Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich

by Michael Franc

A legislative proposal that was once on the fast track is suddenly dead. The Senate will not consider a plan to extract billions in extra taxes from megamillionaire hedge fund managers.

The decision by Senate majority leader Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat, surprised many Washington insiders, who saw the plan as appealing to the spirit of class warfare that infuses the Democratic party. Liberal disappointment in Mr Reid was palpable at media outlets such as USA Today, where an editorial chastised: "The Democrats, who control Congress and claim to represent the middle and lower classes, ought to be embarrassed."

Far from embarrassing, this episode may reflect a dawning Democratic awareness of whom they really represent. For the demographic reality is that, in America, the Democratic party is the new "party of the rich". More and more Democrats represent areas with a high concentration of wealthy households. Using Internal Revenue Service data, the Heritage Foundation identified two categories of taxpayers - single filers with incomes of more than $100,000 and married filers with incomes of more than $200,000 - and combined them to discern where the wealthiest Americans live and who represents them.

Democrats now control the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions. More than half of the wealthiest households are concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats.

This new political demography holds true in the House of Representatives, where the leadership of each party hails from different worlds. Nancy Pelosi, Democratic leader of the House of Representatives, represents one of America's wealthiest regions. Her San Francisco district has more than 43,700 high-end households. Fewer than 7,000 households in the western Ohio district of House Republican leader John Boehner enjoy this level of affluence.

The next rung of House leadership shows the same pattern. Democratic majority leader Steny Hoyer's district is home to the booming suburban communities between Washington, DC, and Annapolis. It boasts almost 19,000 wealthy households and a median income topping $62,000. Mr Hoyer's counterpart, minority whip Roy Blunt, hails from a rural Missouri district that has only 5,200 wealthy households and whose median income is only $33,000.

Income disparity - to use the class warrior's favourite term - is greatest among the districts of lawmakers that lead each party's campaign arm. Maryland senator Chris Van Hollen chairs the Democratic congressional campaign committee. With more than 36,000 prosperous households and a median income of nearly $70,000, his suburban Washington district even out-sparkles Ms Pelosi's. In contrast, fewer than 5,000 such wealthy households are found in the largely rural district of his Republican counterpart, Tom Cole from Oklahoma. The median income there is only $35,500.

Democratic politicians prosper in areas of concentrated wealth even in staunchly Republican states such as Georgia, Kansas and Utah. Liberal congressman John Lewis represents more than 27,500 high-income households in his Atlanta district. The trend achieves perfect symmetry in Iowa. There, the three wealthiest districts send Democrats to Washington; the two poorest are safe Republican seats.

Soon this new political demographic may give traditional purveyors of class warfare the yips. To comply with new budget rules, liberal Democrats on Capitol Hill are readying a tax increase of at least $1,000bn over the next decade. Ms Pelosi says she wants to extract all of this from "the wealthy". When has a party ever championed a policy that would inflict so much pain on its own constituency? At what point will affluent Democrats crack and mount a Blue State tax rebellion?

Will we see the emergence of a real-life Howard Beale, the television anchorman played by Peter Finch in the movie Network ? Beale was disgusted with America's deteriorating 1970s economy and culture. One night he snapped and implored viewers to get out of their chairs. "Go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell: 'I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this any more!' "

Or will Democratic voters follow a different cinematic lead, that of the fraternity pledge in Animal House? Perhaps they will accept these tax rises as a political and economic hazing and greet each new tax hike with: "Thank you, sir. May I have another?"

Michael Franc is vice president of government relations for The Heritage Foundation (heritage.org).

Party Of The Rich And Powerful
By Michael P. Tremoglie (06/06/04)

Who really is the party of the rich?

