Obama can answer dark-money problem: Column

Our broken campaign finance system has many harmful effects on our democracy beyond elections themselves. Among the worst, it exacerbates our nation's enduring racial and economic disparities by permitting the most powerful to spend billions to elect their preferred candidates and dictate policy while sidelining those who can't afford jumbo contributions. And because wealthy special interests can hide behind "dark money" groups that don't disclose their donors, the public increasingly does not even know who they are.

Since the Supreme Court's misguided Citizens United decision in 2010, dark money groups who disclose none of their donors have spent well over $600 million (according to the Brennan Center for Justice) on federal elections and are poised to set new records in 2016. Anecdotal evidence suggests that a lot of this money comes from major firms seeking to curry favor with the government. Dark money is a perfect way for these interests to avoid the scrutiny of voters and their own shareholders.

Dark money also takes a particularly toxic toll on poor and minority communities. We know these communities do not sharethe policy priorities of the political donor class. On issue after issue — from the minimum wage, to paid sick leave, to the regulation of predatory lenders — it is the donor class whose views and priorities win out in the end.

President Obama has spoken eloquently against dark money. But with a hostile Congress, many assume words are all he can offer to stem the tide of secret election spending. They're not.

With a stroke of the pen, the president can strike a blow against unaccountable money by issuing an Executive Order requiring major companies who are awarded federal contracts — including many of the nation's biggest economic players — to disclose all of their political spending.

Is transparency a magic bullet to fix our nation's racial and economic disparities? Of course not.

But it does provide at least a measure of accountability.

Lack of accountability is especially troubling in the context of government contracting. In Fiscal Year 2014, the federal government spent approximately $236 billion on private-sector contracts, with roughly 69% of it going to just 25 major companies. Between 2000 and 2013, the top 10 federal contractors made approximately$1.5 trillion from the government. These are taxpayer dollars at stake — and the public has a major interest in knowing that money is going to companies best equipped to do the job well, not simply the highest political bidders.

It should come as no surprise that most of these companies spend big to court those in power. In the 2014 election cycle, the top 25 federal contractors all made disclosed contributions through their political action committees, giving a total of more than $30 million. And nothing stops those same companies from contributing unlimited amounts to dark money groups. Since those groups increasingly back single candidates, dark money donors can now target a particular race exactly as they would do with disclosed contributions — but in secret and with no limits.

A system that rewards big contractors for how well they play this political money game hurts poor people and communities of color in at least two ways. First, it helps perpetuate unjust policies that further grind down these communities. For example, private prison companies have pushed hard for tougher incarceration policies — for both low-level criminals and undocumented immigrants — that increase demand for their product. Their activities have contributed to a culture of mass incarceration whose true costs politicians across the political spectrum are only now starting to acknowledge.

Second, hidden contractor spending can foster a pay-to-play culture in which contracts are used to reward political supporters rather than to obtain the best product or service. Vulnerable citizens who depend heavily on government programs bear the cost of such practices. So do our active-duty military personnel and veterans, among them many middle- and working-class people of color, for whom military service offers the best opportunity to obtain an education and start a career.

Because pay-to-play culture is so dangerous, several states simply ban contractors and the individuals associated with them from making political contributions. Others opt for disclosure, which at least permits the public to judge for itself whether officials and contractors have behaved acceptably. Thanks to weak, easy-to-evade restrictions and dark money loopholes, the federal government is a laggard in both regards.

President Obama has the chance to help fix this problem. Of course, a lot more is needed to restore the promise of our democracy. But politics, as they say, is the art of the possible. This is the president's last, best opportunity to make an actual difference on something about which he has waxed eloquent but otherwise neglected. He should take it now, before his time runs out.

Michael Waldman is president of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law. Wade Henderson is president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns like this, go to the Opinion front page.