Josh Shapiro may be the biggest fundraising juggernaut Pennsylvania politics has ever produced

The Rev. Ed Stafford first donated to Josh Shapiro in August 2024, sending the Pennsylvania governor $10 through the Democratic fundraising platform ActBlue. A few weeks later, he gave him $5. And then he made two more $5 contributions on the same day toward the end of the month.

He would go on to make 105 separate contributions to Shapiro between that August day two years ago and early June, an average of one donation every 16 days.

“I’ve been getting a lot of text solicitations, and his [Shapiro’s] have come by rapidly and frequently, and that’s how I got to get to know him,” said Stafford, a priest at the Diocese of Youngstown, Ohio. He was particularly impressed with Shapiro’s handling as attorney general of the Catholic Church child sex abuse scandal in the state.

Stafford’s donations, totaling just under $1,200 over the last two years, form a microscopic share of the $60 million Shapiro has raised since the current fundraising cycle began in 2023. But smaller, repeat contributions from dedicated donors like him are one piece of a strategy — along with eye-popping checks from wealthy donors and a nationalized fundraising network — that has allowed the governor to shatter state fundraising records as he looks beyond this November’s race to a prospective presidential run in 2028.

Between the start of 2023 and June 8, Shapiro raised more than $60 million, 56% more than the $39 million he raised at this point four years ago when adjusted for inflation.

That figure is nearly double that of the second-best fundraiser: former Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf, who had raised an inflation-adjusted $31 million at this point in his successful 2018 reelection campaign.

Shapiro raised the eye-popping amount from roughly 22,000 unique individuals, about 44% more than the 16,000 who had given to his campaign at this point last cycle. That is more than triple the number of donors for the closest comparison, former Republican Gov. Tom Corbett in 2014, who had only about 6,000 donors at this point in his unsuccessful reelection campaign.

That figure does not include contributions from donors who gave $50 or less in a campaign finance reporting period, as campaigns are not required to disclose information on those individuals. When including that group, Shapiro’s campaign said it has more than 120,000 unique contributors but declined to comment on the rest of this article.

Perhaps most staggering, Shapiro’s current campaign has raised nearly one in every five dollars collected by every major party gubernatorial candidate since the 2010 cycle.

Robin Kolodny, a political science professor at Temple University, said Shapiro is benefiting from a strong personal brand, a weak GOP opponent in State Treasurer Stacy Garrity, and a favorable national environment with an unpopular president of the opposing party dragging down GOP candidates across the country.

“This is what happens when you have a highly popular incumbent running for reelection,” Kolodny said.

Shapiro has raised about $2.5 million from donors who have given $50 or less in any given campaign finance reporting period — more than any prior candidate since 2010. That is about 4.3% of his total fundraising. Garrity has raised about $530,000 — 9.6% of her funds — from such small donors.

Among candidates who raised at least $1 million, Shapiro’s percentage is relatively high. Only Garrity; Shapiro’s 2022 opponent, State Sen. Doug Mastriano; and 2010 GOP candidate for governor Samuel Rohrer raised a higher share from small-dollar donors. Shapiro’s 2026 run is also pulling in a slightly smaller percentage of small-dollar givers than his 2022 campaign.

Kolodny suggested that improvements in technology have likely aided Shapiro’s hunt for smaller-dollar donors.

“It’s so much easier to reach somebody on their phone with an Instagram post or whatever and get them to Venmo me 10 bucks, while it was definitely more steps in earlier elections,” Kolodny said.

Stafford, whose most common contribution was for $10, agreed.

“They make it real fast and easy to donate,” Stafford said of the multiple daily text messages he gets from ActBlue. “You gotta watch [that] you’re not pressing the button too quickly if you don’t want to let go of all your money,” he added with a laugh.

Dan Mallinson, an associate professor of public policy and administration at Pennsylvania State University’s Harrisburg campus, suggested an additional factor: National politics has filtered down to state politics in ways it had not in the past.

“[Pennsylvania] voters don’t have a presidential candidate on this ballot to express support or anger [about],” Mallinson said. “So that gets translated into these other races, and Shapiro’s is obviously the most high-profile.”

On the flip side, Shapiro has raised more than $33 million from donors who have given $100,000 or more in aggregate. That figure is vastly greater than any prior candidate for the office since 2010 and accounts for about 58% of his total funds raised. Garrity, by contrast, has raised about 21.3% of her money from such mega donors.

Kolodny said big donors’ motivations can differ from those of more modest givers.

For some donors, it’s practical: They want access to the halls of power in case their business interests intersect with government policy — regardless of the party in charge.

With such donors likely viewing Shapiro’s reelection as a sure thing, Kolodny suggested their money has one place to go.

“There’s no reason for a lot of these donors to even think, ‘Well, just in case, I should give some money to Garrity,’” Kolodny said. “There’s only one horse to bet on.”

For other donors, it’s ideological: They share Shapiro’s moderate views and want to demonstrate their support.

More than two-thirds of Shapiro’s money has come from donors who live outside Pennsylvania. That figure is vastly higher than any prior candidate for governor since 2010. Only 6.4% of Garrity’s money has come from outside the state.

Mallinson pointed out that Shapiro finds himself in a unique position among the state’s recent crop of gubernatorial candidates.

“This is the first time Pennsylvania’s really had a governor who’s attracting the national attention that Shapiro’s gotten,” Mallinson said, referring to the widespread expectation that he’ll run for president in 2028. “So if we’re comparing across governors, it makes sense he’d be attracting more outside [the state] money.”

Among the $33 million Shapiro’s raised from donors who have given at least $100,000 or more over the course of the campaign, nearly 70% has come from outside Pennsylvania, with California accounting for about 29% of the money and New York accounting for a little over 18%.

Here, too, changes in media and technology likely play a role.

“At an earlier point in time, we didn’t have that much information about people representing other areas that shared a characteristic or a position similar to me as the donor, but now, this is easy information to find,” Kolodny said.

Shapiro, for example, has repeatedly emphasized the impact his Jewish faith has had on his political values and how those values are shared among adherents of many religions. That sort of openness about his identity can be appealing to donors of all faiths.

As he learned more about the governor, Stafford, a devotee of Catholic social teaching, came to believe the two men shared similar values.

“He’s a good, just man — a good, holy man — set on serving people, especially people who’ve been hurt and victimized, and those are the kind of leaders we need more than ever.”

Staff writer Michelle Baruchman contributed to this article.

Methodology

The Inquirer regularly compiles and analyzes campaign finance records of elected officials and candidates as a means of understanding trends in politics and campaigning.

For this story, The Inquirer analyzed campaign finance data from 20 years' worth of reports filed with the Pennsylvania Department of State — dating to the 2007-10 gubernatorial election cycle.

Figures prior to the 2026 election cycle are adjusted for inflation based on the election year. Figures are based on four-year election cycles with a cycle beginning in the year following an election and ending in the election year (for example, the 2026 cycle reflects money raised or spent from 2023 through 2026). The analysis includes only the candidate-controlled committees of major-party candidates (including those who lost their primaries). The analysis of in-vs.-out-of-state contributions excludes donors who gave $50 or less in any given campaign finance reporting period. An individual donor is defined as an individual (non-committee/PAC) contributor with the same name, city, state, and zip code.