By Adam Pagnucco.

Yesterday was the deadline for candidates to file their Annual 2026 campaign finance reports.  It’s an important moment in this election season as candidates show their financial strength heading into the period when voters are paying attention.  For candidates in traditional financing, the next report is not due until April 21.  So normally, I would be crunching and reporting on all of these numbers, at least for candidates in Montgomery County.

But I’m not going to do that quite yet.

The reason is that the State Board of Elections (SBE) just rolled out a new reporting system for campaign finances and many candidates are struggling to use it.  I have been using this data for almost 20 years and I have never heard complaints of such volume and ferocity as those I have received this week.  (An aside: I’m a former campaign treasurer and you better believe I will never be one again after this!)  I can’t get into the specifics of these complaints because it would risk compromising my sources, something I will never do.  But I expect there to be MANY late reports and amended reports as campaigns try to report accurate information while minimizing fines – fines for which most of them bear no responsibility.

As an analyst, these failures impede my ability to analyze campaign finance data.  First, SBE has inexplicably removed all campaign finance information predating the 2019-22 cycle from its website.  Previously, the site included data from 2005 on.  I asked SBE to fix this issue last month.  They told me it would be fixed.  It has not been fixed.  Until it is, my ability to provide historical context is limited at best.

Second, I have noticed that on some reports, the summary sheets do not match the totals of downloaded data.  I don’t know why.  For now, I am going to rely on the spreadsheet downloads, but that is going to limit my processing speed.

Third, loans previously appeared in contribution downloads.  Now they don’t.  Instead, I have to locate them in individual filings and manually enter them.  There is no reason why this change needed to occur.

Fourth, aggregate totals for contributions appear to be inaccurate in some reports.  That’s a big deal for candidates in public financing, who are currently limited to $500 per individual in this cycle.  If their aggregates are inaccurately reported as higher than $500, they will appear to be in violation of the public financing law when they in fact did nothing wrong.

Finally, I expect a significant volume of amendments as candidates work through their issues with the reporting software.  That’s a problem because the data in any analysis that I do may shift without warning.  Analyses of data like this take a long time, and changes due to state reporting issues will undermine that work.  Let’s just stipulate that when I start posting analyses, the resulting data will be estimates at best.

As a result of the above issues and others, I’m reluctant to start crunching this data right now.  At minimum, I’m going to wait a few days while candidates resolve their issues with SBE.

New reporting systems always have glitches and this one has to cover hundreds of accounts and millions of records from all across Maryland.  SBE should have rolled out this new system at the start of a campaign cycle when the stakes are lower and glitches can be fixed quietly.  By rolling it out in the heat of election season, when lots of new candidates are filing and all of them are scrambling to show their strength, SBE has compounded its problems and hindered analysis of campaign finances.

All of this is tremendously unfair to the folks who are running for office as well as their treasurers.  For their sake as well as that of the public, these problems must be fixed as soon as possible.