It’s a fact. High-tax states had the highest rate of people moving out, while low-tax states had the highest rate of people moving in, according to a conservative taxpayers’ watchdog organization that crunched the numbers.
The analysis by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation’s Interstate Commerce Initiative broke down the rate of taxpayer migration to the second.
It found that the states gaining new residents most frequently are Florida (every 2 minutes and 9 seconds), Texas (2 minutes, 53 seconds), North Carolina (6 minutes, 21 seconds), South Carolina (7 minutes, 30 seconds) and Tennessee (8 minutes, 42 seconds).
In total, 16 states gain a new resident at least once every hour.
On the losing side of the equation, California waved goodbye to residents faster than Florida welcomed them. A Californian leaves the state every 1 minute and 44 seconds.
Other states with the fast emigration rates are New York (2 minutes and 23 seconds), Illinois (6 minutes, 4 seconds), Massachusetts (11 minutes, 38 seconds), and New Jersey (14 minutes, 14 seconds).
Eleven states lose additional residents at least once an hour.
Earlier in the year, NTUF noted that high-taxing states that lose the most taxpayers do not attempt to make their state tax codes more competitive.
“States like New York and California have aimed to make up for lost revenue from taxpayer interstate migration by attempting to assign more tax obligations to nonresidents,” it said.
New warning that abortion drugs fuel abuse
Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America recently cautioned how mail-order abortion drugs like Mifepristone and Misoprostol have enabled a new form of abuse that includes coercion and manipulation that can lead to poisoning of pregnant women and their babies without their awareness or consent.
“This isn’t speculation. It’s already happening — again and again,” SBA Pro-Life America said, citing research from the Charlotte Lozier Institute shows that over 60% of women who had abortions say they faced pressure to do so from boyfriends, family members or others.
“By stripping away safeguards like in-person dispensing requirements for abortion drugs, Biden’s FDA made it easy for bad actors to obtain these dangerous drugs.”
The pro-life group gave several examples:
• An Ohio woman who last year was assaulted and poisoned from mail-order abortion drugs by her medical resident boyfriend, who purchased the drugs online.
• A Baton Rouge woman in 2023 wanted to keep her baby, but her boyfriend forced her to swallow abortion drugs he ordered online through a California doctor, taking the life of the baby.
SBA Pro-Life was joined by 175 Republican lawmakers in an effort to end the mail-order abortion drug rule instituted under President Biden. They recently sent a letter demanding answers from Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy and Food and Drug Commissioner Marty Makary.
The letter called for the FDA to swiftly reinstate requirements for in-person doctor visits while a safety review promised by the Trump administration is conducted.
SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said, “Nearly a year into the second Trump administration, FDA policy still allows abortion drugs to be sent through the mail without even confirming that the recipient is a pregnant woman, purchased by abusers who use it to force abortion even if a mother has said NO.”
“Every day the FDA allows Joe Biden’s radical COVID-era abortion drug policy to stand, more unborn children die and more women end up in the ER. Abortion by mail, with no ultrasound, no in-person evaluation, and no accountability, endangers women and empowers abusers,” she said.
Challenge to IRS donor disclosure rule
The John Locke Foundation and State Policy Network filed an amicus brief in a lawsuit challenging IRS requirements that nonprofit charities disclose the names and addresses of their largest donors on annual tax forms.
The case, Buckeye Institute v. Internal Revenue Service, is under review in the Cincinnati, Ohio-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
The Locke Foundation and SPN urged the court to apply exacting scrutiny in its evaluation of an IRS rule that requires 501(c)(3) nonprofits to report the names and addresses of major donors.
“Forcing organizations to disclose the identities of their supporters chills participation, deters charitable giving, and exposes donors to the risk of retaliation or harassment,” the Locke Foundation said.
The conservative think tank said the IRS should have to demonstrate that forced donor disclosure is a narrowly tailored rule that has a substantial relation to a sufficiently important government interest. If the court is unconvinced (as we are) that forced donor disclosure meets any of these criteria, it should strike down forced donor disclosure.
“Anonymous expression is indispensable to the First Amendment,” said Jessica Thompson, director of government affairs and general counsel for the John Locke Foundation.
“The right to associate anonymously, particularly when expressing minority viewpoints, is essential to a functioning democracy,” Ms. Thompson said. “That’s why Locke is proud to join the State Policy Network in supporting the Buckeye Institute in its constitutional challenge to the IRS’s mandatory disclosure requirements, which violate Americans’ First Amendment rights.”
• The Advocates column is a weekly look at the political action players who drive the debate and shape policy outcomes in Washington. Send tips to theadvocates@washingtontimes.com.
