Loading this committee’s profile from its FEC filings.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
Loading this committee’s profile from its FEC filings.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
PACs › PAC (qualified) › 2025–2026
PAC (qualified)Lobbyist/registrant PACTrade associationArlington, VirginiaActive
Connected organization: National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
Political fund of National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C00002972 · files monthly
“NRECA’s mission is to promote, support and protect the community and business interests of electric cooperatives. To power communities and empower members to improve the quality of their lives.”
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, the organization this committee is the political fund of, electric.coop
Quoted from the committee's site, or its sponsor's or funder's where its own says nothing. The statement is filed under topics from a fixed list, chosen by AI models when two of three agree; which side it takes is in its own words.
17 priorities from the site of National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, the organization this committee is the political fund of, in the order they are listed there. Every heading and the text under it is copied exactly, as one passage for each page it is from, and links to that place on the page; hover a source to see which passage it opens.
Keeping the lights on has never been more important.
That’s why electric co-ops are fighting for smarter energy policies that prioritize reliability and affordability for all.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop
Heading as listed on electric.coop ↗ (opens electric.coop at this heading)
We electrified rural America 75 years ago.
Now we will electrify vehicles and homes and water heaters and provide a path toward a cleaner, more sustainable future.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/our-mission
Heading as listed on electric.coop/our-mission ↗ (opens electric.coop/our-mission at this heading) · “Our Mission” on electric.coop/our-mission ↗ (opens electric.coop/our-mission at this heading)
The energy landscape is evolving quickly.
Demand is growing, technology is advancing, and consumer needs are evolving.
As the industry navigates rapid demand growth, policy change, and supply chain pressures, co‑ops remain committed to delivering practical, cost‑effective solutions tailored to the communities they serve.
Electric cooperatives support smart energy policies that recognize these realities.
Faster disaster recovery for rural communities, including passage of the FEMA Act of 2025.
Keeping reliable power plants online and realistic energy regulations.
Maintaining federal funding for grid innovation and investments.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/our-mission/americas-electric-cooperatives
Heading as listed on electric.coop/our-mission/americas-electric-cooperatives ↗ (opens electric.coop/our-mission/americas-electric-cooperatives at this heading) · “We Are America’s Electric Cooperatives” on electric.coop ↗ (opens electric.coop at this heading)
America’s electric cooperatives are innovating to meet tomorrow’s energy needs.
From utilizing AI to analyze data and respond to member needs to deploying drones for wildfire mitigation and mutual aid damage assessment, co-ops are transforming the electric sector.
As we work to meet tomorrow’s energy needs, smart investment in the future of local communities is key.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/our-mission/americas-electric-cooperatives
Heading as listed on electric.coop/our-mission/americas-electric-cooperatives ↗ (opens electric.coop/our-mission/americas-electric-cooperatives at this heading) · “Florida Co-op Helps Widen Access to Housing for Those With Mental Illness” on electric.coop/our-mission/americas-electric-cooperatives ↗ (opens electric.coop/our-mission/americas-electric-cooperatives at this heading)
Rural electric cooperatives provide electricity to more than 42 million Americans across 48 states.
Voices for Cooperative Power is a network of electric co-op members working together to ensure the needs of rural America are reflected in policy decisions.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/our-mission/empowering-cooperatives
Heading as listed on electric.coop/our-mission/empowering-cooperatives ↗ (opens electric.coop/our-mission/empowering-cooperatives at this heading) · “Our Mission” on electric.coop/our-mission ↗ (opens electric.coop/our-mission at this heading)
Policymakers must approach energy policy with affordability and reliability at the core.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy
As our nation increasingly relies on electricity to power the economy, keeping the lights on has never been more important.
Electric cooperatives are committed to powering and empowering local communities at a cost families and businesses can afford.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/reliability-and-affordability
The proposed rule threatens co-ops’ ability to provide reliable, affordable electricity.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy
The EPA’s 2024 power plant rule and other Biden-era power sector regulations threaten electric co-ops’ ability to provide reliable, affordable electricity to their members.
