Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

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

Opinion

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.

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

Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is running for U.S. Senate, speaks at an event in Lubbock on Oct 7, 2025. Paxton is seeking to shut down Jolt Initiative, a civic engagement group for Latinos, alleging that it's involved in illegal voter registration efforts. The group is fighting back.

Trace Thomas for The Texas Tribune

Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Jolt Initiative, a nonprofit that aims to increase civic participation among Latinos, is suing Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to block his efforts to shut the organization down.

Paxton announced Monday that he was seeking to revoke the nonprofit’s charter, alleging that it had orchestrated “a systematic, unlawful voter registration scheme.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is running for U.S. Senate, speaks at an event in Lubbock on Oct 7, 2025. Paxton is seeking to shut down Jolt Initiative, a civic engagement group for Latinos, alleging that it's involved in illegal voter registration efforts. The group is fighting back.

Trace Thomas for The Texas Tribune

Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Jolt Initiative, a nonprofit that aims to increase civic participation among Latinos, is suing Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to block his efforts to shut the organization down.

Paxton announced Monday that he was seeking to revoke the nonprofit’s charter, alleging that it had orchestrated “a systematic, unlawful voter registration scheme.”

Keep ReadingShow less
MAGA Gerrymandering, Pardons, Executive Actions Signal Heightened 2026 Voting Rights Threats

A deep dive into ongoing threats to U.S. democracy—from MAGA election interference and state voting restrictions to filibuster risks—as America approaches 2026 and 2028.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

MAGA Gerrymandering, Pardons, Executive Actions Signal Heightened 2026 Voting Rights Threats

Tuesday, November 4, demonstrated again that Americans want democracy and US elections are conducted credibly. Voter turnout was strong; there were few administrative glitches, but voters’ choices were honored.

The relatively smooth elections across the country nonetheless took place despite electiondenial and anti-voting efforts continuing through election day. These efforts will likely intensify as we move toward the 2026 midterms and 2028 presidential election. The MAGA drive for unprecedented mid-decade, extreme political gerrymandering of congressional districts to guarantee their control of the House of Representatives is a conspicuous thrust of their campaign to remain in power at all costs.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person putting on an "I Voted" sticker.

Major redistricting cases in Louisiana and Texas threaten the Voting Rights Act and the representation of Black and Latino voters across the South.

Getty Images, kali9

The Voting Rights Act Is Under Attack in the South

Under court order, Louisiana redrew to create a second majority-Black district—one that finally gave true representation to the community where my family lives. But now, that district—and the entire Voting Rights Act (VRA)—are under attack. Meanwhile, here in Texas, Republican lawmakers rammed through a mid-decade redistricting plan that dramatically reduces Black and Latino voting power in Congress. As a Louisiana-born Texan, it’s disheartening to see that my rights to representation as a Black voter in Texas, and those of my family back home in Louisiana, are at serious risk.

Two major redistricting cases in these neighboring states—Louisiana v. Callais and Texas’s statewide redistricting challenge, LULAC v. Abbott—are testing the strength and future of the VRA. In Louisiana, the Supreme Court is being asked to decide not just whether Louisiana must draw a majority-Black district to comply with Section 2 of the VRA, but whether considering race as one factor to address proven racial discrimination in electoral maps can itself be treated as discriminatory. It’s an argument that contradicts the purpose of the VRA: to ensure all people, regardless of race, have an equal opportunity to elect candidates amid ongoing discrimination and suppression of Black and Latino voters—to protect Black and Brown voters from dilution.

Keep ReadingShow less