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 › Party committee (qualified) › 2025–2026
Party committee (qualified)Phoenix, ArizonaActive
Connected organization: DNC Services Corp. / Democratic National Committee
FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C00166710 · files monthly
5 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.
WHEREAS the United States federal judiciary has been packed with conservative judges over the term of President Donald Trump, culminating with Judge Amy Coney Barrett being sworn in as the 115t h Supreme Court Justice on October 26t h, 2020, ensuring a 6-3 conservative control of the Supreme Court and conservative majorities in much of the lower courts for the foreseeable future; and WHEREAS these appointments largely come a perversion of the Senate appointment process whereby Republican Senate leadership unapologetically obstructed a majority of President Barack Obama appointments to the courts, including but not limited to, Judge Merrick Garland’s appointment to the Supreme Court seat now held by Justice Neil Gorsuch, with the specific intent of keeping those seats open for a future GOP president to fill, and then hypocritically violated the very rules set down about election-year appointments to the Supreme Court, by rushing through a partially vetted Judge Amy Coney Barrett only weeks before the 2020 Presidential election in which over 60 million people had already voted; and WHEREAS these illegitimate appointments of conservative judges and perversion of the Constitutional process have created a severe threat to our election system, our democratic process and the ideals of the policies of the Democratic Party and the fundamental human rights of people of color, LGBTQIA+, immigrants, disabled, religious minorities, and the working class at large; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Arizona Democratic Party publicly supports a thorough and complete assessment and implementation of measures needed to reform and rebalance the Supreme Court and lower courts of the federal judiciary, which may include but not be limited to, expanding access to justice through judicial term limits, establishing a process to rotate judges, certiorari reform, and assessing or reassigning the jurisdiction of certain courts: and THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Arizona Democratic Party recognizes that the spiraling disregard and misuse of the Senate procedural rules under GOP control, may necessitate that the Democratic-controlled Congress operate with the understanding that Democrats must take such steps as are necessary to ensure that these perversions and the undermining of checks and balances that protect our democratic republic are corrected and ensure that they no longer continue.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · azdems.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Resolutions-Packet-for-January-23-_-Federal-Judiciary.pdf
Racism is a Public Health Emergency January 23, 2021 Submitted by Jana Lynn Granillo WHEREAS, the COVID-19 pandemic and economic disruption have exposed systemic racism, inequities and negatively impacted communities of color; and1.
WHEREAS, racism impacts the social determinants of health such as: socioeconomic status, education, neighborhood and physical environment, employment, social support networks, health outcomes, and access to health care; and WHEREAS, Arizona COVID-19 rates are high and dangerous to all residents3.; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that The Arizona Democratic Party hereby concur with nationwide declarations that racism constitutes a public health emergency and will condemn racist practices that impact the safety and public health of marginalized communities in Arizona; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Arizona Democratic Party will commit to eliminating race-based health disparities, improving health outcomes in communities of color, and eradicating systemic racism.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Arizona Democratic Party will support efforts to:
1) Remedy the impact of COVID-19 to our indigenous communities3.
2) Include immigrants in COVID-19 financial and healthcare relief efforts4.
3) Prioritize essential workforce in legislation, policy, planning and funding5.
“COVID-19’s Tragic Effect on American Indians: A State-by-State Analysis.”
U.S. News & World Report, 7 Oct 2020, https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-10-07/a-state-by-state-analysis-of-the-imp act-of-covid-19-on-native-americans.
11 Dec 2020, https://www.azfamily.com/news/continuing_coverage/coronavirus_coverage/arizona-has-highest-rate-of-covid-1 9-spread-in-the-nation/article_355ab83c-3bfd-11eb-a0cd-5f61070a2e3e.html 4.
Arizona Republic, 9 Dec 2020.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · azdems.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Resolutions-Packet-for-January-23-_-Public-Health.docx.pdf
Republicans broke it, Arizonans have to buy it.