Threatening Reliable Energy ↗ (opens electric.coop/issues-and-policy/epa-power-sector-rules at this heading)
American families and businesses expect the lights to stay on at a price they can afford.
But that’s no longer a guarantee.
Where We Stand ↗ (opens electric.coop/issues-and-policy/epa-power-sector-rules at this heading)
Specifically, NRECA believes the final rule:
Featured Resource ↗ (opens electric.coop/issues-and-policy/epa-power-sector-rules at this heading)
View summaries of these statements.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/epa-power-sector-rules
The federal permitting process must be updated to be more efficient and reduce costs.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy
Electric cooperatives remain focused on working toward meaningful solutions to address reliability challenges spreading across the nation.
This includes pressing for substantive action to reform the process for permitting and siting new electric generation and transmission infrastructure.
Where we stand ↗ (opens electric.coop/issues-and-policy/permitting-reform at this heading)
Congress must modernize the federal permitting process.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/permitting-reform
The Farm Bill is a crucial tool for electric co-ops and for America’s rural communities.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy
Electric cooperatives are engines of economic development working to power and empower local communities across the nation.
Where we stand ↗ (opens electric.coop/issues-and-policy/farm-bill at this heading)
The Farm Bill is a crucial tool for electric co-ops as they work to provide important financing options that help keep the lights on and accelerate the deployment of broadband internet across rural America.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/farm-bill
More than 250 co-ops are deploying or developing plans to deliver broadband.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy
More than 250 electric cooperatives are deploying or developing plans to deliver broadband service to their consumers, creating new ways for rural communities to live, learn and earn.
Where we stand ↗ (opens electric.coop/issues-and-policy/broadband at this heading)
Expanding rural broadband access remains a significant bipartisan objective.
Electric co-ops are working with policymakers to improve broadband maps, better identify unserved and underserved communities, and successfully bridge the digital divide.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/broadband
Co-ops use a layered defense strategy to protect both physical and digital assets.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy
Protecting America’s electric grid to ensure a reliable, affordable and secure supply of electricity is a top priority for electric cooperatives.
Co-ops use a layered defense strategy to protect both physical and digital assets from storms, vandalism, cyber incidents and more.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/cybersecurity-and-grid-resilience
Co-ops are working to leverage the transformational potential of the infrastructure law.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy
Electric co-ops are working together to leverage and implement the transformational funding awards of the the bipartisan infrastructure law for the communities they serve.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/cooperative-infrastructure-projects
Co-ops need access to affordable financing to maintain power lines and other grid facilities.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy
Electric co-ops use a combination of private financing and government loans and grants to maintain and modernize electric systems and improve rural communities.
Where we stand ↗ (opens electric.coop/issues-and-policy/tax-and-financing at this heading)
Co-ops need access to affordable financing to maintain nearly half of the electric distribution lines and other grid facilities in the United States.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/tax-and-financing
Environmental policies should encourage flexible local approaches that promote innovation.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy
Electric cooperatives have shown what a responsible approach to meeting tomorrow’s energy needs can look like.
Co-ops lowered their carbon emissions by 23% between 2005 and 2020, the equivalent of taking nearly 9 million cars off the road.
They’ve also invested in energy innovation to help meet tomorrow’s needs.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/environment
Electric co-ops embrace locally led solutions that strengthen America’s electric grid.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy
As the U.S. electric grid faces new opportunities and challenges, electric co-ops are hubs of innovation, unlocking new ways to power and empower local communities.
Co-ops leverage groundbreaking research, next-generation energy technologies and first-of-a-kind solutions as they revolutionize the energy industry.
Where we stand ↗ (opens electric.coop/issues-and-policy/energy-innovation at this heading)
The way we power our world is changing.
America’s not-for-profit electric cooperatives are building this future today.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/energy-innovation
Electric co-ops rely on a diverse energy mix to ensure a reliable, affordable and responsible electricity supply that meets the needs of their consumer-members.
