jonetta rose barras: Can DC afford public financing of its local election campaigns?

Just as Mayor Muriel Bowser and the DC Council were ending their breakfast meeting earlier this month, at-large Councilmember Anita Bonds asked her how she intended to handle funding for the city’s Fair Elections Program — a multimillion-dollar outlay to qualifying political campaigns. “This is a very difficult time for our community,” Bonds said, referring to the myriad fiscal challenges facing the District, including a possible $1.15 billion shortfall for fiscal year 2027 if spending were to continue on its current course.

With what may be a record number of candidates vying for the political offices on the ballot this year — including mayor, attorney general, seven DC Council positions (including chair, two at-large seats and wards 1, 3, 5 and 6), and four State Board of Education seats (wards 1, 3, 5 and 6) — Bonds calculated that public financing of DC’s primary and general election campaigns this year could cost as much as $48 million. “These are things we have to wrestle with.” 

Bowser seemed to agree, noting that, “One of things that can be addressed is what happens to public funds if a person fails to qualify [for the ballot] and then drops out.”

Reform anyone?

“In my opinion, the money could be better spent,” Bonds told me during a recent interview in which she spoke in greater detail about her concerns and the need for changes to the Fair Elections law unanimously passed by the council in 2018 and first implemented in 2020.

The District has a $22 billion fiscal year 2026 operating budget. Yet it’s struggling to provide social services programs such as government-subsidized health insurance and child care; the growth in both is outpacing the city’s revenues. Spending has to be reduced.

DC’s economy may not be broken. But there are multiple cracks.

For the past several years, officials have opted for a patchwork approach. Think about the many uneven sidewalks and pothole-filled streets around the city. When basic repairs are completed, they’ll look good for a hot minute. Then the humps and craters return, threatening ankles or vehicle alignment. 

The District’s fiscal infrastructure requires full and comprehensive renovation. That means a deliberate and systematic review of programs, policies and impact — funding only what works to build stronger families and stronger communities, including businesses. 

Given that reality, Bonds is right to flag public financing of election campaigns. This fiscal year 2026, the DC Council has appropriated $12 million for the Fair Elections Program.

However, even before the DC Board of Elections has formally qualified any individual for the ballot, nearly half of that amount has already been transferred to 18 certified political campaign committees that raised enough from small donors and local residents to qualify. There are 37 others that have not yet met the threshold but could eventually do so to receive their cut of the money.

The Fair Elections Act was approved by the council after a robust public discussion before the Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety, then chaired by Ward 6 Councilmember Charles Allen and responsible for oversight of the Board of Elections and Office of Campaign Finance. His committee asserted that the law would “amplify the voices of everyday voters” and rein in “the outsized influence of wealthy and corporate contributors.”

Back then, some experts suggested that the law would also open the political class to more African Americans and other candidates of color. In fact, many Black and Hispanic candidates have had a difficult time being certified.

Initially, officials considered requiring all candidates to participate in the public financing program. However, federal courts had already ruled against such mandates, prompting DC to adopt a voluntary statute.

In order to be certified for the program, candidates for covered offices — mayor, attorney general, council chair, all councilmembers, and members of the State Board of Education — must essentially pledge to reject donations from corporations and lobbying firms while accepting money from small donors, including DC residents. Once certified, each candidate is eligible to receive a base grant that is between $10,000 and $160,000 depending on the office being sought. 

Under the law, certified candidates may also be eligible to receive matching funds, which are provided for “each qualified small dollar contribution with a value of $5 from an individual District resident.” For every $1, the District provides $5 as the match. 

According to a report by the DC Office of Campaign Finance, the District handed out $2,564,863.10 in 2020 for public financing of election campaigns. Two years later, in 2022, that amount jumped to $11,973,672.15. 

The money for the Fair Elections Program is only for individuals running for office. It does not include operating costs for the Office of Campaign Finance or for the DC Board of Elections and its staff. It doesn’t include the expense of sending out ballots by mail, setting up in-person voting at neighborhood centers, or hiring people to work at those facilities. 

Bonds described the Fair Elections Program as “very generous. It’s a lucrative way of competing.”

“No one really has focused on it,” she added of the need for evaluation of the program’s implementation and cost.

