By STEVE BRAWNER
There are three phases in every major political campaign, and Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Attorney General Tim Griffin and Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge are winning the first one.
That would be the pre-campaign fundraising phase, when candidates, particularly incumbents, can raise so much money that they have almost insurmountable head starts in the last two phases. Those phases are the party primaries and general elections that follow.
The three all face re-election to a second term in 2026. They recently announced their fundraising hauls for the first quarter of 2025.
Sanders reported on April 15 that she had raised almost $2.05 million in the first quarter between the primary and general election campaigns. After expenditures, she had more than $3.78 million cash on hand thanks to the $2.16 million she had in the bank before the quarter started.
Griffin, meanwhile, raised $570,138 during the first quarter between the primary and general election campaigns. That amount combined with the $628,000 he previously had raised gave him almost $1.1 million cash on hand after expenditures.
Rutledge raised almost $261,000 in the quarter to go along with the $212,000 she already had in the bank. She had more than $455,000 cash on hand after campaign expenses.
That’s an impressive haul for an officeholder whose main duties are presiding over the Senate when it’s in session and serving as governor if the elected governor can’t serve or doesn’t finish her or his term. Because Sanders is a national figure, the latter always has seemed possible.
Big campaign coffers don’t just give them a fundraising advantage. They reinforce a sense of inevitability that already existed for the three well-known Republican incumbents in a Republican-dominated state. That sense could discourage credible candidates from even considering opposing them.
It especially would be hard for any Republican to challenge any of these three, particularly Sanders. The party would rally around her and oppose them just as Democrats turned a cold shoulder to U.S. Rep. Dean Phillips last year. The former Minnesota congressman is an electable centrist Democrat who gained no traction running for president against former President Biden. He tried to tell his party that Biden wouldn’t win, which turned out to be right.
Democrats nevertheless will field a candidate to run against Sanders and probably the other two. They have been energized across the country in their opposition to President Trump. Moreover, they would have to find someone to run because a party in Arkansas that doesn’t win 3% in the governor’s race loses its status as a major party. It then must collect signatures to qualify for the ballot during the next cycle. That’s what Libertarians are doing now.
If you’d like to see who is donating to these campaigns, go to Secretary of State Cole Jester’s website, www.sos.arkansas.gov, and then click on the “Elections” tab on the left side of the page. After a few more clicks, you’ll reach a page where you can click on the word “Filings.” You then can download the primary and general election quarterly reports.
Those reports will tell you who has donated and how much. It won’t tell you why. For that, we can only surmise that some donors truly philosophically support the candidates, while others have a direct interest in what the candidates will do once they’re in office. Many donors surely are a combination of the two.
The current system at its best reflects a vibrant representative democracy where citizens can freely support their candidates. At its worst, it’s legalized bribery where donors fund elected officials expecting something in return. It doesn’t mean any particular politician is necessarily unethical, but it can put them in the position of choosing between doing what they believe is right and displeasing their donor base.
There was a time when I argued – quite persuasively, I thought – that campaigns should be publicly funded. I made the case that candidates who collect enough signatures should be eligible for taxpayer funds. They therefore would be beholden only to the general public.
However, in any system, people will spend money to elect the candidates they support. It might can be regulated, but it can’t be stopped. Maybe a modest amount of public funding should be available to help lesser-known candidates share their message.
Regardless, current campaigns come in three phases: fundraising, the primaries, and the general election.
Sanders, Griffin and Rutledge have huge head starts in the first phase, which will make the second and third ones much easier for them.
Steve Brawner’s column is syndicated to 19 outlets in Arkansas. Email him at brawnersteve@mac.com.