West Virginia Senate Bill SB643

West Virginia 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/28/26
• Refer: 1/28/26
• Engrossed: 2/17/26
• Refer: 2/18/26
• Enrolled: 3/13/26
• Passed: 3/25/26

Caption

Discontinuing WV Supreme Court of Appeals Public Campaign Financing Program

Summary

SB 643 ends the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals Public Campaign Financing Pilot Program. The bill amends the statute establishing the program so that it terminates on June 30, 2026, and repeals the remaining sections of the article that governed the program’s structure, funding, candidate qualification process, payment schedule, reporting rules, enforcement provisions, and related duties of election officials. The bill also directs that, on or after July 1, 2026, any unexpended money left in the Supreme Court of Appeals Public Campaign Financing Fund be transferred to the General Revenue Fund. In practical terms, the legislation removes the legal framework for public financing of Supreme Court of Appeals campaigns and returns any remaining program balance to the state treasury for general use.

Impact

SB 643 repeals most of Article 12 of Chapter 3 of the West Virginia Code, eliminating the statutory basis for the Supreme Court of Appeals Public Campaign Financing Program and associated administrative, reporting, and penalty provisions. It affects judicial election financing, the State Election Commission, the Secretary of State, and any candidates who might have sought public funds under the program. The bill also redirects any remaining dedicated funds into the General Revenue Fund, reducing the likelihood that those monies will remain earmarked for judicial campaign financing.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have broad legislative support, passing the Senate 30-1 and the House 82-9. The strong vote margins suggest general agreement with discontinuing the program, though the recorded opposition indicates some lawmakers preferred retaining public financing for Supreme Court races or objected to ending the pilot program. No committee transcript is available, so the record reflects support primarily through the final votes rather than stated debate.

Contention

The main point of contention is whether West Virginia should continue using public financing for Supreme Court of Appeals elections. Supporters of repeal likely viewed the program as unnecessary, ineffective, or an improper use of public funds, while opponents likely favored preserving an alternative financing option to reduce private influence in judicial elections and support candidate participation. The bill’s repeal of enforcement and reporting provisions also suggests a complete policy reversal rather than a partial revision, which may have contributed to the minority opposition.