My favorite demographer, Joel Kotkin:

In the wake of the 2012 presidential election, some political commentators have written political obituaries of the “red” or conservative-leaning states, envisioning a brave new world dominated by fashionably blue bastions in the Northeast or California. But political fortunes are notoriously fickle, while economic trends tend to be more enduring.

These trends point to a U.S. economic future dominated by four growth corridors that are generally less dense, more affordable, and markedly more conservative and pro-business: the Great Plains, the Intermountain West, the Third Coast (spanning the Gulf states from Texas to Florida), and the Southeastern industrial belt.

Overall, these corridors account for 45% of the nation’s land mass and 30% of its population. Between 2001 and 2011, job growth in the Great Plains, the Intermountain West and the Third Coast was between 7% and 8%—nearly 10 times the job growth rate for the rest of the country. Only the Southeastern industrial belt tracked close to the national average.

Historically, these regions were little more than resource colonies or low-wage labor sites for richer, more technically advanced areas. By promoting policies that encourage enterprise and spark economic growth, they’re catching up.

“Policies that encourage enterprise and spark economic growth”?

While California, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts and Minnesota have either enacted or pursued higher income taxes, many corridor states have no income taxes or are planning, like Kansas and Louisiana, to lower or even eliminate them.

The result is that corridor states took 11 of the top 15 spots in Chief Executive magazine’s 2012 review of best state business climates. California, New York, Illinois and Massachusetts were at the bottom. The states of the old Confederacy boast 10 of the top 12 places for locating new plants, according to a recent 2012 study by Site Selection magazine.

Energy, manufacturing and agriculture are playing a major role in the corridor states’ revival. The resurgence of fossil fuel–based energy, notably shale oil and natural gas, is especially important.

Wisconsin certainly has manufacturing and agriculture. Not sure about energy, although keep that  thought in mind during the frac sand mining debates.

The corridors’ growing success is a testament to the resiliency and adaptability of the American economy. It also challenges the established coastal states and cities to reconsider their current high-tax, high-regulation climates if they would like to join the growth party.

Wisconsin is not joining the “growth party,” and Wisconsin’s refusal to reconsider our “current high-tax, high-regulation climates” is the reason.

CNS News reports that gun manufacturers are putting their money where their mouths are:

A growing number of firearm and firearm-related companies have stated they will no longer sell items to states, counties, cities and municipalities that restrict their citizens’ rights to own them.

According to The Police Loophole, 34 companies have joined in publicly stating that governments who seek to restrict 2^nd Amendment rights will themselves be restricted from purchasing the items they seek to limit or ban. …

Bravo Company USA states:

“The people at Bravo Company USA and BCM support responsible private individuals having access to the same tools of civilian Law Enforcement to affect the same ends … As such Bravo Company’s policy is that law enforcement officials and departments will be restricted to the same type of products available to responsible private individuals of that same city or state.”

This is an interesting converse of a trend that started in the 1970s and 1980s, when activists hectored companies to abandon their operations in South Africa because of its apartheid policies. The most prominent of those companies may have been General Motors, which after passage of the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act sold off its South African subsidiary in 1987, only to repurchase 49 percent of it a decade later and the rest in 2004.

The concept is pretty simple: Businesses should be able to choose, or not choose, their own customers. This is not a decision made lightly in the case of refusing to sell to a unit of government. It is, however, telling that businesses have more respect for the rights of American citizens than government does.

Quality Arms has this on its website:

We at Quality Arms build semi auto sporting rifles (so called assault rifles) used by members of the public and law enforcement agencies of the free world and because of recent events find ourselves under attack from liberal minded individuals who feel we are the problem of today’s society.

These elected officials have their own agenda to circumnavigate the truth and destroy the constitution of the United States of America. Any rifle, pistol, knife, baseball bat is an inanimate object and therefore is useless as a weapon until a person whether mentally unstable or of a criminal mind decides to use that object in a criminal way.

These liberal politicians are jumping on the band wagon to bolster their own ego’s and have little or any respect for anybody or any laws passed by the founding fathers of this once great nation and wish to destroy the very existence as to how and why those laws came about.

They must not be allowed to destroy the 2^nd amendment because if they succeed what other laws will they wish to change in the name of the people.

We at Quality Arms are against any Politician, Law enforcement official, and any other organization who feel it is their right and purpose to destroy the freedoms and liberties of the citizens of this Country.

As such we consider such acts as TREASONABLE.

The U.S. Constitution has the Second Amendment. Wisconsin’s Constitution has Article I, section 25: “The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose.”

Which seems to lead to an opportunity for this state. A number of firearms manufacturers are based in states such as New York and Connecticut, which have more stringent gun laws than the spirit of the Second Amendment suggests.  (As we’ve seen from mass shootings, the only people who follow firearms laws are those who follow the law generally.) State government is also trying to jump-start the state’s moribund economy (in a nation whose economy is worse than Wisconsin’s).

Unlike in some states, the La Crosse Tribune reports:

Amid continuing debate over cutting gun violence, Republicans in control of the Wisconsin Legislature say it’s unlikely the state will pass any gun-control legislation this session.

While some other states and Congress mull bans on assault weapons or high-capacity magazines, or tighter background checks on buyers, Wisconsin Republicans say they will focus instead on potential gaps in the state’s mental health system.

“I’d be really surprised if anything passes here in Wisconsin that would restrict gun access,” said state Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend. “We haven’t talked about it because we’re not going to do it.”

Grothman, a gun owner and member of the National Rifle Association, said he is against most, if not all, of the measures President Barack Obama’s administration is pushing since a gunman killed 20 first-grade students and six educators in December at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn. …

“They looked at the isolated incident in Connecticut, which a horrible thing, and all of a sudden say we have to change our constitution,” Grothman said. “We have more guns but less problems in Wisconsin.”

Federal data show Wisconsin had 80 firearm murders in 2011, down from 97 the year before. Nationally, firearm murders have dropped in recent years; the number was in 8,583 in 2011, down from 10,129 in 2007. Calculating the level of gun ownership in Wisconsin is more difficult since the state doesn’t require firearm registration. …

Assembly Majority Leader Scott Suder, a Republican from Abbotsford, said he’ll listen to ideas on cutting gun violence but “they can’t go too far.”

“We’re not going to limit how many ammunition clips people can have,” Suder said. “That is a red herring and cannot solve any gun crime.”

Gov. Scott Walker and the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. should send out Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch, who apparently has the role of the state’s number one business recruiter, to firearms manufacturers in states with unduly restrictive (not to mention ineffective, as Newtown, Conn., demonstrates) gun laws to move their companies to Wisconsin. This state is well known for its hard-working skilled workforce, which would fit in well with the precision manufacturing requirements of firearms. The gunmakers can work in a state with a lot of firearms enthusiasts, a lot of hunters, and, with a few exceptions (the Madison–Milwaukee axis), people who would welcome them here. And thanks to the Obama administration, firearms manufacturers are having banner years.

Companies this might apply to include Charter Arms, based in Sheldon, Conn.; Smith & Wesson, based in Springfield, Mass.; Ruger, with corporate headquarters in Southport, Conn.; Colt, of West Hartford, Conn.; ArmaLite, of Geneseo, Ill.; Rock River Arms of Colona, Ill.; and others.

Kleefisch need simply argue that businesses should go where they’re wanted. Based on the actions of their home states’ governors and legislatures, they don’t appear to be welcome where they are now.