Truth be told, I raised my objections years ago. I believed then, as I do now, that the first test of whether someone is ready for leadership or that they have a base is demonstrated by their ability to raise sufficient funds from ordinary citizens and to secure qualifying petition signatures from registered voters. As a DC taxpayer, my money should not be used to prop up a candidate unable to accomplish those tasks. 

After all, as one local resident said recently, quoting a time-worn adage, “Every tub has to sit on its own bottom.”

To be fair, DC isn’t the only jurisdiction footing the bill for political candidates. The Brennan Center for Justice lists a number of state and local governments using public money for that purpose.

Wesley Williams, the chief operations and policy officer at the Office of Campaign Finance, told me during an interview last week that Bonds is wrong: It’s not likely that $48 million will be spent on the Fair Elections Program.

He could not estimate, however, just how much would be spent given the large number of candidates. “If we need more money, we can go back to the council,” said Williams.

That trip to the John A. Wilson Building may occur sooner than anticipated.

Consider that, thus far, in the mayor’s race, the Office of Campaign Finance website shows that Gary Goodweather’s committee has received $321,333.70; former at-large Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie’s committee, $1,114,530.55; and Ward 4 Councilmember Janeese Lewis George, $1,250,201.15.

Each has raised only a fraction of those large sums from individual donors. Lots of that money is being used to pay various operatives and businesses — some located outside of the District. 

McDuffie only recently entered the race, so the report he filed on Feb 2 doesn’t fully capture his startup expenses. 

On the other hand, Lewis George launched her campaign in December 2025. It appears she has spared no expense in her push to claim the mayoral suite. She hired Gusto in San Francisco, paying it as much as $30,000. It promotes itself as a payroll company like ADP — except Lewis George’s committee indicated it has also provided campaign materials. 

A firm known as 4c Partners LLC, located on Connecticut Avenue in Upper Northwest, received $50,000. 

Middle Seat Consultants, which has a local post office box for its address, was paid $33,818.16. It calls itself the “full-service firm for progressive causes and candidates,” providing help with advertising, fundraising, development, organizing and strategy. It lists past clients such as the Biden Victory Fund; the 2020 Women’s March; and, more recently New Yorkers for Lower Costs, in support of Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. 

Lewis George also paid Unite Here more than $46,000 for rental space, according to the committee report filed with the Office of Campaign Finance that is published on the agency’s website. Interestingly, that union has endorsed her candidacy. It also endorsed her first run for the Ward 4 council seat and her reelection bid in 2024.

Just to be clear, there’s no suggestion that any of this is illegal. However, after reviewing the finance reports, I better understood why Lewis George has been trying to squeeze more and more cash from donors — seemingly much more aggressively than is typical of major political candidates in DC. McDuffie has been sending out his own solicitations. 

Both candidates seem in a race to max out the matching mayoral cap within the Fair Elections Program, which is $3,443,855 per candidate.

That’s your money, dear taxpayers.

The District has also distributed nearly $1 million to DC Attorney General Brian Schwalb, who is facing one opponent in his reelection bid. More than a half-million dollars has gone to candidates in the June primary for an at-large seat; that does not include $109,455.00 so far for the at-large special election being held at the same time to fill McDuffie’s seat through the end of the year. He resigned his council post in January in order to run for mayor.

The general election in November could bring a second feasting for primary winners and a new round of candidates lining up for the first opportunity to be certified for the program.

What about the losers? 

Williams told me: “If [candidates] don’t make the ballot, they are kicked out of the program.” What happens to the money? He said a “formal letter is sent. They have to return the funds.”

No, not all the money, Williams cautioned — “just what is left.”

Help us?

“We have to change the law in 2026 to try to affect the election in 2028,” said Bonds, laying out some specific reforms that should be implemented, including more narrowly defining the political season. “The payout of 5 to 1 is too big. I think it should be 3 to 1.”

Williams declined to answer my question directly about whether he supports reforms. “That’s for the citizens of Washington, DC and the council to decide. 

“I will say [however], every program is subject to review and tweaks,” he continued. “Nothing should be set in stone.” 

Is it just me or does that sound like Williams may agree with Bonds about the need for reforms? Is change really coming?

jonetta rose barras is an author and DC-based freelance journalist, covering national and local issues. She can be reached at thebarrasreport@gmail.com.