海角大神

Not a day passes that I don鈥檛 get a call from the media asking me to compare Bernie Sanders鈥檚 and Hillary Clinton鈥檚 tax plans, or bank plans, or health-care plans.聽

I don鈥檛 mind. I鈥檝e been teaching public policy for much of the last thirty-five years. I鈥檓 a policy wonk.聽

But detailed policy proposals are as relevant to the election of 2016 as is that gaseous planet beyond Pluto. They don鈥檛 have a chance of making it, as things are now.聽

The other day Bill Clinton attacked Bernie Sanders鈥檚 proposal for a single-payer health plan as unfeasible and a 鈥渞ecipe for gridlock.鈥�

Yet these days, nothing of any significance is feasible and every bold idea is a recipe for gridlock.聽

This election is about changing the parameters of what鈥檚 feasible and ending the choke hold of big money on our political system.聽

I鈥檝e known Hillary Clinton since she was 19 years old, and have nothing but respect for her. In my view, she鈥檚 the most qualified candidate for president of the political system we now have.

But Bernie Sanders is the most qualified candidate to create the political system we should have, because he鈥檚 leading a political movement for change.

The upcoming election isn鈥檛 about detailed policy proposals. It鈥檚 about power 鈥� whether those who have it will keep it, or whether average Americans will get some as well.

A聽study聽published in the fall of 2014 by Princeton professor Martin Gilens and Northwestern鈥檚 Benjamin Page reveals the scale of the challenge.

Gilens and Page analyzed 1,799 policy issues in detail, determining the relative influence on them of economic elites, business groups, mass-based interest groups, and average citizens.聽

Their聽conclusion: 鈥淭he preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically nonsignificant impact upon public policy.鈥澛�

Instead, lawmakers respond to the moneyed interests 鈥� those with the most lobbying prowess and deepest pockets to bankroll campaigns.

It鈥檚 sobering that Gilens and Page鈥檚 data come from the period 1981 to 2002, before the Supreme Court opened the floodgates to big money in its 鈥�Citizens United鈥� and聽鈥淢肠颁耻迟肠丑别辞苍鈥� decisions. Their study also predated the advent of super PACs and 鈥渄ark money,鈥� and even the Wall Street bailout.

If average Americans had a 鈥渘ear-zero鈥� impact on public policy then, their impact is now zero.聽

Which explains a paradox I found a few months ago when I was on book tour in the nation鈥檚 heartland: I kept bumping into people who told me they were trying to make up their minds in the upcoming election between Sanders and Trump.聽

At first I was dumbfounded. The two are at opposite ends of the political divide.聽

But as I talked with these people, I kept hearing the same refrains. They wanted to end 鈥渃rony capitalism.鈥� They detested 鈥渃orporate welfare,鈥� such as the Wall Street bailout.聽

They wanted to prevent the big banks from extorting us ever again. Close tax loopholes for hedge-fund partners. Stop the drug companies and health insurers from ripping off American consumers. End trade treaties that sell out American workers. Get big money out of politics.聽

Somewhere in all this I came to see the volcanic core of what鈥檚 fueling this election.聽

If you鈥檙e one of the tens of millions of Americans who are working harder than ever but getting nowhere, and who understand that the political-economic system is rigged against you and in favor of the rich and powerful, what are you going to do?聽

Either you鈥檙e going to be attracted to an authoritarian person who promises to make America great again by keeping out people different from you and creating 鈥済reat鈥� jobs in America, who sounds like he won鈥檛 let anything or anybody stand in his way, and who鈥檚 so rich he can鈥檛 be bought off.

Or you鈥檒l go for a political activist who tells it like it is, who has lived by his convictions for fifty years, who won鈥檛 take a dime of money from big corporations or Wall Street or the very rich, and who is leading a grass-roots 鈥減olitical revolution鈥� to regain control over our democracy and economy.

In other words, either a dictator who promises to bring power back to the people, or a movement leader who asks us to join together to bring power back to the people.聽

You don鈥檛 care about the details of proposed policies and programs.

You just want a system that works for you.

This article first appeared at Robert Reich.