An even more opportunistic example is an amendment quietly added to the CARES Act granting a $170 billion tax break to wealthy real estate investors, with 80 percent of the benefits going to those earning over $1 million each year. It is hard to see how cutting taxes for billionaires and multimillionaires helps normal families and small businesses. Yet the tax break should perhaps come as no surprise, since wealthy donors with money in real estate interests have given at least $34 million to super PACs in just the first few months of 2020.

Of course, special interests could not have anticipated a pandemic happening this year — or the multi-trillion dollar congressional response it would require. But the influence game is a marathon, not a sprint. The lavish spending and lobbying these interests take on over many years are done in anticipation of rainy days like this. Times when they’ll need to leverage the power, the favors and the relationships their money can buy.

Small businesses and workers can afford neither super PAC donations nor costly lobbyists. And they have been neglected.

The money in politics that shaped the CARES Act is yet another damning illustration of how Washington works: for those with the deepest pockets. And it underscores why we need structural reforms to limit private influence, like those included in the “For the People Act” passed by the House last year, which takes aim at the dominance of big money in our politics.

For now, there is the more immediate concern of how the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve handle the $500 billion from the CARES Act meant to support large loans for big businesses (potentially with few strings attached). The evidence so far indicates that the size of your campaign donations and lobbying army correlates with positive treatment — which is why we need transparency and accountability over the distribution of the remaining funds.

Back during the 2008 financial crisis, a senior U.S. Senator voiced his concerns about the economic relief package: “Without proper oversight and safeguards,” he said, “a trillion-dollar spending bill invites fraud and waste on a massive scale” and “other misuse of taxpayers’ funds.” His name was Mitch McConnell.

Regardless of whether we can count on Mr. McConnell to mean what he says, his literal words were true. And in this crisis, the economic stakes are higher. The majority leader could show his commitment to those principles, and the rule of law, by finally naming a chair, with oversight experience, to the Congressional Oversight Commission created by the CARES Act.

Moments like these are precisely why Americans should have confidence that elected officials are acting in the best interests of the entire nation, not just the wealthy and well-connected.

Brendan Fischer is the director for federal reform at the Campaign Legal Center, where Mr. Payne is the senior director for ethics.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.