When the Republican presidential candidates debate this week, it would help if voters could hear them offer detailed proposals for dealing with the 800-pound fat cat in the room — superrich donors who are making enormous, often untraceable contributions that undoubtedly tie candidates to special-interest agendas.

The money flood, invited by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, is floating candidacies in both parties, with politicians ceaselessly begging for millions from the most affluent Americans. Two candidates are notably absent from the race for excess money — Donald Trump on the Republican slate, and Bernie Sanders, the independent senator from Vermont whose criticism of the super PAC political culture has won him supporters.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is accepting super PAC money to survive, she says, even as she vows to rein in entities that can take in unlimited contributions. Cynics are laughing, but the proposals she outlined last week are excellent.

Image A Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter sold items before the candidate spoke at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee on Thursday. Credit... Morry Gash/Associated Press

They range from a government-matching system to bolster the power of small-dollar donors to support for a Securities and Exchange Commission rule that would require publicly traded companies to disclose political spending to shareholders. Another proposal would require greater disclosure of political spending by nonprofit “social welfare” groups and business trade organizations. She would also require disclosure by federal contractors to reduce the risk of pay-to-play corruption. She also supports a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, which is unlikely to happen.