Meet “The Democrats” — The New Party of the Rich

And, so it should be. Self-described Democrats are generally better educated than Republicans, and they are more likely to view society as an interrelated system that is as strong as its weakest links. Thus, Democrats are more inclined to care about the health and welfare their fellowman.

According to a recent Heritage Foundation study, Democrats control the majority of the country’s wealthiest congressional jurisdictions. Most of Americas wealthiest households are located in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats. The Heritage Foundation looked at two categories of taxpayers: single filers with income above $100,000 and married filers with income above $200,000.

Are they wealthy because they are Democrats?

Or, are they Democrats because they are wealthy?

An article about this Heritage Foundation Study, written by conservative Michael Franc, was originally published in the Financial Times. Franc, clearly surprised by the findings, starts rationally enough by asking a provocative question:

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.

Now, Franc’s Neocon spew about “a plan to extract billions in extra taxes from hedge fund managers” is the first hint that the guy is becoming unhinged. The issue is — whether fund managers should pay the same rate of income taxes as all other Americans. Currently, billionaire fund managers pay only 15 percent because their highly-paid tax attorneys argue that their “overlords” ordinary income is actually capital gains.)

Still, Franc does bring up a salient point. If the election issue of 2008 is the economy, why would Reid table this? It is directly connected to the subprime debacle that will be destroying so many American lives, come this spring.

From this point on, the article gets quite interesting. Not because of its content, but because of the underlying psychology that it reveals. Here’s where Franc’s cheese begins to slip off his cracker.

And here’s where the true autistic nature of the Republican mindset comes into full view. By “autistic” I mean that Republicans lack the ability to feel true empathy for others — or to understand how someone could have a motive in life that does not serve one’s own self-interest. The closest empathetic sensation an off-the-shelf Republican seems to feel, is to imagine their own non-existance had their mothers had an abortion. Hence, the near-hysterical pro-life forced-pregnancy stance on the Right.

Stage One — The Peevishness

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.

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.

Stage Two — The Name Calling

Income disparity – to use the class warrior’s favourite term – is greatest among the districts of lawmakers that lead each party’s campaign arm [the ability to raise money]…. Soon this new political demographic may give traditional purveyors of class warfare the yips.

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.

Stage Three — The Disconnect

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?

Stage Four — The Ranting

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?”

As a reductionist, I seek the beginnings of things, the seeds of change, the fundamental underlying principles that hurdle trends and collapse waves of probability.

The self-sacrific of an individual for the greater good is a concept for which Republicans have absolutely no neuroreceptors. They could never imagine this urge in themselves and cannot conceive of it in others. So they project all of their deepest fears on altruistic actions.

For example, Warren Buffet is the new Republican Satan because he believes he is taxed less than his secretary.

This is the gulf that divides and cannot be crossed.

It is not intellectual.

It is biological.