From high gas prices to worsening inflation, Arizonans are paying more because Republicans like Biggs, Schweikert and Ciscomani are committed to backing Trump’s war with Iran and cost-raising tariffs.”
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · azdems.org/trumps-tariffs-war-forcing-arizonans-to-pay-more
Social Security represents a fundamental 92-year promise, serving as a vital financial pillar for approximately 1.5 million Arizona residents.
It is an essential mandate for the United States government to protect, preserve and ensure the long-term solvency of Social Security so that both current retirees and future generations receive the benefits they have earned through their lifetime of contributions.
“ ...at its core, the debate over the future of Social Security is about our values and the kind of society we, as a people, believe in and want for ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren.”
hFps://www.cri.org/nostatespared Resolution submitted by Senior Council members:
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · azdems.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/8_29_26-Proposed-Resolutions-3.pdf
Heading as listed on azdems.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/8_29_26-Proposed-Resolutions-3.pdf ↗ (opens azdems.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/8_29_26-Proposed-Resolutions-3.pdf at this heading) · “Approved April 2023” on azdems.org/resolutions ↗ (opens azdems.org/resolutions at this heading)
A Path to Solvency The PROMISE Act lays out an achievable plan to develop and consider Social Security solvency while ensuring Congress can properly debate the issue.
Direct the Social Security Advisory Board to gather public input, hold listening sessions, and submit recommendations and draft legislative language to Congress.
Create procedures requiring both chambers to reconvene, introduce, and consider a “Social Security bill,” with committee reporting, certification deadlines, and a robust floor Debate. Furthermore, the bill includes numerous safeguards to ensure that the bill remains a clean, uninterrupted, and focused effort to address Social Security’s solvency issues:
- Require a three-fifths vote for Senate amendments and passage and a simple majority in the House on the Social Security bill.
- Limit provisions of the Social Security bill to changing outlays, revenues, or financing only.
- Coordinate action between the House and Senate, limit adjournment, and bar motions to suspend the process.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · azdems.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/8_29_26-Proposed-Resolutions-3.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.
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 | 5 | $7.8K · 100% |
| All recipients | 5 | $7.8K |
| State | Candidates | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| Arizona | 5 | $7.8K |
Bars drawn to $4.2K, 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.
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 12 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 3,294 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $422.4K. FEC contributor lists are public records and cannot be used for commercial solicitation.
The 3 largest committees by total given are listed. Counted from the givers' own filings, which can run above the total this committee reports.
Total reported receipts $5,033,729
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 |
|---|---|
| 2,007 contributions · 67% | $283,023 |
| 421 contributions · 9.8% | $41,468 |
| 97 contributions · 4.4% | $18,459 |
| 39 contributions · 4.1% |
Total reported disbursements $6,419,921
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.
$6.4M spent from Jan 2025 to Oct 2026. Most in one report: $985.9K, 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.
No lobbying disclosures matched
Arizona Democratic Party is registered with the Federal Election Commission as a party committee (qualified). Its FEC record names DNC Services Corp. / Democratic National Committee 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.
Arizona Democratic Party is matched to organization records using the FEC committee identity, structured identifiers, and corroborated organization data.
Committees that reported giving to this one on their own Schedule A filings, grouped by the giver’s committee ID.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| Party committee (qualified) · 8 payments | $554.5K |
| Party committee (nonqualified) · Connected to ARIZONA DEMOCRATIC PARTY · 15 payments | $409.9K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to DEMOCRATIC GRASSROOTS VICTORY FUND · 24 payments | $302K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 11 payments | $146.8K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 2 payments | $83.2K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 1 payment | $61.3K |
| Party committee (nonqualified) · Connected to DNC SERVICES CORP / DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE · 1 payment | $33.2K |
| Senate campaign committee · Connected to MARK KELLY VICTORY FUND · 1 payment | $25K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 1 payment | $20K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · 2 payments | $18.8K |
| Senate campaign committee · Connected to FIGHT AND WIN FUND · 1 payment | $7.5K |
| PAC (qualified) · Connected to DEMOCRATIC MOMS PAC · 1 payment | $5K |
$1.7M from 32 committees, counting every itemized receipt this cycle. The largest 12 are shown.