Co-ops thoughtfully explore all options, technologies and ideas as they work to meet the evolving energy needs of their local communities.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/reliability-and-affordability
According to the North American Electric Reliability Corp., a not-for-profit entity with regulatory authority over reliability and security of the grid, the “disorderly” retirement of existing generating assets is directly impacting reliability.
Many generation assets taken offline in recent years have been replaced with sources providing less capacity, no capacity or capacity that's intermittent and not always available.
Reliability has been threatened as a result.
In the 15 U.S. states covered by the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, the number of warnings issued when electric supply is at risk of not meeting demand quadrupled from 2020 to 2021.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/reliability-and-affordability
The current permitting process required to build, site and maintain electric generation and transmission infrastructure is outdated and a significant impediment to meeting tomorrow’s energy needs.
Electrifying other sectors of the economy could require a threefold expansion of the transmission grid by 2050, according to the National Academies of Sciences.
Just one new transmission project can take up to 10 years to complete due to regulatory hurdles.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/reliability-and-affordability
The U.S. is increasingly reliant on natural gas for baseload power and as a backstop for intermittent generation sources.
The availability of natural gas has been challenged by several recent extreme weather events.
The extreme cold on the East Coast in December 2022 revealed severe shortages when natural gas was not available for power plants.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/reliability-and-affordability
Hydroelectric power is a reliable, abundant source of electricity.
Hydroelectric power generated by the Columbia River System is the foundation of the electric grid in the Northwest.
But an agreement made during the Biden administration sets the stage to breach the Lower Snake River dams, jeopardizing reliability and increasing costs for consumers in the northwest.
This short-sighted memorandum of understanding must be rescinded so that co-ops and their members can continue to rely on this safe and affordable source of power.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/reliability-and-affordability
The rule violates the Clean Air Act because vast new authority of major economic and political significance without a clear statement from Congress.
This disregards the “major questions doctrine” and is inconsistent with the text, structure and context of Clean Air Act Section 111.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/epa-power-sector-rules
While carbon capture and storage is a promising technology, it is not yet widespread nor commercially available and thus has not been “adequately demonstrated” as is required.
There are no units in the country currently achieving the rule’s required 90% carbon capture and storage rate consistently and while operating at baseload levels.
Electric co-ops are national leaders in the testing and development of carbon capture.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/epa-power-sector-rules
There is insufficient infrastructure in place, especially massive pipeline networks, to support CCS and hydrogen, even assuming the technologies work as EPA envisioned.
The necessary infrastructure cannot reasonably be expected to be in place in time to meet the rule’s requirements.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/epa-power-sector-rules
The final rule will reduce key generating resources, magnifying today’s reliability challenges with grave consequences for an already stressed electric grid.
All of this will occur while the demand for electricity skyrockets as we electrify more of the American economy.
In short, the final rule will jeopardize reliability and result in more blackouts, higher costs and greater uncertainty for American families and businesses.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/epa-power-sector-rules
Currently, the National Environmental Policy Act permitting process takes too long.
In order for co-ops to maintain reliable and affordable energy and build the infrastructure we need for the future, the process must be efficient and predictably completed within two years.
That should be enough time to conduct a rigorous review, while providing project certainty.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/permitting-reform
Electric co-ops are owned by the communities they serve.
Co-ops know the specific details of their projects and the unique needs and challenges facing their communities.
Greater involvement by those proposing the infrastructure projects will provide agencies with the information they need to facilitate more efficient and effective reviews in a timely manner.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/permitting-reform
Electric co-ops should not have to navigate a lengthy, bureaucratic process when both co-ops and the agency already know the benefits are high and the impacts are low.
As an example, electric co-ops spend significant time managing the vegetation that grows around power lines to maintain reliability and prevent wildfires.
Those vegetation management efforts regularly take place across the country.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/permitting-reform
The permitting system has been distorted to the extent that a special interest group can effectively kill a project that a local community supports by holding it up in court.
Litigation is driving excessive paperwork and unnecessary delays—holding up projects that are badly needed by communities and will help support the changing energy landscape.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/permitting-reform
Rural Utilities Service electric infrastructure financing programs and new clean energy initiatives help co-ops meet traditional electric needs and promote clean energy deployment.
