By Peter Nicholas 

Democrats looking for a way forward after their election losses this year have wound up in a debate over how best to frame the party's economic message, with the most liberal members rallying behind Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) and her calls for a focus on income inequality.

Ms. Warren had gained new prominence on the national stage--and drawn increasing calls for her to run for the White House--in recent weeks with her attempt last week to scuttle a compromise budget bill because of concessions to Wall Street, as well as her opposition to President Barack Obama's choice for a top Treasury post due to his Wall Street ties. Those moves have reinforced Ms. Warren's long-standing message that Democrats should fight to reduce corporate influence and the share of wealth controlled by the nation's richest households.

Other Democrats say Ms. Warren's message will lead only to more electoral defeats, as many voters will reject the focus on income inequality and instead want policies aimed at broad economic growth. While all Democrats say they want to foster a growing economy, the two wings of the party are at odds over which points should be most central to their message.

"In a world where there are more self-described conservatives than there are self-described liberals, is having a campaign that only tries to win by appealing to your base the right strategy?" asked Jack Markell, the Democratic governor of Delaware. "I would argue it's not."

Mr. Markell, who hasn't yet endorsed a candidate for the 2016 election, said the next Democratic nominee has to reach independents and "some Republicans, as well. In my mind, an agenda around [economic] growth is the most likely message to do that."

At the same time, Ms. Warren's populist message has made her a focal point of a vocal wing within the party. The liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org hosted an event in Iowa on Wednesday night aimed at showcasing support for Ms. Warren in the state that holds the nation's first presidential contest. MoveOn also plans to spend $1 million on its "Draft Warren" effort and is hiring staff in Iowa, New Hampshire and possibly other states that hold early primaries.

So far, Ms. Warren has said only that she is backing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, telling National Public Radio earlier this week, "I am not running for president." Yet in sticking to the present tense, as NPR's Steve Inskeep pointed out, she suggested she hasn't entirely ruled it out.

One question hanging over the party is what economic policy Mrs. Clinton would propose should she run for president, and whether she would cast herself in Mrs. Warren's populist mode or adopt a more centrist, business-friendly stance.

Much of Mrs. Clinton's career suggests she would take the latter course.

For years, the liberal and moderate strands of the party largely minimized differences and kept a united front amid Republican resistance to President Barack Obama's agenda. But the uneasy alliance has become strained after the midterm elections, in which the party suffered deep losses.

A sign of the split is stepped-up calls for Ms. Warren to jump in the presidential race.

Some 300 lower-level former Obama campaign aides are lining up behind the Massachusetts senator, signing a recent letter describing her as someone who would "take on the Wall Street banks and special interests" and tackle "rising inequality," which they called the "challenge of our times."

A liberal advocacy group called Democracy for America is putting $250,000 into the effort to draft Ms. Warren. Yet the group's founder, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, has endorsed Mrs. Clinton.

Ms. Warren gained fresh attention in recent weeks. She played a leading role in opposing Mr. Obama's choice for a top Treasury post, Antonio Weiss, due to his Wall Street ties, and also mounted an unsuccessful campaign in the Senate to scuttle a provision in a $1.1 trillion spending bill that will loosen parts of the Dodd-Frank financial regulation law.

In her attempt to do away with the provision, she employed the sort of language that leaves liberals enthralled and centrists unnerved. Taking aim at Citigroup Inc., a recipient of taxpayer-financed bailout money during the financial crisis, Ms. Warren said in a speech on the Senate floor: "Washington already works really well for the billionaires and the big corporations and the lawyers and the lobbyists....What about the families who are living paycheck to paycheck and saw their tax dollars go to bail out Citi just six years ago?"

Ms. Warren decried what she cast as a revolving door between Citi and the top ranks of the U.S. Treasury Department, saying the bank has too much political and economic clout. "I'm from the Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party," read a sign that appeared at a protest Thursday at a Manhattan office of Citigroup.

"I'm from the Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party," read a sign that appeared at a protest Thursday at a Manhattan office of Citigroup.

"We're at a crossroads: The rich, the ones at the very top are getting wealthier and wealthier," Ilya Sheyman, executive director of MoveOn, told roughly 100 people at the event in Des Moines. "The middle class and those struggling to get into it are falling further and further behind....This is a moment for Elizabeth Warren."

Those aligned with Ms. Warren call for policies that would increase the minimum wage, raise taxes on wealthy households and subject Wall Street firms to tighter regulation.

While embracing some of those goals, others in the party tout policies that would strengthen education, improve roads and bridges, and promote exports. And they describe businesses as more of a partner in a joint endeavor to expand economic opportunity than a special interest to be tamed.

In the midterm elections, many Democrats made a minimum-wage increase the centerpiece of their campaigns. Rep. John Delaney (D., Md.), who has warned against rhetoric that winds up "demonizing the private sector," said the message must be more encompassing.

"You cannot anchor your whole economic message around" the minimum wage, he said, "because in fact it doesn't affect a lot of Americans, and it doesn't get at the heart of the issue: Creating more middle-skill jobs where people can have a decent standard of living and feel like their kids have opportunity."

In her recent book, "Hard Choices," Mrs. Clinton wrote about her efforts as secretary of state to boost exports and help U.S. businesses gain access to foreign markets, in the interest of creating jobs at home.

At the same time, she has begun sprinkling her speeches with populist themes. "Our democracy is supposed to work for everyone, not just the privileged few," Mrs. Clinton said this fall at a campaign appearance in Kentucky. "But, more and more--you know this, you feel it, you live it--the scales are weighted against working families."

Mrs. Clinton also has been hinting that she would like to bridge the divide between the party's left and centrist blocs. "I love watching Elizabeth giving it to those who deserve to get it," she said at a campaign rally in October for former Massachusetts Democratic gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley.

Janet Hook contributed to this article.

Write to Peter Nicholas at peter.nicholas@wsj.com

Access Investor Kit for Citigroup, Inc.

Visit http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=US1729674242

Subscribe to WSJ: http://online.wsj.com?mod=djnwires

Citigroup (NYSE:C)
Historical Stock Chart
From Feb 2024 to Mar 2024 Click Here for more Citigroup Charts.
Citigroup (NYSE:C)
Historical Stock Chart
From Mar 2023 to Mar 2024 Click Here for more Citigroup Charts.