Disbursements this committee itemized to another committee: candidate contributions, party transfers and payments alike, not contributions only.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| Party committee (nonqualified) · Connected to ARIZONA DEMOCRATIC PARTY · 12 payments | $704.2K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to DNC/STATE PARTY VICTORY FUND · 1 payment | $150K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to SC PARTY VICTORY FUND · 1 payment | $50K |
| Party committee (qualified) · 4 payments | $36.3K |
| Party committee (nonqualified) · Connected to DNC SERVICES CORP / DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE · 7 payments | $28.1K |
| Party committee (qualified) · 1 payment | $14K |
| Hybrid PAC (qualified) · 1 payment |
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.
The 15 largest sources are listed. Each as the committee named it on this line, $355.2K from 112 sources in all.
| $17,230 |
| 70 contributions · 3.4% | $14,544 |
| 46 contributions · 1.8% | $7,474 |
| 1 contribution · 1.2% | $5,000 |
| 51 contributions · 1% | $4,353 |
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 · 1,955 contributions · 52% of ranked | $205,213 |
| Written instead of an employer · 239 contributions · 6.9% of ranked | $27,460 |
| 5 contributions · 4% of ranked | $16,000 |
| 2 contributions · 2.7% of ranked | $10,600 |
| 1 contribution · 2.5% of ranked | $10,000 |
| 1 contribution · 2.5% of ranked | $10,000 |
| 1 contribution · 2.5% of ranked | $10,000 |
| 5 contributions · 1.8% of ranked | $7,000 |
A further $25,830 came from donors whose answer names no employer (N/A, blank), so it is not ranked. 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 ($727,781) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an occupation · 1,701 contributions · 43% of ranked | $173,923 |
| Written instead of an occupation · 235 contributions · 8.9% of ranked | $35,800 |
| 152 contributions · 7.7% of ranked | $30,935 |
| 5 contributions · 4% of ranked | $16,000 |
| 2 contributions · 2.6% of ranked | $10,600 |
| 11 contributions · 2.6% of ranked | $10,250 |
| 37 contributions · 2.5% of ranked | $10,000 |
| 1 contribution · 2.5% of ranked | $10,000 |
A further $20,680 came from donors whose answer names no occupation (N/A, blank), so it is not ranked. 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 ($727,781) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Total itemized disbursements $1,669,012
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 750 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
22 payments were reported as a lump sum, such as a card or payroll bill, with the detail filed underneath as memo entries. Those entries, $24,275 in all, are counted under the payee and purpose they name rather than under the processor that was paid. The total is the same either way.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 12 payments · 11% of all spending | $704,159 |
| 23 payments · 4.1% of all spending | $260,060 |
| 1 payment · 2.3% of all spending | $150,000 |
| 7 payments · 1.3% of all spending | $84,000 |
| 22 payments · 1.1% of all spending | $70,321 |
| 10 payments · 1% of all spending | $66,400 |
| 330 payments · 0.9% of all spending | $58,969 |
| 1 payment · 0.8% of all spending | $50,000 |
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.
| $5K |
| House campaign committee · Connected to JONATHAN NEZ HOUSE VICTORY FUND · 1 payment | $4.2K |
| House campaign committee · 1 payment | $1.1K |
| House campaign committee · 1 payment | $1.1K |
| House campaign committee · 1 payment | $1.1K |
| Party committee (nonqualified) · Connected to DEMOCRATIC GRASSROOTS VICTORY FUND · 1 payment | $500 |
$995.9K across 13 recipient committees, or 16% of everything this committee reports spending. The largest 12 are shown.