When the Republican presidential candidates took center stage for their first debate, they spent little time addressing the problem of money in politics. Will it be any different when they take the stage for the second debate in Simi Valley Wednesday?

Voters sure hope so.

According to a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, Americans cited the influence of the wealthy on the outcome of the election as their top concern. In Iowa, the critical first caucus state, 91 percent of Republicans rated themselves unsatisfied or “mad as hell” about the amount of money in politics.

Voters are hungry, starving even, for candidates to lay out a specific plan to fight big money and empower everyday Americans to have a real voice in our democracy. Will any of the candidates finally deliver on Wednesday night?

Last week, Hillary Clinton released a plan to overturn Citizens United, disclose corporate money influencing elections through the Securities and Exchange Commission and an executive order, and to amplify the voices of average voters with a system to match small donations like the one in Los Angeles. Her plan as well as those of Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vt., and Martin O’Malley meet many of the standards established by leading campaign finance experts in the “Fighting Big Money, Empowering People: A 21st Century Democracy Agenda.” Republicans would be wise to follow suit.

Republicans were not completely silent on the topic at the last debate.

Donald Trump surprised many when he candidly described his experience trading campaign cash for favors from elected officials. “That’s a broken system,” he said. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., criticized Trump for “buying and selling politicians of all stripes.” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, attacked “career politicians in both parties who get in bed with the lobbyists and special interests.” Mike Huckabee asserted, “The donor class feeds the political class who does the dance that the donor class wants.”

Slick one-liners disparaging lobbyists and the donor class are sure to draw applause, but voters are much too cynical to be fooled by this approach in the long term. To win over the overwhelming majority of Americans demanding a reboot of our political system, candidates must also outline a comprehensive plan to tear down the barriers that prevent everyday Americans from enjoying real representation in our government. Neither Trump, Paul, Cruz nor Huckabee has given voters anything remotely resembling an actual policy platform.

In fact, the policies endorsed by Cruz and Huckabee would actually make the problem worse. Both candidates support eliminating all limits on how much individuals can donate directly to candidates and parties. Imagine candidates directly soliciting $1 million, $10 million or $100 million donations instead of the current $2,700 limit.

Paul and Trump are little better. They apparently think they can sell voters on their personal integrity alone. Good luck.

Trump is by far the biggest offender. The central claim of his pitch to voters is “I’m so rich I can’t be bought.” Similarly, Paul wrote, “Donald Trump has never donated to any of my political campaigns, perhaps because he knows I can’t be bought.”

But the problem isn’t one bought politician. The problem is a system that forces elected leaders to spend half their day hobnobbing with wealthy individuals to raise money for election, instead of serving their constituents.

Rebalancing this system so it works for everyday Americans will take far more than one supposedly “unbought” president. It requires the kind of full-scale restructuring proposed in the Fighting Big Money Agenda.

If the candidates have a real plan, voters deserve to hear it at the debate.

Lisa Gilbert is the director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch.