The main thing wrong with the parties -- according to Mr. Peters, the coiner of the

term "neo-liberal" -- is that they're, well, partisan: that they put their gain as a group ahead of an honest look at the issues. And the "reforms" of the Seventies have only made things worse. Whatever one thinks of Mr. Peters's own reforms, he does change the terms of the debate: "Practical reforms are also idealistic reforms.... If you ask people to give up public benefits that they did not need, like Social Security for the rich, again you would save billions and billions of dollars. So there are realistic, practical means of meeting the deficit that ask people to be their best selves rather than to be selfish. And I think people are tired of being selfish." ... Mr. Kinsley: "The ironic effect of the contribution ceiling in the post-Watergate reform laws is to eliminate all disinterested large sums of money.... you lose the potential for the occasional rich people who gave money in the old days. In part they were serving their class interests, in part they were on ego trips, in part idealistic. Whereas with PAC people there is absolutely no hope."