Of the ten richest United States senators, eight are members of the Democrat party. They are in order of their wealth:

1-Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry (net worth, $620 million)

2- Wisconsin Democrat Herbert Kohl ($300 million)

3- West Virginia Democrat Jay Rockefeller ($200 million)

4- New Jersey Democrat Jon Corzine ($71 million)

5-California Democrat Dianne Feinstein ($26 million)

7-New Jersey Democrat Frank Lautenberg ($17 million)

9- North Carolina Democrat John Edwards ($12 million)

10-Massachusetts Democrat Ted Kennedy ($10 million)

However, Senators are not the only rich Democrats. Some of the wealthiest people in the United States, indeed the world are Democrats.

Warren Buffet, the billionaire investor and the world's second-richest man, is a Democrat. He is now John Kerry’s economic adviser. He was economic adviser to Bob Kerry Democratic presidential candidacy in 1992.

Billionaire George Soros, who was indicted for fraudulent transactions, is a Democrat. Soros has stated that he will spend whatever it takes to get rid of George Bush. Soros is funding groups like MoveOn.org.

Apple Computer co-founder Steve Jobs is also a Democrat and also advising Kerry about economic issues. Jobs appointed Al Gore to the Board of Directors of Apple Computer Corporation.

Susie Tompkins Buell, who is co-founder of the fashion company Esprit, is a Democratic Party donor and activist.

Many of California's wealthiest people are Democrats. They include, Steve Kirsch, Haim Saban, and Steve Bing. The three gave $20.2 million to Democratic Party committees in 2002. Haim Saban, is owner of Saban Entertainment. They are the producers of the "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers." Steve Kirsch is a Dot.com millionaire. He was Infoseeks founder and sold it to Disney. Stephen Bing is the grandson of a New York real estate. Bing also contributed $1 million to help pay for the Democrats national convention.

Leo Hindery Jr., a cable magnate, recently resigned as CEO of New York YES cable network because, At this point all I'm interested in is getting a majority in the Senate for the Democrats and in getting Senator Kerry elected in November, was quoted as saying, by Reuters April 5.

The Saint Petersburg Times reported that trial lawyer Harry Jacobs, who has earned millions representing patients in malpractice suits, wants to spend millions to be a Florida Democrat congressman. The Orlando Sentinel has reported Jacobs has a net worth of at least $42-million, largely from suing doctors and nursing homes.

Wayne Hogan earned $54-million by representing Florida against tobacco companies. He also wants to be a Florida congressman.

West Virginia millionaire trial lawyer Democrat and Congressional candidate Jim Humphreys made his fortune helping plaintiffs win settlements from asbestos manufacturers.

Bernard L. Schwartz, CEO of Loral Space & Communications is a major Democrat donor. He was a principal character in the Chinagate scandal (the sale of advanced satellite and space technology to the Chinese People's Liberation Army).

C. Michael Armstrong, Chairman of Comcast Corporation the world’s largest cable company is also a major financial supporter of the DNC. He too was one of the major players that sold defense technology to Communist China.

What is very interesting about the wealth of the Democrats is that much of it is or was made in the communications industry and in the legal industry. Comcast, Saban Entertainment, Loral Satellite, Infoseek, Shangri-La Entertainment, are or were all operated by Democrats.

The trial lawyers are devoted constituent of the Democratic Party - especially those made millions suing doctors such as John Edwards.

When you combine the Democrats pervasive influence in the communications industry, the news industry (Ted Turner and Rick Kaplan just to name two), the legal profession, and the labor unions – especially government labor unions – the power they have to control this country is incredible.

This nexus of those who craft the laws and argue the laws with those who communicate and entertain the public should be frightening to the conspiracy theorists. For example, Bing the millionaire producer, contributed to Edwards campaign.

This means that Democrats can craft the laws and then propagandize easily what they are doing. They can create their very own 1984.

Yet, the mainstream media never mentions the concentration of wealth and power with the plutocrats of the Democratic Party. This wealth and power of the Democrats is only occasionally mentioned by the lunatic liberal fringe media. Wealth and power are almost exclusively associated with Republicans.

Is there any wonder why