Almost all the economic gains are still going to the top, leaving America's vast middle class with stagnant wages and little or no job security. Two-thirds of Americans are working paycheck to paycheck.
Meanwhile, big money is taking over our democracy.
If there were ever a time for a bold Democratic voice on behalf of hardworking Americans, it is now.
Yet I don't recall a time when theDemocratic Party's most prominent officeholders sounded as meek. With the exception of Elizabeth Warren, they're pussycats. If Paul Wellstone, Teddy Kennedy, Robert Kennedy or Ann Richards were still with us, they'd be hollering.
The fire now is on the right, stoked by the Koch brothers, Rupert Murdoch and a pocketful of hedge-fund billionaires.
Some wonder about the strength of her values and ideals. I don't. I've known her since she was 19 years old, and I have no doubt where her heart is. For her entire career she's been deeply committed to equal opportunity and upward mobility.
Some worry she's been too compromised by big money -- that the circle of wealthy donors she and her husband have cultivated over the years has dulled her sensitivity to the struggling middle class and poor.
But it's wrong to assume great wealth, or even a social circle of the wealthy, is incompatible with a deep commitment to reform -- as Teddy Roosevelt and his fifth cousin Franklin clearly demonstrated.
The more relevant concern is Hillary Clinton's willingness to fight.
If she is to get the mandate she needs for America to get back on track, she will have to be clear with the American people about what is happening and why -- and what must be done.
For example, she'll need to admit that Wall Street is still running much of the economy, and still out of control.
I'm not suggesting a long list. Democratic candidates too often offer mind-numbing policy proposals without explaining why they're important.
Ms. Clinton should use such policies to illustrate the problem, and make a vivid moral case for why such policies are necessary.
In recent decades Republicans have made a moral case for less government and lower taxes on the rich, based on their idea of "freedom." They talk endlessly about freedom, but they never talk about power. It's power that's askew in America -- concentrated power that's constraining the freedom of the vast majority.
Hillary Clinton should make the moral case about power: for taking it out of the hands of those with great wealth and putting it back into the hands of average working people.
Such a voice and message make sense politically. The 2016 election will be decided by turnout, and turnout will depend on enthusiasm.
If she talks about what's really going on and what must be done about it, she can arouse the Democratic base as well as millions of independents and even Republicans who have concluded, with reason, that the game is rigged against them.
The question is not her values and ideals. It's her willingness to be bold and to fight, at a time when average working people need a president who will fight for them more than they've needed such a president in living memory.
This is a defining moment for Democrats, and for America. It is also a defining moment for Hillary Clinton.
Robert Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at theUniversity of California at Berkeley and Senior Fellow at the Blum Center for Developing Economies. His new film, "Inequality for All," is now out on Netflix, iTunes and Amazon.