Most people would agree that America’s strength rests upon two pillars: democracy and capitalism. That first pillar is built upon a duly elected representative government that operates on a check and balance system and an independent judiciary guaranteed by our Constitution. And the second pillar is our special form of capitalism which is based upon a free enterprise system regulated by government to assure economic stability and—ideally—equal opportunity for its participants. Government’s involvement in the business cycle was advocated by James Madison in order to assure business would have a stake in preserving our democracy. Today, the Fed uses various tools at its disposal to monitor and affect two key components of our economy: inflation and unemployment. By design our economic success is an underpinning to our democracy and has always been a key issue in every election. Unfortunately, it has often been used as the main justification for excessive wealth accumulation—a contemporary myth.

President Reagan is quoted as saying that “a rising sea lifts all ships.” Few would disagree with this metaphor when applied to a free enterprise system. Unfortunately, it no longer applies to the state of our current economy. Has the accumulation of wealth in recent decades raised the economic status of a majority of our citizens? Whether you look into the fields of news and book publishing, hydrocarbon exploration and drilling, telecommunications and broadcasting, drug development and provisioning, defense industry manufacturing and contracting, or the airline industry, you find a handful of companies dominating their enterprise sector. This dominance does not serve our economy or our democracy. President Theodore Roosevelt inveighed against the oligarchs of industry and sought to eliminate monopolies not because he was against big business, but because he wanted to preserve the free enterprise system AND our democracy. The roadblock he put in place slowed the inevitable accumulation of wealth that eventually was wiped out by the Great Depression. The unequal distribution of wealth in America at the time of the Depression has recently been replicated just before the great recession of 2008. But on this occasion, it was not the large private fortunes that were wiped out, but the pensions and housing security of millions of average Americans. The big investment banks (with the exception of Lehman Brothers) have actually grown, capturing an even bigger share of the economy since the recession while income inequality continues to become more disparate. The oligarchs of business amass a disproportionate amount of wealth, much like those deep ocean canyons that swallow 40% of the ocean’s water. They are the bottomless pits that consume capital, not for the sake of business growth, but for corporate and personal gain far beyond the needs of any organization or citizen in a democratic society. They are not “job creators,” but “job stranglers,” squeezing productivity out of a workforce despairing of any share in an expanding economy and drying up start-up money for entrepreneurs, seventy six percent of whom now thrive in only three states (California, New York and Massachusetts). Wage earners and small businesses that account for increases in demand and for most new hires, respectively, suffer in this environment. The new metaphor for our era might be “a receding sea sinks many ships.”

Somehow it has become a conservative position to resist any effort to reduce economic inequality. But a conservative is somebody who wants to preserve those values that have made society robust and successful. It is not a legitimate conservative position to support inequality in the world’s oldest democracy. So why do some “conservatives” support a system of growing inequality and decry any attempt to change that system as “socialism?” In Russia, where true socialism hides under the banner of a state controlled democracy, 60% of the economy is state owned. In America, a true democracy, more than 60% of the economy is controlled by a few capitalists and the corporations that represent their interests. Socialism is not our problem; unfettered capitalism or, more specifically, the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few oligarchs is the problem. Their interest is not the preservation of American institutions and way of life, but of their wealth and its unrestrained accrual. How would I prove this assertion? The evidence is all around us. Corporations are more liquid than at any time in recent decades, yet wages have stagnated. There are more billionaires in America than at any time in history, far exceeding the so-called “barons of industry” from Teddy Roosevelt’s time. Campaigns are costlier than ever, because big pocket donors now dominate the playing field and the Washington agenda. Legislation in Congress can no longer be unencumbered of provisions written by special interest (i.e., predominately “moneyed interest”) lobbyists. Why do you think the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act required hundreds of pages, when it merely had to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act previously revoked by Congress and to establish the Volcker rule? If our political campaigns and legislative process are corrupted by big money, why would we not consider these facts the greatest threat to our democracy? How can we “promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessing of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” when those democratic goals are subordinated to the wealth accumulation of the few?

I believe it was a famous historian of the 19th century who said that Americans were better than the government that served them. And, yes, it was Churchill who also said that democracy was the worst system of government, except for every other. The problem is not with Americans or with our system of government, but with our will and ability to elect representatives who serve our general welfare and interests. Also, the problem is not with the rich in general. There are many wealthy philanthropists who have supported programs that educate the electorate and that train the workforce for future jobs. But the initiative to learn and train is hampered by a loss of opportunity. Higher education costs are sky-rocketing. Public education is unequal in quality and, in too many cases, encumbered by high administrative costs, subverting investment in actual teaching and education resources. Our investment in infra-structure is at an all-time low at a time when it desperately needs to be rebuilt not only for the purpose of growing the future economy, but also for the benefit of our contemporary workforce denied access to the initial rungs of that economic ladder. There are legislative actions that could alter this picture. But there is also Washington gridlock abetted by power politics and supported by big money where zero-sum is the only game in town and fundraising is its leverage. Elected officials campaign on “getting things done,” “working across the aisle,” and “compromising with the opposition party.” Once elected, they are swallowed by the whale that awaits them in Washington, that is, Party Leadership. Perhaps there was some wisdom in those founding fathers who were reluctant to form political parties. They can too easily become the embodiment of special interests. In our era, they seem to represent campaign donors, lobbyists, and the powerbrokers dangling lucrative post-politic careers rather than you and me, the actual electorate. The issues that concern the general welfare go unaddressed—whether they are on immigration reform, gun control, global warming, wage fairness, education priorities, out-of-control campaign funding, a confusing and misapplied tax system, infra-structure maintenance and restoration, a system of regulatory authority that ranges from excessive to non-existent, or matters of war and peace.

It is true that it is still easier to start a business in America than in many other places in the world. But large mergers are becoming more common, while investment money for new business is becoming scarcer. The specter of a future where only big business remains is a future without free enterprise. In addition, we can easily see how big money is corrupting our democratic institutions. Fortunately, the future is still ours to create. There are reasonable politicians in Washington—the ones rarely given voice by the press because they capture less of an audience than the radicals from the left or right. When you hear talk of reforming campaign funding, investment banking, or the tax structure, give an ear to what is being said and give voice to your concerns. What is most true about America is its ability to salvage a promising future from its own pitfalls, whether it be slavery, suppression of women and minorities, the misadventures of foreign wars or, hopefully, the risks of losing our free enterprise system. The time for a voter revolution is now before that system becomes nothing more than an illusion and our democracy, a sham.