What if we DIDN’T have the genius of Federalism? Magpul is an object lesson

by Skip

Grokster Steve just put this post up concerning Colorado based Magpul, one of the premier gun magazine manufacturers in the country (along with lots of other accessories – and yes, I have a few of their mags).  Right at the end is this announcement from the CEO, warning Colorado legislators they are not bluffing (emphasis mine):

We’re hearing some rumors that the Gov and the Dem caucus think we are bluffing. Just to clarify for them, then…we’re not a political company. We don[']t play political games. We’ve made our position very clear, very publicly. We would not survive lying to our customer base, nor would we ever consider it. If you pass this, we will leave, and you will own it. We’ve already got plans in place to get PMAG manufacturing moved rapidly, and the rest of the company will follow. We will make sure to at least have a small remain-behind operation through the 2014 elections so that we can remind folks why we are gone.

States and provinces (or whatever other terminology works) are invariably mere subdivisions of their respective nations – a top-down command and control system (as town and cities are here in NH).  But our Founders, in their philosophical genius, came up with the idea of Federalism whereby the States retain their Sovereignty within the national system (leaving aside seceding).  Would Magpul be able to pull off this economic and PR threat future promise  if regulatory and taxation policies were “normalized” across the nation?  That basing one’s operations in NH would be no different than in California?  How would this play out if there was only the Federal government and “regional administrators”?

Shades loom long of Obama when he said that he was not the Emperor of the United States (and more shades of when he wishingly said it would be easier to be head of China).  Certainly there are Progressives that would love for the idea of Federalism to wither away and control all from DC – thus fulfilling a primary mantra that all power needs to be concentrated in one spot as high as possible.  They do not trust ordinary citizens to make the “right” decisions and a decision on the part of Magpul would certainly be judged a Progressive sin (how DARE you argue with a bureaucrat that only here to “help and guide” you?).  They are, indeed, working towards this end where one policy is enforced across all the states in what is known as “co-operative federalism” – a runaround the Constitutional bounds on the Federal government..

Proponents say “hey, it is only ‘partnership, what’s wrong with that”?  Putting it bluntly, it is nothing more that excess taxation being removed from a State’s citizens, laundered through the wringer in DC, and then politically doled out and returned back to the States with DC’s “juice” skilfully removed.  However, how often have we seen this “co-operation” turning Mafioso in outlook as in “Nice program you have there – a shame if the money for it dried up”.  Or worse, as has been done here: Feds bribing NH Legislators – we’ll pay you $3 + odd change per individual if you pass mandatory seatbelt laws.

New Hampshirites, watch this happen here again.  The Democrat / Progressives did it two sessions ago in sucking as much power into Concord as possible; Speaker Bill O’Brien spent the last session trying to undo that and put the power back to where it belongs – as low a position and as close to the citizenry as possible.  Now they are doing it again (and raising taxes to boot).

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: