This is from the Financial Times by Michael Franc, who is the vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation.

The headline says it all here:

“‘Democrats Wake Up to Being the Party of the Rich.‘ — 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 mega-millionaire 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.

“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.”

So the Democrats are the new party of the rich based on their constituents, based on what they represent.

Who could doubt this? Hollywood. San Francisco. New York. They are the new party of the rich.

This is why Sen. Reid put off the vote or actually tabled this whole thing on raising taxes on hedge fund managers and portfolio asset managers because they’re largely Democrat contributors.

Dirty little secret, isn’t it?

They’re largely Democrat contributors, plus, they were lobbied quite a bit. Sen. Reid, lobbied heavily by a number of people, but the truth is out now.

The difference is that the Democrat wealthy feel guilty about it, or want us to think they feel guilty about it.

Resource:

Financial Times: Democrats Wake Up to Being the Party of the Rich