 14 to 12, New Jersey from 16 to 15, New York from 45 to 33, and PA from 32 to 23. In 2024, Illinois dropped again—to 19. Massachusetts now stands at 11, New Jersey at 14, New York at 28, and PA at 23. Contrast that with just two red states, Texas and Florida—both of which boast no income tax, low regulatory regimes, and little union influence. In 1960, Texas had 24 electoral votes. In 2000, that number grew to 32. And by 2024, it had catapulted to 40. Florida’s electoral vote growth was even more remarkable. In 1960, Florida had 10 electoral votes. By 2000, it had skyrocketed to 25, and in 2024, that number rose to 30.   That’s why the Democrats—and their academic and media allies—so hate the electoral college. But what they really hate are the rational and difficult choices Americans across the country are making, moving precious assets and capital—lives, careers, and families—from blue states to red. Many people today hate the Constitution—especially the 10th Amendment, which disperses power to the states. It’s federalism itself they hate. They hate federalism because it creates competition—and a real-life scorecard. Americans are voting with their feet because of that competition. Because of that scorecard. But what the modern Left seems to hate most of all is reality itself. They’re at war with the real-life impact of their public policy positions, and they’ll keep losing citizens—and electoral votes—if they don’t change them. Given the ongoing education freedom movement—ALEC’s Top 10 states in their annual Index of State Education Freedom is dominated by red states—blue states will continue losing families at an even faster clip. Especially if blue states continue to lurch further left toward socialism. One reality is certain: If blue states keep driving Americans to red states, the 2030 Census will produce a continued shift in the electoral map in favor of Republicans. This shift will make it all but impossible for Democrats to win back the White House. A version of this article originally appeared in Newsweek on May 20, 2022. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.