Wall Street's investments in congressional campaigns and President Barack Obama appear to be paying off. One year after risky investments nearly caused a global economic collapse, little has been done to rein in the banks that helped cause the crisis. And the concept of "too big to fail," which was the justification for multibillion-dollar bailouts, is even more troubling today because those banks deemed too big to fail a year ago are now even bigger.

Obama made what appeared to be little more than a public relations effort last week, when he said in a television interview he "didn't run for office to help out a bunch of fat- cat bankers on Wall Street." A day later, he called the nation's top bankers to a meeting at the White House. But once behind closed doors, Wall Street's elite were gently scolded by Obama. It appears Obama's tough talk is only for show.

It's possible that Obama is too distracted to really push for necessary changes on Wall Street. His efforts on health care reform, global warming, as well as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, leave little time for trying to fix the conditions that helped cause the financial crisis.

Obama's apparent neglect on financial reform also might be related to the fact that Obama raised more campaign money from Wall Street than any other presidential candidate in history and there are many former Wall Street executives in his Treasury Department and serving as White House advisers. It's also true that many congressional Democrats rely heavily on campaign contributions from Wall Street and the financial services industry. These campaign finance and cultural connections could explain why more is not being done to reform the financial industry.

Unlike many in Congress, those not encumbered by lobbyists and campaign contributions are more plain-spoken about what needs to be done.

One person who has more credibility on this issue than almost anyone else is Paul Voelker, former Federal Reserve chairman. The widely respected Voelker says banks should not be allowed to take deposits and also make risky investments. Voel-ker, 82, believes that Congress should restore the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial banking from investment banking since the 1930s and was repealed in 1999 after lobbying by the financial industry.

The economic crisis resulted in failing banks being absorbed by other banks — with the help of billions in taxpayer bailout funds. The result is that those banks that had to be rescued with bailout money because their failure would threaten the entire financial system are now even bigger. The nation's four biggest banks — Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup — held 28 percent of the nation's deposits in 2007. Today, they hold 35 percent of the nation's deposits because Bank of America bought Merrill Lynch and Wells Fargo absorbed Wachovia while JPMorgan Chase took over Bear Stearns.

Now, Wall Street banks are back to making record profits, thanks in part to the bailouts. They also can borrow at near zero percent interest and loan money at 4 percent. But most banks are not making their big money from loans; they are making huge profits in their trading departments, with risky investments on complex financial instruments known as derivatives. These are the same sort of investments that played a role in bringing on the financial crisis.

As Wall Street prepares to pay out $30 billion in bonuses, most Americans are rightly disgusted. But too much of Washington, D.C., is beholden to Wall Street's campaign contributions to make the necessary changes. And the lack of progress on financial reforms reinforces the idea that Wall Street has too much control over Washington, despite sound bites about "fat-cat bankers."

But bankers in Europe have less control over their governments. In England and some other European countries, the government is imposing a 50 percent tax on big year-end bonuses in the financial industry to send the message that it's not business as usual for bailed-out bankers.

Like Voelker, Robert Reich, former secretary of Labor under President Bill Clinton, is not dependent on Wall Street's campaign contributions. To help avoid another financial crisis, Reich argues for a return of the Glass-Steagall Act, the Depression-era law that separates commercial banking's deposits-and-loans business from investment banking's risky ventures. He also says that antitrust laws should be used to break up the biggest banks. Too big to fail should be too big to exist.

Reich and Voelker are right. But Wall Street bankers are determined to fight off serious reforms, and their millions of dollars in campaign contributions have, so far, kept Congress and Obama from doing the right thing.