Collectively, these programs help co-ops keep electric bills affordable while meeting the expectations of our consumer-members.
We urge Congress to oppose policies that would lead to higher electricity costs for rural families, businesses and communities.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/farm-bill
A reliable broadband connection is vital for a modern electric grid, and it also creates new ways to live, learn and earn in rural America.
Many electric cooperatives are working to expand rural broadband access in unserved and underserved areas of the country, in addition to integrating smart grid technologies to their electric networks.
We encourage Congress to use the Farm Bill to robustly fund scalable broadband networks that meet current and future needs in rural America and allow providers additional flexibilities to meet the unique challenges posed by hard-to-reach areas.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/farm-bill
Owned by the communities that they serve, electric co-ops have a vested interest in the success and safety of their people and places.
USDA programs like the Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant Program, Rural Energy Savings Program, Rural Energy for America Program and Rural Cooperative Development Program are crucial for co-ops as we carry out our mission to power and improve the quality of life in rural communities.
We urge Congress to maintain these critical tools for electric co-ops.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/farm-bill
The federal permitting process has continually expanded over the last four decades, resulting in delays and added costs for electric co-op infrastructure projects.
For electric co-op consumer-members, this means longer waiting times to get high-speed internet and higher electricity bills.
We urge the Congress to modernize and improve the federal environmental review process across USDA-Rural Development, specifically for RUS projects.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/farm-bill
Congress exempted electric co-ops from federal regulations governing the attachment of cable, telecommunications and broadband service equipment to existing utility poles.
Co-op pole attachment rates are cost-based and locally regulated.
This protects critical power equipment while ensuring the co-op can work with interested attachers to help bring these services to local consumer-members.
Congress should maintain this exemption.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/broadband
Heading as listed on electric.coop/issues-and-policy/broadband ↗ (opens electric.coop/issues-and-policy/broadband at this heading) · “Broadband” on electric.coop/issues-and-policy ↗ (opens electric.coop/issues-and-policy at this heading)
Electric co-ops routinely monitor and manage cyber risks.
Cooperation among cooperatives is a key part of that cyber risk management process.
Co-ops work together and share cybersecurity information with each other and with industry and federal government partners.
Co-ops are seeking better access to government intelligence about threats so that they can respond quickly to protect members’ power and data.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/cybersecurity-and-grid-resilience
As part of the co-op commitment to keeping the lights on, electric co-ops conduct thorough planning, strategy and collaboration sessions.
Co-ops work closely with the North American Electric Reliability Corp., federal agencies and local law enforcement agencies on matters of critical infrastructure protection.
This includes sharing information about potential threats and vulnerabilities to the electric grid.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/cybersecurity-and-grid-resilience
Increased frequency and severity of wildfires threaten electric co-op infrastructure and the communities we serve.
As small, not-for-profit entities, co-ops often have constrained financial resources and operate on limited margins, even as they provide reliable and affordable electric service to 56% of our nation’s landscape.
As a result, any increases in planning, operating and mitigation costs must ultimately be shouldered by consumer-members, many of whom cannot afford increased electric rates.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/cybersecurity-and-grid-resilience
Electric sector mutual assistance programs and FEMA disaster relief funding are essential to restore electric service after major storms or disasters.
Electric cooperatives, as not-for-profit entities, rely on this assistance to effectively respond to these events, especially in small communities that cannot fund major restoration efforts.
Without FEMA assistance following a disaster, recovery time and expenses would increase dramatically, leaving residents and businesses without electricity for longer time periods and increasing costs.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · electric.coop/issues-and-policy/cybersecurity-and-grid-resilience
Each part reads different filings, so counts and totals can differ.
Direct PAC contributions and independent expenditures explicitly reported as support, by the party of the candidate they went to.
| Party of the candidate | Candidates | Direct | Independent | Amount | Share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 182 | $839,500 | $0 | $839,500 | 56% |
| Democratic | 140 | $573,000 | $0 | $573,000 | 38% |
| Other or unresolved | 35 | $88,500 | $0 | $88,500 | 5.9% |
| Shown support | 357 | $1,501,000 | $0 | $1,501,000 | 100% |
Contributions are reported money, not endorsements; a PAC giving to both parties is common.
Every contribution on line 23 of the committee’s own Schedule B, which is the filing its summary totals are built from. That line covers federal candidates, party committees and other political committees alike, so a super PAC funding other super PACs appears here rather than under candidate giving.
| Recipient | Count | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| Democratic candidates | 186 | $707K · 28% |
| Republican candidates | 257 | $1.1M · 41% |
| Other or unresolved candidates | 38 | $94.5K · 3.7% |
| Democratic party committees | 2 | $60K · 2.4% |
| Republican party committees | 2 | $60K · 2.4% |
| Other PACs and committees | 65 | $567K · 22% |
| All recipients | 550 | $2.5M |
| State | Candidates | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| California | 46 | $183.5K |
| Florida | 33 | $124.5K |
| Texas | 34 | $107K |
| North Carolina | 27 | $103.5K |
| Ohio | 24 | $82.5K |
| New York | 19 | $76K |
| Pennsylvania | 16 | $68K |
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 12 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 11,679 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $1.7M. FEC contributor lists are public records and cannot be used for commercial solicitation.
The 9 largest sources are listed. Each as the committee named it on this line, $199.3K from 9 sources in all.
Total reported receipts $4,033,668
Every dollar the committee reported receiving this cycle, split by the source the FEC filing attributes it to. Open a source marked + to see who gave. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
Loading the map
Tap or hover over a state, or focus the map and use the arrow keys, to read its total. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 1,151 contributions · 6.6% | $115,118 |
| 715 contributions · 6.1% | $106,096 |
Total reported disbursements $4,313,211
Every dollar this committee reported spending this cycle, split by the lines it reports against. Open a line to see who was actually paid on it. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
$4.3M spent from Jan 2025 to Oct 2026. Most in one report: $426.6K, March 2025.
The running total of what the committee’s FEC reports say it spent, independent expenditures included, with a point at the end of each report. The line is straight between reports because a report gives one total for its whole period.
No lobbying disclosures matched
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association America's Electric Cooperatives PAC is registered with the Federal Election Commission as a PAC (qualified). It is a lobbyist/registrant PAC. Its FEC record names National Rural Electric Cooperative Association as an affiliate. Official FEC summary: Federal Election Commission committee record.
Statements are quoted from these pages exactly. Headings, order and wording are the committee’s or its sponsor’s; the record marking is ours.
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association America's Electric Cooperatives PAC is matched to organization records using the FEC committee identity, structured identifiers, and corroborated organization data.
| Michigan | 15 | $61K |
|---|
The largest 8 of 51 states.
Bars drawn to $30K, the largest gift total here. 2025–2026 filings.
Candidate contribution rows come from candidate committee Schedule A filings, the same rows the party chart above counts.
Money moving between this committee and other committees, matched on FEC committee ID rather than the name each filing was typed under. Both sides exclude memo entries. The figures here count each committee once, from the itemized transfers read for this section, so they will not match the payment counts under Who this PAC gave to.
Committees that reported giving to this one on their own Schedule A filings, grouped by the giver’s committee ID.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| PAC (qualified) · 5 payments | $40.5K |
$40.5K from 1 committee, counting every itemized receipt this cycle.
Disbursements this committee itemized to another committee: candidate contributions, party transfers and payments alike, not contributions only.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| PAC (qualified) · Connected to ACTION COMMITTEE. FOR RURAL ELECTRIFICATION. (ACRE) NATIONAL RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE · 8 payments | $226.6K |
| PAC (qualified) · Connected to ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES OF MISSISSIPPI · 8 payments | $80.6K |
| PAC (qualified) · Connected to NATIONAL RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION AMERICA'S ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES PAC · 8 payments | $60.8K |
| PAC (qualified) · Connected to NATIONAL RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES ASSOCIATION AMERICA'S ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES PAC · 8 payments | $60.8K |
| PAC (qualified) · Connected to KENTUCKY'S ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE PAC · 8 payments | $58.1K |
| Party committee (qualified) · 2 payments | $30K |
| Party committee (qualified) · 2 payments | $30K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to COLE COMBINED COMMITTEE · 2 payments | $30K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to YOUNG VICTORY COMMITTEE · 2 payments | $30K |
| PAC (qualified) · 8 payments | $24.4K |
| PAC (qualified) · Connected to NATIONAL RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION AMERICA'S ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES PAC · 8 payments | $20.6K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 8 payments | $12.5K |
$3.1M across 451 recipient committees, or 72% of everything this committee reports spending. The largest 12 are shown.
Built from FEC Schedule A and Schedule B filings for the selected cycle. A committee only appears here if the money was itemized under its FEC committee ID.
| 627 contributions · 5.6% |
| $97,419 |
| 793 contributions · 5.6% | $96,636 |
| 1,098 contributions · 4.8% | $83,341 |
| 246 contributions · 4.7% | $81,116 |
| 195 contributions · 4.7% | $80,709 |
| 328 contributions · 4.6% | $79,653 |
By the state each contributor wrote on the filing. The FEC aggregates every Schedule A line together, so one committee or organization transfer can account for a whole state. Contributors who have given $200 or less this cycle are not itemized and cannot be placed on a map. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total.
| Employer as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 996 contributions · 7.5% of ranked | $96,038 |
| 29 contributions · 1.8% of ranked | $23,650 |
| 172 contributions · 1.7% of ranked | $21,625 |
| 44 contributions · 1.6% of ranked | $20,025 |
| 85 contributions · 1.5% of ranked | $19,765 |
| 156 contributions · 1.5% of ranked | $19,080 |
| 260 contributions · 1.4% of ranked | $18,253 |
| 187 contributions · 1.4% of ranked | $17,293 |
Ranked from the largest 200 of 201 employer spellings filed; each share is of the money in those. Itemized receipts grouped by the words contributors filed. The FEC aggregates every Schedule A line here, so committee and organization money sits alongside individuals; this is not an industry classification. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($1,936,598) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 1,476 contributions · 28% of ranked | $396,997 |
| 534 contributions · 7.1% of ranked | $102,132 |
| 318 contributions · 5.2% of ranked | $75,336 |
| 389 contributions · 4.4% of ranked | $63,739 |
| 154 contributions · 4% of ranked | $57,067 |
| 280 contributions · 2.7% of ranked | $38,152 |
| 104 contributions · 2.5% of ranked | $35,447 |
| 117 contributions · 2.4% of ranked | $35,146 |
A further $5,436 came from donors whose answer names no occupation (blank), so it is not ranked. Ranked from the largest 200 of 201 occupation spellings filed; each share is of the money in those. Itemized receipts grouped by the words contributors filed. The FEC aggregates every Schedule A line here, so committee and organization money sits alongside individuals; this is not an industry classification. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($1,936,598) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Total itemized disbursements $3,134,695
Every itemized payment the committee reported this cycle, sorted by what it said each one was for. The categories are ours; the wording they are matched against is the committee’s own. Open a category to read the filed descriptions and who was paid. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
All 1,457 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 8 payments · 5.3% of all spending | $226,598 |
| 8 payments · 1.9% of all spending | $80,571 |
| 8 payments · 1.4% of all spending | $60,835 |
| 8 payments · 1.4% of all spending | $60,775 |
| 8 payments · 1.3% of all spending | $58,108 |
| 2 payments · 0.7% of all spending | $30,000 |
| 2 payments · 0.7% of all spending | $30,000 |
| 2 payments · 0.7% of all spending | $30,000 |
The people, firms and committees paid the most, across every kind of payment. Each share is of everything the committee reported spending this cycle, not only the itemized payments above. A payee that is itself a committee links to its own profile.