Spotlight: Money politics in U.S. deepen social divide

A dozen U.S. states are holding their primaries Tuesday to decide the candidates to represent the Republican and Democratic parties in the November 2016 general presidential election.

Republican candidate Donald Trump and Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton are projected to come out as winners of this year's "Super Tuesday," one of the most decisive days in the presidential primaries.

However, for many American voters, who will be chosen to represent the two parties in the presidential election might not be their biggest concern right now. What is worrying them is something else: This election season is awash in money, and it is eroding the country's democracy and worsening social disparity.

MONEY TALKS IN ELECTION SEASONS

In a stark departure from previous elections, most of the money in this election cycle is flowing not into the campaigns, but into outside groups like "Super-PACs," also known as political fundraising organizations that are allowed to raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals and corporations.

"Super-PACs" have altered the political landscape in the United States, allowing a cadre of billionaires and multimillionaires to channel their extreme wealth to candidates in a far more effective way.

As a result, the figure of this year's campaign expenditure has been astronomical, even as the primary election just began a month ago. The U.S. presidential election has become a game of the rich more than ever.

Democratic front-runner Clinton already raised 130.4 million U.S.dollars, and her goal was set at 2.5 billion dollars. Another rival within her party, Bernie Sanders, has raised 96.3 million dollars.

Not to mention billionaire Donald Trump, who is a real estate mogul with a self-proclaimed personal fortune of more than 10 billion dollars.

And there is former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is worth 37 billion dollars and is considering joining the race.

ONE DOLLAR ONE VOTE

It is not news that money plays a big role in American politics. However, in the "money game" that occurs every four years, those who play a decisive role are not ordinary voters, but rather the minority "rich and powerful" and some consortiums.

A report from the New York Times last October said that half of the then 176 million dollars raised by presidential candidates came from 158 American families, and noted that such a degree of concentration has never been seen since the 1970s. These families had backgrounds in the industries of finance, energy and entertainment.

In addition, dark money, with the identities of the donors remaining a secret, has also complicated the already disturbing game of campaign financing.

The Huffington Post has said in an article that "the United States can no longer claim to be democracy. Instead of one person one vote, it is now one dollar one vote."

A 2014 Princeton University study concluded that multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence, according to the article.

In other words, elected representatives no longer listen to ordinary Americans, only to those with big bucks.

While people's concerns about big money's influence on U.S. politics have intensified, analysts also warn that the growing influence of big money in the elections will not only erode democracy, but also aggravate social disparity, as wealthy patrons do not invest without expecting an eventual return.

According to a new study by academics, wealth inequality in the United States is at near-record levels. Over the past three decades, the share of household wealth owned by the top 0.1 percent has increased from 7 percent to 22 percent.

That might explain why for many voters, the fact that Sanders' campaign was mostly funded by small donations instead of big money matters a lot.

Sanders announced in January at a rally to a cheering crowd that his campaign had raised nothing from Super-PACs.

"I support Bernie because he fights for the ordinary Americans and if you are a genuine champion for us, you need to stand up to big money and a rigged economy that only favors the rich," said Alex Harris, a local college student at Sanders' rally at Grand View University in Des Moines in the north-central state of Iowa.

"What do I expect from Sanders? I expect President Sanders to break up the big banks and rein in Wall Street," said Lisa Rugaber, a retiree who said she would not vote in this election cycle if Sanders couldn't get the nomination.

"How can you achieve these goals," said Rugaber, "when you actually get money from those hedge-fund managers and billionaire donors?" Endi