Virgin Islands campaign finance laws look strong on paper. In practice, they appear weakly enforced — if enforced at all — creating fertile ground for cronyism, pay-to-play politics, and public cynicism.
Under Title 18, Sections 902–907 of the Virgin Islands Code, individual contributions to candidates or Political Action Committees (PACs) are capped at $1,000 per election cycle. The intent of the law is clear: to prevent wealthy donors from dominating the political process and to limit corruption or the appearance of corruption.
Yet repeated disclosures, investigative reporting, and court filings suggest that this legal framework has failed to deliver meaningful accountability.
A Pattern That Demands Scrutiny
Recent allegations emerging from the Epstein files claim that the Bryan–Roach campaign received as much as $380,000 during the 2018 election cycle from Jeffrey Epstein, and that former Gov. Kenneth Mapp personally solicited a $50,000 contribution from Epstein for his unsuccessful reelection bid. These claims warrant careful verification, but they align with a broader, long-standing concern: that campaign finance limits in the Territory are routinely circumvented with little consequence.
Earlier reporting tied to internal JPMorgan Chase investigations revealed that Delegate Stacey Plaskett received approximately $30,000 from Epstein and his associates over three election cycles. CBS News, citing Federal Election Commission (FEC) data, reported that Epstein and related donors made direct contributions of $5,400 in 2016 and $2,700 in 2018. After Epstein’s death and the public exposure of his criminal conduct, Plaskett donated an amount equivalent to those contributions to charity.
JPMorgan-related disclosures also included emails from a former first lady boasting that 10 of the 12 candidates financially supported by “us” won their races. That statement alone should alarm any citizen who believes elections ought to be competitive, transparent, and fair.
This raises an unavoidable question: Who in the Virgin Islands is responsible for verifying campaign finance disclosures and enforcing the law — and why does enforcement appear ineffective?
The True Cost of Power
As we enter a new election cycle, it is worth being honest about what it takes to win the governorship. Based on the size of the electorate (about 39,000 registered voters), historical turnout rates (roughly 52–55%), the need to campaign across three island districts, and prior spending patterns, a competitive gubernatorial campaign today costs between $1.3 million and $2 million, according to AI-assisted modeling.
Even a modest campaign requires a professional staff: a campaign manager, three district captains, finance and compliance staff, communications and digital media support, legal oversight, and a field operation capable of mobilizing volunteers locally and in the mainland diaspora. Campaigns that fail to raise at least $500,000 by summer typically cannot afford television ads, sustained radio placement, or the inter-island travel necessary during the critical final months.
These realities explain why candidates gravitate toward large donors — and why the system structurally favors those willing to court ambitious politicians without independent wealth.
Pay-to-Play as the Default
In the Virgin Islands, generous political donations are widely understood as a means of gaining access and influence, including expedited permits, regulatory forbearance, waivers, government leases, contracts, board appointments, or consulting arrangements. Whether explicit or implicit, the expectation of reciprocity undermines public trust, impartiality, and good governance.
A candidate who doesn’t want to be beholden to special interests would need to rely on small donors and small- to medium-sized local businesses, many of whom are frustrated by the Territory’s high energy costs, inadequate infrastructure, poor public services, elevated housing and food costs that make it hard to recruit and retain skilled workers and to simply survive, let alone prosper. But building such a coalition takes time, organization, and — most importantly — an engaged and informed electorate.
Here lies the deeper problem.
An Electorate That Rewards Short-Term Gains
Roughly 45% of eligible voters do not vote. Winning the governorship typically requires only 10,000–12,000 votes. About 29% of workers are government employees; roughly 19% of residents receive SNAP, and 37% receive medical assistance. These groups, along with contractors dependent on public spending, form a reliable voting bloc.
Meanwhile, younger voters, private-sector professionals, small entrepreneurs, and the self-employed are largely disengaged.
Politics in the Virgin Islands remains driven less by policy than by personalismo, handouts, and spectacle — flashy concerts, fish fries, and short-term giveaways. In 2024, the Bryan administration accelerated spending in the run-up to the election: direct payments to seniors and unemployed residents, grants to roughly 500 businesses with unclear criteria, and $1,000 payments to registered taxi drivers years after the worst of the pandemic had passed. The strategy worked electorally — but left the Territory fiscally strained afterward.
A more politically and discerning mature electorate might have recognized this as unsustainable political budgeting. Instead, many rewarded it. Gov. Bryan won reelection with a wide margin.
Same Players, Same Game in 2026
With no incumbent, the current field for governor is crowded. So far, 16 individuals and/or teams appear to be vying, as indicated by handshaking activities and the display of T-shirts at the Agricultural Fair on St. Croix, and as reported by long-term political observers. Most aspiring candidates are known politicians, and only a few are newcomers. Those candidates with large war chests, name recognition, and strong on-the-ground organizations will likely dominate, because the rules of the game have not changed.
This brings us to the central question facing Virgin Islanders: Are we prepared to demand a different system — or will we continue to expect better outcomes from the same practices and the same politicians?
If the public wants a different system, it means insisting on the effective enforcement of existing campaign finance laws, frequent and accessible disclosure of fundraising and spending, serious consideration of moving to public campaign financing, equal access to the media, and a better-informed electorate.
Democracy cannot function on paper alone. Without enforcement, transparency, and civic engagement, campaign finance laws become window dressing — and public trust becomes collateral damage. An electorate that does not research issues, assess candidates, and understand how government works, and that does not demand pragmatic policies, is bound to make choices that are not in its self-interest.
In this new election cycle, the Virgin Islands voting public should demand to know who the major contributors are to each of the dozen or more gubernatorial and senatorial candidates. The current aspirants for high office, such as Bernie Sanders, should periodically and voluntarily disclose the range of donations they have received. The V.I. electorate should demand candidates who are reformists, have credible policy platforms, have a record of achievement, and have demonstrated competence and managerial ability.
To get rid of the spoils-patronage that plagues V.I. politics and results in cronyism, corruption, and poor governance, campaign finance laws must be enforced, the electorate must demand a better quality of political candidate, and campaigns should be contested based on ideas, values, policy proposals, and competence, not spectacle and personal ties.
— Mark D. Wenner is an economics professor at UVI and a resident of St. Thomas, USVI.
Editor’s Note: Opinion articles do not represent the views of the Virgin Islands Source newsroom and are the sole expressed opinion of the writer. Submissions can be made to visource@gmail.com.
