www.demos.org

• The Affluent Have Different Priorities

• The Affluent Don’t Prioritize Policies for Upward Mobility

• The Priorities of Lower Income Americans Are Often Ignored or Blocked

• The Affluent Participate More in Politics and Civic Life

• The Affluent Have More Influence Over Policy Outcomes

• The Affluent Have More Ways to Shape Politics

• Political and Economic Inequality Are Mutually Enforcing

www.demos.org

THE AFFLUENT HAVE DIFFERENT PRIORITIES

www.demos.org

THE AFFLUENT HAVE DIFFERENT PRIORITIES

Even when the affluent do support policies for upward mobility, they often do not prioritize these policies over other goals, such as lower taxes.

Elected officials are sacrificing investments in the future workforce in order to cut taxes for corporations.

Case Study: Some Governors have prioritized tax cuts for corporations over investments in higher education. NJ cut higher education funding by $1.6B, as state gave away $1.57 in corporate tax breaks.

www.demos.org

THE AFFLUENT DON’T PRIORITIZE POLICIES FOR UPWARD MOBILITY

“…under most circumstances the preferences of the vast majority of Americans appear to have essentially no impact on

what policies the government does or doesn’t adopt.”

- Martin Gilens Princeton Political Science Professor and author of Affluence & Influence 

“…the preferences of the people in the bottom third of the income distribution have no apparent impact on the behavior

of their elected officials. ”  - Larry Bartels

Vanderbilt Political Science Professor and author of Unequal Democracy

www.demos.org

THE AFFLUENT HAVE MORE INFLUENCE OVER POLICY OUTCOMES

www.demos.org

WHO IS THE BOTTOM THIRD

www.demos.org

AN ECONOMY SHAPED BY THE ALREADY-WEALTHY

“…the starkest difference in responsiveness to the affluent and the middle class occurs on economic policy, a

consequence of high-income Americans’ stronger opposition to taxes and corporate regulation.”

- Martin Gilens Princeton Political Science Professor and author of Affluence & Influence 

www.demos.org

UNEMPLOYMENT & JOB CREATION

DEBT & DEFICITS

VS.

www.demos.org

MINIMUM WAGE VS. CAPITAL GAINS

www.demos.org

MINIMUM WAGE VS. CAPITAL GAINS

www.demos.org

THE AFFLUENT PARTICIPATE MORE IN POLITICS AND CIVIC LIFE

www.demos.org

CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS TO CANDIDATES

www.demos.org

OUTSIDE SPENDING

www.demos.org

www.demos.org

www.demos.org

RACIAL DIMENSIONS OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE

More than 90% of itemized 2012 donations came from majority white neighborhoods. Less than 4%

came from Latino neighborhoods, even though Latinos make up 16% of the population. Less than

3% came from African American neighborhoods and less than 1% came from Asian neighborhoods.

www.demos.org

Wealthy and business interests exercise outsized influence over policy making through lobbying. Corporations and business groups spend vastly more than organizations that represent large constituencies of ordinary Americans:

• Chamber of Commerce spent $886M lobbying federal government between 1998 and 2012• Labor Unions spent $518M• Healthcare groups spent three times as much as AARP

LOBBYING

www.demos.org

Changes in capital gains and dividends were the largest contributor to the increase in the overall income inequality between 1996 and 2006.

Rolling back of regulations in ways favored by influential business interests has stripped away key protections for the middle class and made it harder for lower income groups to get ahead.

Wealthy interests have used their resources to block reforms aimed at reducing political inequality:

• Bankrolling efforts to suppress voting by low-income Americans• Lobbying to oppose campaign finance reform measures

POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC INEQUALITY ARE MUTUALLY ENFORCING

www.demos.org

CONCLUSION – POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

Any comprehensive effort to create a more balanced society, one where the deck isn’t stacked in favor of the wealthy, must achieve progress in four main areas:

1. RESTRICT THE INFLUENCE OF MONEY IN POLITICS• Amend the U.S. Constitution to restore the ability of the people to enact restrictions on political contributions• Enact strict limits on the amount that individuals and interests can spend on U.S. politics. • Match small contributions with public resources• Encourage small contributions by providing vouchers or tax credits• Require greater transparency around political spending• Strengthen rules governing lobbying

www.demos.org

CONCLUSION – POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

2. PROTECT AND EXPAND THE FREEDOM TO VOTE• Remove Barriers to Registration and Voting• Same-Day Registration• Expand Agency Registration and Automate the Registration Process• Making Registration Permanent and Portable• Protect Against Intimidation and Wrongful Challenges

3. MAKE CORPORATIONS MORE RESPONSIVE TO PUBLIC INTEREST

• Develop a more reasonable approach to corporate personhood• Corporations should be accountable to a wider array of stakeholders• Corporations could be defined in a manner that is more compatible with democratic governance

www.demos.org

CONCLUSION – POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

4. PROMOTE A STRONGER AND MORE DIVERSE MIDDLE CLASS• Invest in human capital and education• Increase employees’ power in the workplace• Use tax policy to strengthen and expand the middle class• Enable Americans to build assets