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)Membership organizationIrving, TexasActive
Connected organization: American College of Emergency Physicians
The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) is a professional organization of emergency medicine physicians in the United States. ACEP publishes the Annals of Emergency Medicine and the Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open (JACEP Open). ACEP is a partner of the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases (NFID). (Linked public record: Wikipedia organization profile)
FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C00140061 · files quarterly
“The American College of Emergency Physicians promotes the highest quality of emergency care and is the leading advocate for emergency physicians, their patients, and the public.”
National Emergency Medicine PAC / American College of Emergency Physicians, on its own site, acep.org
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.
6 priorities from the committee’s own site, 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.
Many hospitals are responding to resource constraints and staffing challenges by allowing nonphysicians—like physician assistants or nurse practitioners—to perform complex medical procedures without supervision.
ACEP believes that an emergency physician should lead every emergency care team in the country.
Physician assistants (PAs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) are integral and valued members of the care team.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · acep.org/federal-advocacy/scope-of-practice-efforts
ACEP is a staunch supporter of physician-led team-based care that ensures that every patient has access to high quality medical care from an educated and trained physician.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · acep.org/federal-advocacy/scope-of-practice-efforts
Since the US Supreme Court’s 2023 decision to overturn of Roe v. Wade, legal cases and regulations continue to evolve.
ACEP reasserts our unwavering support of EMTALA and the right of the emergency physician to provide the highest quality medical care to pregnant patients without fear of legal consequences.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · acep.org/federal-advocacy/Emergency-Care-in-a-Post--Roe-Era
"Emergency medicine is being attacked from all sides. We need to fight for our patients, friends and family."
As your voice in Washington, D.C., ACEP is an active force working on important issues affecting emergency medical care.
One common thread runs through all of ACEP's federal advocacy efforts: ensuring life-saving emergency care is there when it's needed nationwide.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · acep.org/federal-advocacy/federal-advocacy-overview
ACEP is committed to leading the charge that calls on all of us within emergency medicine to work together to evolve our profession so we can provide the best possible care for our patients.
ACEP partnered with EMRA to submit a statement for the record for a Senate HELP Committee hearing on workforce shortages. The statement highlights how ongoing workforce shortages affect emergency care - including the importance of maintaining the physician-led team-based emergency care, persistent issues in providing emergency care in rural and underserved areas, issues regarding nurse staffing firm practices during the COVID-19 pandemic, and how these workforce shortages contribute to ED boarding.
After more than 6 years of advocacy by ACEP, Congress passed a provision as part of the 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act to allow rural hospitals to voluntary convert to the newly established Rural Emergency Hospital starting in 2023. An REH will not provide inpatient services, but only emergency and other outpatient services—and it will receive higher Medicare (facility) reimbursement rates for these services.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · acep.org/federal-advocacy/workforce-issues
For years, state support for mental health resources has been on the decline and services for psychiatric patients in the United States are simply inadequate.
As a result of this diminishing support, psychiatric patients are more and more often turning to emergency departments for their acute care needs.
Unfortunately, it takes three times as long to find an inpatient bed for a psychiatric patient rather than a medical patient after the decision to admit has been made.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · acep.org/federal-advocacy/mental-health
Medicare reimbursement rates are extremely important for emergency physicians.
Not only do they affect Medicare payments, but they serve as the basis for which private payors establish their own individual payment levels.
Over the last few years, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has increased and subsequently maintained the value of the emergency department (ED) evaluation and management (E/M) codes–the most commonly billed codes for emergency medicine.
