In today’s edition … Democrats call their shot in Arizona … We ask you about voter ID laws … but first …
Read more Unlikely duo seeks ban on using campaign funds to fight sexual harassment claims
It’s been a rough few days for Ken Martin.
A burst of stories has raised fresh questions about the Democratic National Committee chair’s temperament and lack of fundraising prowess. But the more consequential problem continues to be the committee’s books.
The DNC ended June with $16.3 million in cash and $18.5 million in debt — putting it about $2.2 million in the red. It is a staggering hole compared to the numbers of the Republican National Committee, which held $128.5 million and reported no debt.
For months, Martin and his allies have predicted that Democratic victories and the approaching midterms would bring major donors back. The midterms are now approaching. The money has not followed.
Martin is not new to criticism. But beneath the latest turmoil is the problem that has dogged his tenure from the start: Cash.
Few Democrats expected the DNC to keep up with a Donald Trump-led Republican Party that controls all levers of power in Washington. Martin’s allies note that his committee is doing better than the committee at a comparable time in 2018 and spending the money it raises to help build infrastructure and invest in state parties. But for more than a year, it has failed to reassure major donors that its finances are improving — or back up when they said they would.
“It’s slow. … There is still the hangover from 2024 for big donors,” Jaime Harrison, Martin’s predecessor who still fully supports his besieged successor, told us of big money fundraising. “That is the real rub. They just need to warm up.”
We reported in April that Martin had been telling people for months that a string of Democratic victories last November would lead to a fundraising boost. The wins happened, but the money didn’t follow, especially from moneyed donors.
At the time, Democrats close to Martin suggested things would turn around in the coming months, as donors and voters began to pay more attention to the coming midterms.
That has not happened.
Top-dollar Democratic donors continue to sit on their hands — and checkbooks — as the committee struggles to raise money. Republicans, meanwhile, are swimming in it à la Scrooge McDuck.
According to Clara Ence Morse, our ace data reporter, six individuals donated at least $100,000 in June to the Democratic National Committee or its Grassroots Victory Fund committee. By comparison, in the first half of 2026, 35 individuals gave $100,000 or more to the Democratic committee or its fund. Meanwhile, the figure for the Republican National Committee alone is 154. And its many fundraising committees have raised millions more from megadonors.
Democratic committee officials say its high-dollar fundraising remains ahead of the comparable point in 2018, the last time a midterm under a Republican president. In June 2018, they said, only three donors gave at least $100,000 to the committee, half of what they received this June.
“They do have a different type of donor base, they do have a different way that finances are arranged, and they do have historically a different philosophy,” Chris Lowe, the committee’s national finance co-chair, said of Republicans. “So, I’m not sure we are ever going to view ourselves as directly in financial competition there.”
Martin himself used a lengthy Substack post to argue that power, not money, should be the grading scale of his DNC, pointing to all the wins Democrats have notched nationwide. And DNC officials have sought to compare this iteration of the committee with 2018, not the Republicans they are currently fighting.
But in another move of the goalposts, some Democrats are now telling us that they don’t expect top-dollar donors to come back to the Democratic National Committee until right before the midterms, once it is clear that Democrats have a good chance to flip the House and possibly take the Senate.
“I don’t feel like this can be fixed between now and November,” said Rufus Gifford, a longtime Democratic fundraiser who wrote a blistering criticism of the committee he once worked for. Gifford, who is hosting fundraisers for House and Senate candidates in the coming weeks, said his “focus is on making sure we win back the House and the Senate and then going into 2027. That is when I really feel like we need to fully address the issues that are on the table with the DNC.”
Lowe responded to critics by arguing the committee’s shift from relying on major dollar donors to living on grassroots donations reflects “a massive change in how political fundraising operates.”
“None of this comes easy,” Lowe concluded. “We have what we would say is quite an aggressive budget. We’re ahead of that budget so far this year. And I think we will continue to be ahead of or meet that budget this year.”
Even so, it is unlikely Martin will be going anywhere anytime soon.
First, he has received votes of confidence from some of the party’s most powerful officials.
“The chairman has my full support,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York) said while campaigning in Pennsylvania over the weekend. “We look forward to our continued partnership.”
But second, and possibly more important, is that it is difficult to remove a DNC chair. Many members remain loyal to Martin. And under the bylaws, the chair often controls when the committee meets.
Read more This grandma fought for a bill to allow happy hour at retirement homes
Political pressure can force a chair to resign, however. Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee in July 2016 ahead of the party’s national convention after leaked emails showed she and party officials preferred Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders in the party’s presidential nominating process.
