Want to run for one of Nevada's seats in Congress?

It helps to be rich.

A record number of Nevada House candidates are investing their own money, with nearly all challengers who have posted big fundraising totals doing so with help from their own wallets. As of the beginning of April, 22 of Nevada's 2026 congressional candidates have pumped nearly $8.3 million into their bids, according to a Nevada Independent analysis.

This isn't new. Nearly half of the money Nevada congressional campaigns received in 2024 was self-funded, and with six months until the general election, this year could easily surpass that.

Video game composer Marty O'Donnell (R), who has President Donald Trump's endorsement in the 3rd Congressional District, is the biggest self-funder so far having loaned his campaign $3 million dollars.

But he isn't alone. Though a few are no longer running, 10 candidates this cycle have poured at least $100,000 into their campaign accounts.

Candidates are legally allowed to loan or contribute as much as they want to their own campaigns, and for many challengers, it's the only way to have any chance against entrenched incumbents — especially in Nevada, where three of the country's most competitive House races often require campaigns to spend anywhere from $1 million to $10 million.

"Incumbents don't rely on self-funding, simply because they don't have to rely on self-funding," said UNLV political science professor Ken Miller. "Especially in the House — even more so than in the Senate — just by way of being an incumbent, means that you attract a whole lot of PAC money, you attract a whole lot of party support, and you also have the higher name recognition that drives individual donations."

Rep. Susie Lee (D-NV), for instance, is a powerhouse fundraiser, having brought in more than $1 million in the first three months of this year — a record in a Nevada House race.

The amount she's loaned to her five most recent campaigns for the 3rd Congressional District? Zero dollars.

But Lee was once a self-funder, too.

"It was a mistake, honestly," she said of the $655,000 she loaned her campaign in 2016. "I think that you should be funded by people who support you. … And so, when I ran, I lost that race, and when I ran in 2018, I made the commitment that I'd never do it again."

Why are more Nevada congressional candidates funding their own campaigns?

As elections grow more expensive, it's no surprise that candidates without a ready-made fundraising base decide to open their wallets.

"Our elections are subject to a 'big money primary,'" said Stuart McPhail, director of campaign finance litigation at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a watchdog nonprofit. "Even if money doesn't guarantee any candidate an electoral win, money is necessary to even have a shot."

Of the three dozen times Nevada House candidates self-funded $100,000 or more between 1996 and 2024, the money helped win 10 primaries, but no general elections.

Wealthy investor Greg Kidd (D) loaned his independent 2024 congressional campaign $9.2 million, the most of any Nevada candidate in the last three decades. He said that's what needed to be done in the Republican-leaning 2nd Congressional District, where he is now running again as a Democrat.

"It looked like a race that needed to be run," he recalled. "I talked to the Democrats if they were going to run a candidate, and they didn't really have the resources to do it. … I asked just, what does it take to be competitive here, just given that it's a plus-seven district. And so, you know, we put together a budget."

Asked about accusations that he's trying to buy a seat, Kidd replied, "There's always going to be somebody that's kind of like, whiny and cranky about that, but my skins a lot tougher than that, and I go out for beers with those people afterwards, and it's just a script that they're working through.

"I come from bike messenger roots," he added. "We're pretty humble, and so I don't really think of myself as one of those people, even if I do have some zeros behind my name now."

One of Lee's primary challengers, Dr. James Lally (D), has loaned his campaign $600,000. Originally inspired to run because of his sympathy for Gaza, he said he was surprised to learn how much money is in politics.

"If you don't have money to get your message out, I think donors are reluctant to give," he said. "Once the donors started to see I was putting up my own money, they've been much more likely to give."

A recent development may also be boosting self-funding. In 2022, the Supreme Court scrapped the limit on how much money raised after an election a candidate could use to repay pre-election loans. If a candidate truly thinks they can win, the change reduces the risk of making big investments in their campaign. If they secure public office, many donors are likely to be eager to give to a candidate who has already won.

What do candidates say about investing in their campaigns?

UNLV political science professor David Damore has another theory.

"I think this is just this notion that, 'Well, if Donald Trump can do it, I can do it,'" he said.

Dr. Aury Nagy (R), who is running in the 3rd Congressional District, agrees.

"People on the Republican side have been inspired by our president," he said. "Our president was an outsider to the system. He self-funded his own campaign, and he was willing to take on great personal hardship. I mean, they came after his fortune, his family, his freedom."

But he also thinks money may have factored into the president's decision to endorse his opponent earlier this month.

"I think Trump got bad information," Nagy said, suggesting his advisors made the decision based on who was bringing in the most money.

Construction and real estate businesswoman Tera Anderson (R) is another candidate in the 3rd Congressional District who loaned her campaign money — about $100,000. She pointed out that it's small potatoes compared to her opponents.

"I think it's a gesture of good faith in my commitment to the race, but I think it pales in comparison to what folks in my race, in particular, are loaning themselves, or at least giving people the belief that they will spend, because I don't intend to buy this race," she said.

Small business owner and 4th Congressional District candidate Cody Whipple (R) stood firmly behind his self-funding, writing in a statement to The Indy, "I'm proud to invest in my own campaign." He added that he and his wife will "continue to support this campaign with everything we have."

Many candidates may not be able to fully bankroll their campaigns, but can give them a little bit of start-up capital.

"It's very common for candidates to seed the campaign with a little bit of loaned money because it's so important to get that ball rolling in the fundraising process to indicate viability," Miller said.

That's the case for former Assembly Majority Leader Teresa Benitez Thompson (D-Reno), who loaned $20,000 of her own money to her campaign for the 2nd Congressional District.

