( CNN ) -- Five years ago , on October 3 , 2008 , with the economy in a tailspin , President George W. Bush signed the $ 700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program into law , giving the government the ability to bail out the big banks to prevent further calamity . A number of factors caused the economic collapse , but one in particular stands out -- a witch 's brew of money and politics . As the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission wrote in its 2011 report , `` It did not surprise the Commission that an industry of such wealth and power would exert pressure on policy makers and regulators . From 1999 to 2008 , the financial sector expended $ 2.7 billion in reported federal lobbying expenses ; individuals and political action committees in the sector made more than $ 1 billion in campaign contributions . '' Five years later , with millions of Americans still unemployed or underemployed , not much has changed . Wall Street is still the biggest player in Washington . The industry dished out more dough than any other industry during the 2012 election . In the first six months of 2013 , the finance , insurance and real estate sector has already given $ 63 million to federal candidates and committees . It has spent $ 242 million on more than 2,000 lobbyists . The Dodd-Frank financial reform was an important legislation and it has , and will continue , to protect consumers from abuses of the banks . But the industry played a major role in what rules were passed and it continues to play a role in the implementation of regulation rules . Soon , the Supreme Court may give bankers and wealthy special interests -- the same guys and gals who wrecked the economy in 2008 -- even more influence . On October 8 , the court will hear oral arguments in McCutcheon v. FEC , a case brought by Alabama businessman Shaun McCutcheon and the Republican National Committee that threatens to remove the aggregate limits that individual donors can give , in total , to federal candidates and committees each election cycle . For the 2014 election cycle , that total is $ 123,200 -- more than double the median American family income . If the court sides with McCutcheon , an individual donor could bundle more than $ 1 million to congressional fundraising committees . So what does this have to do with Wall Street and TARP ? Plenty . Some 28 % of the roughly 1,200 individuals who got within 10 % of the aggregate limit in the 2012 election work on Wall Street . These super donors work at Goldman Sachs , Elliott Management and other top financial firms . Wall Street was the biggest industry to put money into politics . If aggregate limits are thrown out , a future presidential candidate could be allowed to ask for a $ 2 million donation for his campaign and various committees . Congressional leaders could set up a fundraising committee that could take in $ 3.5 million from one donor . That 's a sweet deal for Wall Street , but it 's a raw deal for democracy . Based on past precedent , the court should uphold the current limits . But whether the justices do or do not , our democracy is already in trouble . Congress must act to raise the voices of We the People . StampStampede.org brings the issue home to Main Street . The Stampede encourages people to legally stamp messages such as `` not to be used for bribing politicians '' on our nation 's currency to support reforms to # GetMoneyOut of politics . Every bill is seen an average of 875 times and helps demonstrate a growing , sustained demand for reform . One solution is modeled on successful systems in Arizona , Connecticut and Maine , which allow candidates to run competitive campaigns for office by relying on a mix of small donations and limited public funds . There are a handful of similar measures already introduced in Congress . They would empower small dollar donors and help them compete with the lobbyists , bankers and wealthy donors writing big checks . The American people want and deserve a representative democracy that represents the people , not super-rich donors . But unless we come together and demand change , Congress will continue to be owned ( or at least rented ) by big money . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Ben Cohen and Betty Ahrens .
It 's been five years since the government bailed out banks during the economic crisis . Ben Cohen , Betty Ahrens : The New York Times In upcoming McCutcheon v. FEC , Supreme Court may give the rich even more power . Cohen , Ahrens : We need democracy that represents the people , not super rich donors .