Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

When presidential campaigns end, what happens to the leftover money?

Andrew Yang

"If there's anything left over after all the bills are paid, the candidate has a few options," explains Richard Briffault.

Scott Olson/Getty Images

Briffault is a professor at Columbia Law School.

Andrew Yang and Michael Bennet are the latest Democrats who have ended their campaigns for president.

What happens to the money they have raised, but not yet spent?


The amounts could be substantial. Financial reports submitted to the Federal Election Commission indicate that as of Dec. 31, candidates who had already dropped out still had plenty in the bank. Former Rep. Beto O'Rourke of Texas dropped out Nov. 1, but at year's end still had $360,000 in the bank. Sen. Kamala Harris of California, who dropped out Dec. 3, reported having $1.3 million available.

Other candidates who dropped out in January had large sums on hand not long before they ended their campaigns: Former Housing Secretary Julian Castro had $950,000 on Dec. 31, and dropped out two days later. Less than two weeks before they exited, writer Marianne Williamson had $330,000 and Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey had $4.2 million.

I teach and write about campaign finance law. There is one clear rule about that money: Candidates can't use it for personal expenses, like mortgage payments, groceries, clothing purchases or vacations. But there are a lot of other options, both within politics and outside of it.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The first use for money from a candidate who has just quit the campaign is generally to pay the cost of winding things up. Just because someone announces they're out, their expenses don't stop right away. They may still owe rent on office space, as well as fees for services like polling and transportation and for staff salaries.

Some campaigns max out their credit cards, or take out loans to fill their accounts, and those still need to be repaid.

Candidates whose campaigns have ended but who are still handling outstanding expenses need to keep filing campaign finance reports with the FEC. Once those expenses are paid, there may not be much left.

At times, candidates need to keep fundraising after they drop out, just to pay off the bills they ran up while running. Six months after they dropped out of the 2012 presidential nomination race, failed Republican candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum were still working to pay off their campaign debts. Former presidential candidates Rudy Giuliani, Dennis Kucinich and John Edwards took years to pay off their campaign debts.

Cory BookerCory Booker can use money left over from his presidential campaign to run for reelection to the Senate.AP Photo/Patrick Semanksy

If there's anything left over after all the bills are paid, the candidate has a few options.

For some politicians, the most likely use is to help pay for their next campaign. Booker, for instance, is up for reelection to his Senate seat. Once his presidential campaign has paid off any debts it may owe, he can transfer the remaining money to his senatorial reelection campaign fund.

If he, or any other candidate, wants to run for president again in the future, it's easy enough to transfer the funds to a committee for the 2024 campaign season.

A former candidate can also use any excess funds to create a so-called "leadership PAC," which is a political committee that can be controlled by the former candidate but is not used to support that person's campaigns. Instead, it backs a political agenda – including other candidates – the candidate supports. Leadership PACs have been criticized for functioning as "slush funds" for politicians to spend on travel and entertainment they can't buy with regular campaign donations.

Instead of using the money for the candidate's own political purposes, people who drop out can donate their money to other campaigns or candidates. There are no limits on how much they can give to a national, state or local party committee – such as the Democratic National Committee.

They can also give money to state and local candidates, depending on state campaign finance laws, or up to $2,000 to each of one or more candidates for federal office.

A former candidate can also donate surplus funds to charity. This seems most likely to occur when a candidate is retiring from public life. For instance, when he left the Senate Joseph Lieberman transferred funds from his campaign fund and his leadership PAC to a college scholarship fund for high school students from his state, Connecticut. He used other leftover campaign money to organize his political and campaign papers to donate to the Library of Congress.

A former candidate with excess funds has two more possibilities. She can do nothing at all and just keep the cash in the bank. In 2014, an analysis found ex-candidates, Republicans and Democrats alike, had as much as $100 million in unused campaign funds just waiting for account holders to decide what to do.

If the person really doesn't want all that cash on hand, the law is vague on what's next – it can be used "for any other lawful purpose," besides personal use. For example, former Democratic Rep. Marty Meehan of Massachusetts helped fund a document archive for his former colleague, Barney Frank.

Read More

"Voter Here" sign outside of a polling location.

"Voter Here" sign outside of a polling location.

Getty Images, Grace Cary

Stopping the Descent Toward Banana Republic Elections

President Trump’s election-related executive order begins by pointing out practices in Canada, Sweden, Brazil, and elsewhere that outperform the U.S. But it is Trump’s order itself that really demonstrates how far we’ve fallen behind. In none of the countries mentioned, or any other major democracy in the world, would the head of government change election rules by decree, as Trump has tried to do.

Trump is the leader of a political party that will fight for control of Congress in 2026, an election sure to be close, and important to his presidency. The leader of one side in such a competition has no business unilaterally changing its rules—that’s why executive decrees changing elections only happen in tinpot dictatorships, not democracies.

Keep ReadingShow less
"Vote" pin.
Getty Images, William Whitehurst

Most Americans’ Votes Don’t Matter in Deciding Elections

New research from the Unite America Institute confirms a stark reality: Most ballots cast in American elections don’t matter in deciding the outcome. In 2024, just 14% of eligible voters cast a meaningful vote that actually influenced the outcome of a U.S. House race. For state house races, on average across all 50 states, just 13% cast meaningful votes.

“Too many Americans have no real say in their democracy,” said Unite America Executive Director Nick Troiano. “Every voter deserves a ballot that not only counts, but that truly matters. We should demand better than ‘elections in name only.’”

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand Placing Ballot in Box With American Flag
Getty Images, monkeybusinessimages

We Can Fix This: Our Politics Really Can Work – These Stories Show How

As American politics polarizes ever further, voters across the political spectrum agree that our current system is not delivering for the American people. Eighty-five percent of Americans feel most elected officials don’t care what people like them think. Eighty-eight percent of them say our political system is broken.

Whether it’s the quality and safety of their kids’ schools, housing affordability and rising homelessness, scarce and pricey healthcare, or any number of other issues that touch Americans’ everyday lives, the lived experience of polarization comes from such problems—and elected officials’ failure to address them.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why America’s Elections Will Never Be the Same After Trump
text
Photo by Dan Dennis on Unsplash

Why America’s Elections Will Never Be the Same After Trump

Donald Trump wasted no time when he returned to the White House. Within hours, he signed over 200 executive orders, rapidly dismantling years of policy and consolidating control with the stroke of a pen. But the frenzy of reversals was only the surface. Beneath it lies a deeper, more troubling transformation: presidential elections have become all-or-nothing battles, where the victor rewrites the rules of government and the loser’s agenda is annihilated.

And it’s not just the orders. Trump’s second term has unleashed sweeping deportations, the purging of federal agencies, and a direct assault on the professional civil service. With the revival of Schedule F, regulatory rollbacks, and the targeting of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs, the federal bureaucracy is being rigged to serve partisan ideology. Backing him is a GOP-led Congress, too cowardly—or too complicit—to assert its constitutional authority.

Keep ReadingShow less