Democrats learned something about inequality, Republicans could use the same lesson

Here’s a related puzzle: How did economic inequality begin 2014 as “the defining challenge of our time” and “a fundamental threat to the American dream,” in the words of President Obama, but finish Election Day as an afterthought, at best a segue, for Democrats?

Finally, a third question: Why did Democrats spend so much time bashing millionaires and billionaires like Charles and David Koch, but spend almost zero time pushing redistributive policies such as a wealth tax, or higher capital gains rates?

The key that unlocks all three of these mysteries is the notion of fairness. Democrats, reading the polls closely, have run away from talk of redistribution, soaking the rich, or even really caring for the poor. The president’s party discerned that “spreading the wealth around” isn’t popular, but ensuring people get what they deserve — no less, no more — is a winner. Too bad for Harry Reid, that didn’t fit well into his party’s actual views.

Americans, in general, perceive rising economic inequality, and they dislike it.

Seventy-five percent told a CBS News poll in January, “the gap between the rich and the poor in the U.S. is getting larger,” while only 5 percent said the gap was shrinking. Other polls bear this out.

When it comes to “the way income and wealth are distributed in the U.S.,” Americans were five times more likely to say “very unsatisfied” than “very satisfied,” according to a January 2014 Gallup poll. About half the country finds the distribution of wealth unfair, polls suggest.

So what should government do about inequality? The public’s answer seems to be something — but not very much, and not as a high priority. When asked to name important issues for this election in two recent polls, almost nobody mentioned inequality — about 1 percent brought it up in an October Politico poll.

Democrats took all this data to heart. Inequality dropped out of their stump speeches. If you checked the “issues” pages of any of the Democrats in top races, you would have seen “jobs,” “energy,” “women & families,” but not “inequality,” “poverty” or “the wealthy.”

If you read through these Democrats’ issue pages, only Rep. Gary Peters of Michigan even used the word “inequality” regarding the gap between the rich and the poor.

When asked about inequality, Democrats mostly pivoted to the minimum wage. As far as a way of redistributing wealth, a higher minimum wage isn’t irrelevant, but it’s clunky: Cutting against its upsides, it raises costs for consumers and increases unemployment among the poor. The best reason for liberals to focus on a higher minimum wage is that it’s politically popular.

Tuesday’s results proved it: The same voters who elected conservatives Rep. Tom Cotton, Ben Sasse, Dan Sullivan and Mike Rounds to the Senate also voted to increase their state’s minimum wage higher than the federal minimum wage.

The distinction, in the public’s mind, seems to be between minimum wage and welfare. Your wage is what you earn for the work you do. Welfare is often seen as a giveaway to the lazy. Anyone who works 40 hours a week, Americans seem to think, deserves a decent paycheck.

The other side of inequality is the rich. Democrats in 2014 ran against the rich, attacking their opponents for “representing millionaires instead of you,” and for being owned by the Koch brothers. But Democrats didn’t promise to increase taxes on the rich — they instead agitated for limiting the rich’s role in politics.

Democrats attacked the wealthy not for being too wealthy, but for having too much say in politics.

This coincides with the public’s view. “Do you think the United States benefits from having a class of rich people, or not?” Gallup asked in 2012. Sixty two percent said yes.

Bill Gates is the fifth most admired person in the world, according to a YouGov poll. Warren Buffett’s favorability is 19 points higher than his unfavorability.

Americans, however, hate Wall Street, especially since the bailouts.

Here’s the theme: Americans don’t mind rich people. They mind rich people who didn’t earn their wealth. Also, being wealthy doesn’t earn you a greater say in a democracy, people think.

Democrats understood the data well, they just couldn’t work it into their own policy framework this year. Republicans could harness this same data more effectively by crusading against unearned wealth — crony capitalism — and looking for ways to make hard work pay off.

Timothy P. Carney, the Washington Examiner’s senior political columnist, can be contacted at [email protected]. His column appears Sunday and Wednesday on washingtonexaminer.com.