Democrats are debating whether to retreat from progressive policies. Hawaiʻi just raised taxes on millionaires anyway. There’s a bigger lesson to be learned here.

After epic and consequential losses in 2024, the fight over what Democrats should stand for is playing out in primaries from Maine to Illinois to Pennsylvania. The argument usually gets framed the same way: progressives or pragmatists, activist base or persuadable middle, move left or move toward the center.

A large swath of Democrats have claimed that the party needs to temper its more progressive instincts to win back mainstream America. Meanwhile, unabashedly progressive politicians like Zohran Mamdani have built impressive coalitions across broad groups of voters that Democrats will need in elections ahead.

A Special Commentary Project

Civil Beat is focusing on transparency, accountability and ethics in government and other institutions. Help us by sending ideas and anecdotes to sunshine@civilbeat.org.

Read More

Amidst the national push-and-pull, a boldly progressive policy is having a moment. At least a dozen states have proposed or passed millionaire taxes this year, including Maine and Washington, which have signed them into law.

On Thursday, Hawaiʻi officially joined them. Gov. Josh Green signed Senate Bill 3125, which adds a 13% income tax bracket for joint filers earning over $1 million and preserves income tax cuts for more than 90% of Hawaiʻi households earning under $350,000.

The bill passed unanimously in the Senate, earning approval from both Democrats and Republicans. In the House, eight representatives voted with reservations and six voted no. Reading through the floor debate, though, it’s clear the objections were largely about what else Senate Bill 3125 did — or didn’t do.

Several legislators who voted with reservations, including Democratic Reps. Kim Coco Iwamoto, Amy Perruso and Terez Amato, as well as Republican Rep. Garner Shimizu, were listed as introducers on one of the two standalone millionaire tax proposals introduced earlier this session in the House. Their comments indicated concern over the bill’s treatment of solar tax credits, not the new income bracket.

Notably, House Minority Leader Lauren Matsumoto was among the bill’s supporters despite a few concerns. On the floor, she cited the size of Hawaiʻi’s budget as something the Legislature failed to address, but called the bill’s tax relief a step in the right direction: “We preserved the majority of the tax cuts and even improved most of them.”

Her objection was about what the government spends, not who pays for it. Six of the 10 House Republicans voted yes or yes with reservations, with Minority Leader Matsumoto and Minority Floor Leader Diamond Garcia among them.

Among the six no votes, two legislators stated their reasons during the final floor vote. Republican Rep. Elle Cochran stated clearly: “In my district, I have a lot of high-end tax bracket people, and so that’s one of my main reasons.” Given the other no votes, both Democratic and Republican, who also represent districts with above-average wealth, it’s not hard to imagine their shared reasoning with Cochran’s.

The only clear ideological objection to wealth taxes came from Republican Rep. Elijah Pierick, who gave a standard trickle-down explanation.

“If we are taxing more the rich, sometimes the rich own the businesses. And then the more they have, they can give it to their employees. They can reduce the costs of the goods they offer because the margins are better for that,” Pierick argued. “So I think from a structured economy perspective, this bill won’t help the economy of Hawaiʻi, so I’m voting no.”

That’s the argument I’d expect in traditional two-party politics, but only one person made it. The millionaire bracket wouldn’t usually seem like a place for common ground.

Increasing taxes on top income earners to fund government programs or providing tax relief for lower-income earners is a clear-cut progressive policy. And yet, all Republican senators and six of 10 House Republicans voted for it. Why wasn’t there more resistance? What can Democrats learn from this success moving forward?

Perhaps it is because the political ground has shifted. An April Economist/YouGov poll found that Americans now trust Democrats over Republicans on both the economy (40% to 34%) and taxes (37% to 33%). These aren’t issues where Republicans have traditionally been vulnerable. The party built its brand on economic stewardship and low taxes.

But tariffs have cost the average family more than $1,700, and the One Big Beautiful Bill’s cuts to Medicaid and food assistance are landing on people who were already struggling. The Republican argument that cutting taxes on the wealthy and slashing funding for assistance programs will somehow produce broad prosperity isn’t just being challenged theoretically. People are living its results right now. In that environment, defending a tax break for the top 0.36% of earners becomes much harder.

A pull toward the center is a natural reaction for Democrats who lost voters to Republicans largely on economic grounds in 2024. But the progressive-centrist binary could be the wrong frame, particularly on economic policy. People are angry about the economy, and they know the policies of the past haven’t delivered for them. That anger isn’t a base-voter phenomenon. In Hawaiʻi, this year’s millionaire tax bracket showed that coalitions for progressive economic ideas can be broader than the usual calculus assumes.

When progressive economic policy is paired with something people can actually feel, like tax relief for the majority of residents, it can mobilize more than just the base. Progressive voices, including Rep. Iwamoto, Rep. Tina Grandinetti and Sen. Karl Rhoads, who introduced Hawaii’s three standalone millionaire tax proposals, figured that out before anyone else. And that’s worth remembering as we decide what’s next for the Democratic Party.