This increase was the result of many months of behind-the-scenes work by ACEP.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · acep.org/federal-advocacy/federal-advocacy-overview/acep4u/acep4u-CMS-Medicare-Payment-Codes
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 | 105 | $478,500 | $0 | $478,500 | 55% |
| Republican | 79 | $362,000 | $0 | $362,000 | 41% |
| Other or unresolved | 12 | $35,000 | $0 | $35,000 | 4% |
| Shown support | 196 | $875,500 | $0 | $875,500 | 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 | 106 | $483.5K · 30% |
| Republican candidates | 77 | $356.5K · 22% |
| Other or unresolved candidates | 14 | $40.5K · 2.5% |
| Democratic party committees | 1 | $5K · 0.3% |
| Other party committees | 4 | $145K · 8.9% |
| Other PACs and committees | 83 | $606K · 37% |
| All recipients | 285 | $1.6M |
| State | Candidates | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| California | 21 | $102K |
| Pennsylvania | 13 | $66.5K |
| New York | 15 | $64.5K |
| Florida | 12 | $57.5K |
| North Carolina | 8 | $39K |
| Texas | 10 | $35K |
| Illinois | 10 | $30K |
| Ohio |
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 12 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 4,840 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $737.4K. FEC contributor lists are public records and cannot be used for commercial solicitation.
Total reported receipts $1,574,118
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 |
|---|---|
| 694 contributions · 8.1% | $59,911 |
| 250 contributions · 7.7% | $56,771 |
| 215 contributions · 7% |
Total reported disbursements $1,668,340
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.
$1.7M spent from Jan 2025 to Oct 2026. Most in one report: $389.8K, Jan 1 – Jun 30, 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.
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.
Late 12G report, 2018$8.7K assessed
Case 3599 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
The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) is a professional organization of emergency medicine physicians in the United States. ACEP publishes the Annals of Emergency Medicine and the Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open (JACEP Open). ACEP is a partner of the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases (NFID). Linked public record: Wikipedia organization profile.
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 Emergency Medicine PAC / American College of Emergency Physicians is matched to organization records using the FEC committee identity, structured identifiers, and corroborated organization data.
| 7 |
| $29K |
The largest 8 of 42 states.
Bars drawn to $50K, 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 |
|---|---|
| Senate campaign committee · Connected to MULLIN VICTORY FUND · 1 payment | $1K |
$1K 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 |
|---|---|
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to COLE COMBINED COMMITTEE · 4 payments | $50K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · 2 payments | $50K |
| Party committee (qualified) · 3 payments | $35K |
| Party committee (qualified) · 4 payments | $30K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to YOUNG VICTORY COMMITTEE · 2 payments | $30K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · 2 payments | $25K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · 1 payment | $25K |
| Hybrid PAC (qualified) · Connected to 314 ACTION VICTORY FUND · 2 payments | $20K |
| House campaign committee · Connected to COWAN VICTORY COMMITTEE · 5 payments | $12.5K |
| PAC (qualified) · Connected to CLARK · 4 payments | $10K |
| PAC (qualified) · 2 payments | $10K |
| PAC (qualified) · Connected to PRO-CHOICE WOMEN · 3 payments | $10K |
$1.6M across 295 recipient committees, or 98% of everything this committee reports spending. The largest 12 are shown. A further $5K 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.
| $51,639 |
| 212 contributions · 6.5% | $48,114 |
| 389 contributions · 6.4% | $47,156 |
| 84 contributions · 5.9% | $43,244 |
| 846 contributions · 5.6% | $41,143 |
| 235 contributions · 4.4% | $32,650 |
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 |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an employer · 1,728 contributions · 43% of ranked | $317,317 |
| 566 contributions · 4.7% of ranked | $34,535 |
| 826 contributions · 4.6% of ranked | $34,166 |
| 25 contributions · 3.9% of ranked | $29,000 |
| 140 contributions · 3.2% of ranked | $23,756 |
| 172 contributions · 2.8% of ranked | $20,367 |
| 6 contributions · 1.7% of ranked | $12,400 |
| 26 contributions · 1.2% of ranked | $8,800 |
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 ($743,446) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 4,840 contributions · 100% of ranked | $737,352 |
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 ($743,446) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Total itemized disbursements $1,658,340
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 707 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 4 payments · 3% of all spending | $50,000 |
| 2 payments · 3% of all spending | $50,000 |
| 3 payments · 2.1% of all spending | $35,000 |
| 4 payments · 1.8% of all spending | $30,000 |
| 2 payments · 1.8% of all spending | $30,000 |
| 2 payments · 1.5% of all spending | $25,000 |
| 1 payment · 1.5% of all spending | $25,000 |
| 54 payments · 1.3% of all spending | $21,840 |
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.