That just isn’t likely to happen before the midterms. We spoke to multiple DNC members on Monday who flatly said there was no effort afoot to oust Martin, despite some public agitation for his departure.
What happens after the midterms is more of an open question.
“They keep moving the goalposts,” said a Democratic strategist close to the committee. But they argued those money questions will become particularly important once the Democratic committee turns its focus to the presidential nominating process, its central function. “And the buck comes due for 2028 when the goalposts can’t move anymore.”
Democrats are ready to spend big in Arizona.
The Democratic Governors Association tells us they plan to make an initial investment of $10 million on the effort to reelect Gov. Katie Hobbs, the state’s Democratic incumbent. Hobbs’s race represents one of Democrats’ clearest opportunities to hold on to the governor’s mansion in a battleground state ahead of the crucial 2028 presidential race.
Rep. Andy Biggs, a Trump ally, won the Republican gubernatorial nomination earlier this month, invigorating Democrats who think they can quickly define a candidate who represents the far right of the party and has been a devout election denier.
Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, the chair of the Democratic governors’ campaign arm, told us that despite Arizona representing “one of the toughest battleground states,” Hobbs is in a strong position, in part, because Biggs is “running with the full-throated support of Donald Trump and Turning Point USA after leading the charge to overturn the 2020 election.”
“As national Republicans are set to pour millions into this race to try to make Andy Biggs the first election denier in charge of a swing state, the stakes are incredibly high,” Beshear said.
The Republican Governors Association has yet to put money behind Biggs’s campaign, a notable difference from 2022 when the association announced in March that they would spend $10.2 million on the Arizona race.
Kollin Crompton, spokesperson for the Republican association, said they have and “will continue to hold Katie Hobbs accountable for her dismal record.”
“It’s clear Arizona is in desperate need of new leadership,” Crompton said. “Andy Biggs is focused on making Arizona affordable for families, protecting communities from illegal immigration and crime, and securing Arizona’s energy for the future.”
Stateline: As prices rise, state attorneys general are stepping up their consumer protection work nationwide, pledging to fight high prices and investigate businesses for possible price gouging. It’s politically astute — nothing is invigorating voters more right now than prices.
Oregon Capital Chronicle: In a sign of the economic times, multibillion dollar grocers Walmart and Amazon have among the most listed employees on publicly funded health care, according to an analysis of Oregon Health Authority data. Not all employees at the companies qualify for employee-sponsored health care. “One in six of the most listed employers on Medicaid forms in Oregon was a major grocer and retailer,” the publication reported.
Danville-San Ramon (California): California prisons are increasingly using people — not technology — to sound the alarm on fires in prisons. “Between 2020 and 2025, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has spent nearly $50 million on “fire watch” staffing costs. In recent years, prison employees have spent roughly 270,000 hours monitoring for smoke or fire,” the paper reports.
We asked about whether Trump supporters are excited to be Trump supporters ahead of the 2026 midterms. Polls and data show Democrats are way more excited to cast a ballot.
“This issue for Republicans is a slippery slope — I would like to understand how promoting “rigged” elections encourages voter turnout,” wrote Patricia Rennau, referring to those Republicans who say Trump is focused on invigorating his base.
“The people I know who voted for Trump in 2024 do not seem as energized this cycle. A couple have expressed they like some of his policies but are embarrassed by the way he conducts himself,” wrote Bob Miller. “Democrats have their own problems. Candidates are very anti-Trump, but don’t articulate any meaningful policies, particularly on affordability.”
And John Frank wrote that his sense was Trump supporters in 2024 “were swept up in the messaging about how Biden was frail and should never have been elected.”
“But now after he’s been in office for almost half his term, the promises of a better America have worn off. High gas, food and housing costs are a reality. People who weren’t struggling are now forced to look for second incomes or trim their budgets to survive financially. … Not uncommon in a mid-election,” wrote Frank.
A rift is emerging between the president and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-South Dakota). Trump on Monday demanded that Thune keep the Senate in Washington through their August break to pass a voting bill that he has said would “guarantee the midterms” for Republicans. Our colleague Theodoric Meyer reports that “the bill, the Save America Act, would require Americans to prove their citizenship to register to vote and to show photo identification when voting.”
So we wanted to ask you: Is showing your ID to vote too high a bar for you? In your view, should showing your ID before you vote be required? Why or why not? Let us and your fellow Early Brief readers know at [email protected].
Read more A literary outdoorsman, he helped popularize bodybuilding and co-created paintball
Thanks for reading. You can follow Dan on X at @merica.