"I took on a loan to get the campaign started and it will absolutely have to be paid back — I'm a social worker 😁," she wrote in a statement to The Indy.

Do candidates actually spend all the money they loan themselves?

Candidates often make loans to their campaigns rather than contributions because it can allow them to get their money back later if they don't spend it all.

But loans have another advantage: They let candidates boast about big war chests. A candidate could loan themselves $1 million to indicate to donors, potential supporters and media that they are a viable contender without spending a cent. They could even place a media buy to signal investment and then quietly get it refunded.

This hasn't actually happened much in Nevada. The vast majority of candidates who loaned themselves $100,000 or more spent nearly all of it and did not come close to paying themselves back. But there have been a few exceptions, such as attorney Jesse Sbaih (D), who was named in headlines as a top fundraiser but spent far less than his campaign brought in.

The candidates who have loaned themselves the most this cycle — O'Donnell and 2nd Congressional District candidate David Flippo (R) — were not available for interviews.

Speaking to NOTUS, O'Donnell said, "The Democrats are going to throw a big pile of money at this race… I'm not going to let a Democrat defeat me because they outspent me." He added that his money was "a gift from God" he is now trying to pay back.

In response to a list of questions about Flippo's self-funding, his campaign provided a statement calling his top opponent "an establishment politician" and accusing him of taking money from Democratic donors.

All of the candidates who did speak to The Indy suggested they expect to, or at least are willing to, spend everything they have already loaned themselves, if not more.

Nagy said he initially expected his $1 million loan to be enough to cover both the GOP primary and the general election in the 3rd Congressional District, but it's likely not enough.

"People are now telling me that because this is a nationally focused election, and it's going to be one of the top 10 races in the country, it's going to take a substantial amount more than that," he said. "So that's something I'm gonna deal with. … I'm hearing it's gonna take at least $8 to $10 million. That's not a thing I can self-fund."

Is self-funding bad?

Instead, Nagy said he would seek financial support from organizations who hold the same views as he does to make up the difference. He said that plan will allow him to stay true to his values.

"One of the reasons I sell-funded is because you hear about how politicians are bought, and I didn't want to be a bought candidate," he added.

Flippo has made a similar argument on social media. In response to previous Indy reporting showing he made big loans to his campaign, he suggested that his approach staves off corruption.

"It's rare I ever agree with [The Nevada Independent], but this is a pretty accurate description — I am primarily funding my own campaign because I will not be beholden to anyone but the people," he wrote. "My opponent, [former state Sen. James Settelmeyer (R-Minden)], is relying on insider donations."

Miller, the campaign finance expert, said there can be some truth to that claim.

"You could argue that one good thing about self-funding candidates is that they're less beholden to interest groups. because they didn't receive any sort of funding of that type," he said. "But on the other hand, self-funding candidates are, by definition, quite different than their constituents."

Campaign finance experts who spoke to The Indy suggested that self-funders can be a boon for the parties because they bring extra resources to the table, but they often turn out to be bad candidates. When they must rely on self-funding, that means they don't have the support to raise money from donors. And even in other cases, simply going out and asking for money can help build connections with their potential constituents and interest groups.

Anderson said she often reflects on what changes would lead to better candidates and more community engagement, though she hasn't settled on specific policy solutions.

"The sad reality in politics is that the political machine as we know it, the cottage industry of political consultants and lobbyists and the political class — when you tell people you're going to run for office, sadly, the first and usually only question they ask you is, 'How much money do you have?'" she said. "There are a lot of people who profit in this industry, and very wealthy candidates are very attractive for that reason."

Every Democrat who spoke to The Indy for this story agreed that the system was broken. Lally called the amount and influence of money in politics "an unfortunate reality." Kidd said he wished elections didn't reward his deep pockets.

"I don't like spending money any more than the next person," he said. "Look, if it was up to me, we'd repeal Citizens United. … So I don't like this system. … I think it sucks. I mean, I'd rather spend money on other things, but I'm serious about this."

One of his primary opponents, former state Democratic Party executive director Matthew Fonken (D), is also troubled by the increase in self-funding.

"This is a perpetuation of the problem that we are seeing in Congress," he said. "A lot of these folks come from wealth. They're able to then self-fund and buy elections, and I think that's wrong."

Fonken has done the opposite of self-funding, drawing a salary from his campaign coffers. Based on his last five years of income, Fonken calculated a monthly paycheck of $6,000 — though he is not always collecting it because the campaign sometimes has more pressing expenses. Still, he said the option allows regular people a chance to run for office when they otherwise couldn't.

"This is a full time job," he said. "Being working class, I don't have the money to loan to my campaign."

His December financial disclosure confirms that. It lists five figures of credit card debt and somewhere between $2,000 and $30,000 in a 401k and an Acorns investing account.

Methodology: For this analysis,The Nevada Independent used an AI-coding tool to write scripts that pulled information for all Nevada House and Senate candidates who reported any fundraising for election years between 1996 and April 2026 to the FEC. A manual review of one randomly selected candidate financial summary for each year unearthed no discrepancies between FEC records and our database.

The Indy then combed through the resulting database and removed candidates who were double-counted. Candidates who terminated their committees before the election or did not file paperwork in Nevada are nonetheless included in the analysis, except where otherwise noted.

The Nevada Independent

Barry Ellsworth

Want to run for Congress in Nevada? It pays to be rich.

Sign up for our newsletters

The Daily Indy

Indy Elections

Indy Environment

Indy Education

Indy Gaming