When we get back into power, we're coming for the wealthy. But, how do we define the "wealthy?" [View all]

This one question, I believe, is going to define more than any other whether Democrats merely temporarily regain the levers of power in Washington or are able to present the American people with a lasting deal they trust for decades - not unlike the New Deal that resulted in Democrats controlling Congress from the early 1930s all the way until the dawn of Ronald Reagan. In order to do this though, we need to have a defined target. Because, if we start infighting over this issue, we're never going to get to the real root of the problem.

Increased taxes - both income and wealth - on billionaires? That's a no brainer. The statistics paint a scathing picture of the degree to which wealth distribution in the US has gotten completely out of control. Currently, the top 1% of US households hold a record 31.7% of the nation's wealth (up from 22.8% in 1990). More disturbing, the top 1% own nearly as much wealth as the bottom 90% combined. In total, the top 1% hold a record $52 trillion to $55.8 trillion in wealth - enough to pay off the entire US national debt with another $13 to $16 trillion to spare.

So, the top 1% should clearly be a target of change in policy. What about the top 10% though? In order to fall into the top 10% of US households in terms of wealth, you need to possess at least $1.8 million to $2 million in wealth. For most Americans falling into this category, the vast majority of their wealth is held in home equity and/or retirement investment portfolios. Are these households really all that "wealthy" though, especially given the rapid rise in inflation, particularly home prices? Should these folks also be a target of policy change?

At present, as a party, we Democrats have yet to clearly address what it means to be "wealthy" in America. The Van Hollen/STEP Act proposed in 2021 by Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen and joined by Senators Cory Booker, Bernie Sanders, Sheldon Whitehouse and Elizabeth Warren listed as one its suggestions for tax reform the taxing of inherited wealth in excess of $1 million. A low bar for sure. But, also an indicator that we may be losing sight of the real culprit in our broken economy and broken wealth distribution.

The wealth in the US is there, amassed and stalled in the hands of the few, just waiting to be taken back by the people - much to the horror of the truly wealthy - but only if we as a party can first decide whether we want to hunt apex predators or waste our time hunting small game.