Virginia Finally Closes the "Wild West" Loophole — And It's About Time
April 16, 2026; For more than a decade, Virginia stood as an outlier among American states — a jurisdiction where campaign contributions could be spent with virtually no restrictions on personal use, and where repeated legislative efforts to close that loophole met quiet, persistent defeat. Twelve years of introduced bills. Twelve years of committee maneuvers, stalled votes, and institutional inertia protecting a system that served the powerful at the expense of public trust. According to the League of Women Voters, Virginia has been consistently ranked among the weakest states for campaign finance regulation, often cited as a "pay-to-play" jurisdiction due to having no limits on campaign contributions from individuals or Political Action Committees (PACs). It is one of only five states with no contribution caps and has lacked laws governing the personal use of campaign funds.
That era ended in March 2025, when former Governor Glenn Youngkin signed HB2165 into law, at last aligning the Commonwealth with the ethical standards that nearly every other state — and the federal government — had long since adopted. In March 2025, he signed HB2165 into law, prohibiting any person from converting contributions to a candidate or campaign committee for personal use — a practice that, until now, Virginia law only restricted in the narrow context of surplus funds at the dissolution of a campaign. With that action, the Commonwealth, long derided as the "Wild West" of campaign finance, finally joined the rest of the civilized democratic world.
The vote tells its own story. HB2165 passed the House 99-0 and the Senate 40-0. In an era of bitter partisan gridlock, that kind of unanimity is almost unheard of. It speaks to how indefensible the old system had become.
What exactly was legal before? Campaign funds could be used for mortgage payments, clothing purchases, non-campaign automobile expenses, country club memberships, vacations, household food items, tuition, entertainment, and family member salaries — even when those family members provided no genuine campaign services. In short, Virginia's campaign finance laws functioned less like a guardrail and more like a personal ATM for politicians willing to exploit them.
The new law draws a clear and common-sense line. A contribution is now considered converted to personal use if it is used to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense that would exist regardless of the person's seeking, holding, or maintaining public office. Campaign money must be for campaigning. Revolutionary, one might say — if it weren't so obviously overdue.
The impact of this reform will ripple across Virginia's political culture in ways both tangible and symbolic. Most immediately, it will deter the kind of brazen self-dealing that has damaged public trust in elected officials nationwide. Advocates pushing this bill for years nicknamed it the "George Santos bill," and with good reason. Many of the infractions the disgraced Ny Congressman was federally charged with were, until now, perfectly legal in Virginia. That embarrassing reality is now in Virginia's rearview mirror.
Beyond deterrence, HB2165 may meaningfully widen the pool of people willing to run for office. The law wisely includes a provision allowing campaign funds to be used for a candidate's dependent care expenses incurred as a direct result of campaign activity. For working parents, particularly mothers who have historically faced steeper barriers to political participation, this is no small thing. Running for office is expensive and time-consuming; if a reform that cleans up corruption simultaneously makes campaigns more accessible to ordinary citizens, that is a genuine win-win.
Critics over the years warned that any personal use ban would invite politically motivated complaints against candidates. The legislature took this concern seriously. The law includes robust safeguards to protect candidates from politically motivated complaints, and any person subject to the personal use ban may request an advisory opinion from the State Board of Elections when the lines are unclear. That is a reasonable and workable framework.
The road to implementation has been deliberately careful. The bill, introduced by Delegate Joshua G. Cole (D-65) who represents parts of Spotsylvania and Stafford Counties and the City of Fredericksburg, was signed into law and the State Board of Elections unanimously approved implementing regulations at their September 2025 meeting — but the prohibition on personal use won't go into effect until July 2026, which is the 2027 election cycle, giving candidates, treasurers, and party committees time to adapt.
Some may argue that the delayed effective date is too cautious — that reform delayed is reform diluted. There is merit in that criticism. But the more important point is that Virginia got here at all. For over a decade, bills like this died in committee or were quietly shelved, victims of an institution that had a vested interest in preserving its own perks.
As our State Senator, Jennifer Boysko, commented when the bill passed: "By sending this bill to the governor's desk, we will take a long-overdue first step toward restoring faith in our democracy and ending Virginia's status as the 'Wild West' of campaign finance."
She is right. Faith in democratic institutions does not restore itself. It is rebuilt through exactly these kinds of reforms — unglamorous, technical, and fiercely resisted for years by those who benefit from the status quo. HB2165 will not solve every problem in Virginia politics. But it establishes a foundational principle that donors, voters, and candidates deserve--money given to a campaign should be used for the campaign.
That is not a partisan idea. It is not a radical idea. It is simply an honest one. And Virginia, at long last, has put it into law.