In light of recent events, such as the plan of a few billionaires to spend nearly $900 million on the 2016 presidential campaign, I believe all Americans must be deeply concerned about the phenomenon of the power of money in the election process leading to access and influence on policy.

While money has always been a factor in our elections at the federal, state and local levels, what has been unleashed by court decisions like Citizens United is now creating havoc with the political process. The influence of corporate giving, the loopholes, the lack of transparency about who is donating funds and the agenda they may have are appalling.

Hence, our nation is on the path to becoming an oligarchy where corporate monopolies dominate the electoral process and undermine the foundation of our democratic society in a way that the voice of the ordinary citizen cannot be heard.

In this year's mid-term elections, more money was spent on congressional races than ever before: $4 billion nationally. As worrying as the amount of money is its source. In battleground states, where one party was vulnerable, outside groups outspent the campaigns themselves. For example, of the 87,800 political ads that ran in Kentucky this year for all campaigns, one in seven was from a single group, Kentucky Opportunity Coalition, which favored the eventual winner. However, Kentucky Opportunity Coalition seems to exist only as a post office box in Louisville, and lists no staff or governing board on its website.

This is an indication of the rising influence of 501(c)(4) groups — so-called social welfare organizations — that have flourished following the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United, which loosened campaign finance restrictions on corporations and certain nonprofits. They are no longer restricted from endorsing or opposing specific candidates. Moreover, they may raise unlimited amounts of money to fund overt political messages without having to disclose the sources of their funds.

Such organizations contribute nothing discernible to "social welfare" but are seemingly bottomless pits of what has come to be called "dark money." In reality, however, they may well be killing the American experiment with democracy.

It is imperative, therefore, that we create an awareness of what is happening so that we may have not equality of speech but equality of citizenship. We must stop this slippery slope to a plutocracy by convincing Americans that our elected officials are what James Madison intended them to be — agents of the sovereign people, not the hired hands of the rich givers.

Hence, what we need are free and fair elections, not the free and expensive elections brought about by the undemocratic canard that money spent on speech is speech.

In sum, the combination of increased spending on media and the use of media to convey negative messages creates a self-sustaining cycle in which large sums of money fund messages that discourage voter involvement, which in turn strengthens the role of "special interests." Taken together, these trends serve to discourage citizen participation and trust upon which our democracy depends for its survival.

We must break this cycle. While not intending to endorse any specific reform proposal, I believe it is appropriate to suggest three criteria to evaluate any proposals for reform. Campaign finance reforms should serve to increase citizen participation in the political process, They should foster consideration of the common good over particular "special" interests. And, they should make voters more informed about the candidates, including the sources of their financial support.

If we had reforms which reflected such criteria, it would not get the money out of politics, but it would re-empower the American voter and revitalize our democracy.

Howard J. Hubbard is Bishop Emeritus of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany