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 PACLabor organizationWashington, District of ColumbiaActive
Connected organization: Branch 193 National Association of Letter Carriers PAC
Political fund of Branch 193 National Association of Letter Carriers Political Action Committee
FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C00023580 · files monthly
8 priorities from the site of Branch 193 National Association of Letter Carriers Political Action Committee, 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.
To amend Title 18, United States Code, and Title 39, United States Code, to provide the United States Postal Service the authority to mail alcoholic beverages, and for other purposes.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · nalc.org/government-affairs/body/priority-legislation.pdf
To deter crimes and assaults against letter carriers by securing keys and collection boxes, directing U.S.
attorney offices to prioritize cases involving assaults against letter carriers, and strengthening sentencing guidelines for those found guilty of these crimes.
Introduced by Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Greg Landsman (D-OH) and Sens.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · nalc.org/government-affairs/body/priority-legislation.pdf
Would allow certain federal employees to make catch-up retirement contributions for time spent as non-career employees after Dec. 31, 1988, making such time creditable service under the Federal Employees Retirement System.
This includes letter carriers who served as casuals, transitional employees and city carrier assistants.
Introduced by Reps. Gerry Connolly (D-VA), Nikki Budzinski (D-IL), David Valadao (R-CA), and Don Bacon (R-NE)
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · nalc.org/government-affairs/body/priority-legislation.pdf
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Congress should take all appropriate measures to ensure that the United States Postal Service remains an independent establishment of the federal government and is not subject to privatization.
Introduced by Reps. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) and Nick LaLota (R-NY), and Sens.
Gary Peters (D-MI), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Susan Collins (R-ME), Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Maggie Hassan (D-NH)
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · nalc.org/government-affairs/body/priority-legislation.pdf
This bill applies a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for annuities paid under the Federal Employees Retirement System that is equal to the increase in inflation, regardless of the amount of the increase.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · nalc.org/government-affairs/body/priority-legislation.pdf
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 175 | $903,700 | $0 | $903,700 | 75% |
| Republican | 46 | $285,500 | $0 | $285,500 | 24% |
| Other or unresolved | 5 | $20,000 | $0 | $20,000 | 1.7% |
| Shown support | 226 | $1,209,200 | $0 | $1,209,200 | 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 | 175 | $903.7K · 17% |
| Republican candidates | 45 | $278K · 5.1% |
| Other or unresolved candidates | 7 | $112.5K · 2.1% |
| Democratic party committees | 6 | $31.5K · 0.6% |
| Republican party committees | 1 | $20K · 0.4% |
| Other party committees | 3 | $180K · 3.3% |
| Other PACs and committees | 118 | $3.9M · 72% |
| All recipients | 355 | $5.4M |
| State | Candidates | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| California | 40 | $197.5K |
| New York | 20 | $109.2K |
| District of Columbia | 1 | $85K |
| Pennsylvania | 12 | $60.5K |
| New Jersey | 9 | $58.5K |
| Texas | 12 |
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 12 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 45,704 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $1.1M. FEC contributor lists are public records and cannot be used for commercial solicitation.
Total reported receipts $7,491,118
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 |
|---|---|
| 3,808 contributions · 8.4% | $95,263 |
| 3,438 contributions · 7.1% |
Total reported disbursements $6,913,974
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.
$7M spent from Jan 2025 to Oct 2026. Most in one report: $817.9K, September 2026.
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.
Published by the Commission against this committee’s own FEC ID. An audit is a periodic examination that reports findings; an administrative fine is a penalty for filing a specific report late or not at all. They are separate instruments and are not combined into a score here.
1982 cycleReport released Dec 20, 1983
Late M9 report, 2001$4.5K assessed
Case 528 at the FEC ↗Source: the Commission’s audit-case and administrative-fine records, joined on this committee’s FEC ID, imported Oct 26, 2026. Enforcement matters (MURs) are published only against respondent names, with no committee identifier, so they are not shown here rather than being matched by name.
No lobbying disclosures matched
National Association of Letter Carriers of U.S.A. Political Fund is registered with the Federal Election Commission as a PAC (qualified). It is a lobbyist/registrant PAC. Its FEC record names Branch 193 National Association of Letter Carriers PAC 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 Association of Letter Carriers of U.S.A. Political Fund is matched to organization records using the FEC committee identity, structured identifiers, and corroborated organization data.
| Ohio | 8 | $47K |
|---|
| Michigan | 7 | $46.5K |
|---|
The largest 8 of 44 states.
Bars drawn to $1M, 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.
No committee-to-committee receipts were itemized this cycle.
Disbursements this committee itemized to another committee: candidate contributions, party transfers and payments alike, not contributions only.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| Hybrid PAC (qualified) · Connected to MINNESOTA SECOND DISTRICT VICTORY COMMITTEE · 5 payments | $1M |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · Connected to WINSENATE · 4 payments | $1M |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 1 payment | $255K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 1 payment | $150K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · 1 payment | $150K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 1 payment | $130K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 1 payment | $100K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 3 payments | $100K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · 1 payment | $100K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · Connected to EMILY'S LIST · 1 payment | $100K |
| House campaign committee · 1 payment | $85K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to YOUNG VICTORY COMMITTEE · 2 payments | $60K |
$5.4M across 369 recipient committees, or 78% of everything this committee reports spending. The largest 12 are shown. A further $15K was filed as memo entries, which FEC reports separately to avoid counting it twice.
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.
| $80,526 |
| 2,671 contributions · 6.1% | $69,417 |
| 2,128 contributions · 5.1% | $57,984 |
| 2,387 contributions · 4.6% | $52,276 |
| 1,693 contributions · 4.2% | $46,964 |
| 1,752 contributions · 4.1% | $46,149 |
| 1,732 contributions · 4% | $45,182 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 45,702 contributions · 100% of ranked | $1,131,833 |
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 ($6,157,624) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 39,026 contributions · 78% of ranked | $880,981 |
| 6,676 contributions · 22% of ranked | $250,852 |
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 ($6,157,624) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Total itemized disbursements $6,618,598
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 721 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 5 payments · 14% of all spending | $1,000,000 |
| 4 payments · 14% of all spending | $1,000,000 |
| 18 payments · 5.9% of all spending | $406,393 |
| 1 payment · 3.7% of all spending | $255,000 |
| 23 payments · 3.3% of all spending | $229,756 |
| 2 payments · 2.6% of all spending | $182,277 |
| 23 payments · 2.6% of all spending | $177,732 |
| 6 payments · 2.3% of all spending | $161,000 |
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.