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 associationSchaumburg, IllinoisActive
Connected organization: American Society of Anesthesiologists
organization (Linked public record: Wikidata organization record)
FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C00255752 · files monthly
“At the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), we take pride in our dedication to raise and maintain the standards of the medical practice of anesthesiology and to improve patient care. Since 1905, our achievements have played an important role in American medicine and we’ve acted as an advocate for all patients who require anesthesia or relief from pain. We provide outstanding education, research and scientific knowledge to physician anesthesiologists and care-team members.”
American Society of Anesthesiologists PAC, on its own site, asahq.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.
Big insurance companies have used increasingly aggressive, profit-driven behaviors to harm frontline physicians and health care professionals.
Insurance companies have developed, proposed, and implemented several workarounds to federal and state regulations, renegotiated anesthesia contracts midway through agreed upon terms, and have failed to appropriately pay for anesthesia services.
Anesthesiologists and their practices are often at a disadvantage when assessing the impact policy changes will have on their revenues and their ability to cover service lines.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · asahq.org/advocating-for-you/private-payer-policies
Heading as listed on asahq.org/advocating-for-you/private-payer-policies ↗ (opens asahq.org/advocating-for-you/private-payer-policies at this heading) · “Private Payer Policies” on asahq.org/advocating-for-you/private-payer-policies ↗ (opens asahq.org/advocating-for-you/private-payer-policies at this heading)
ASA advocates to ensure equitable payments to anesthesiologists through the development of measures and models that capture and express the value of what anesthesiologists do; right historical wrongs in government payment models; and direct and influence policy to uphold the economic viability of your practice and the specialty.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/auto-rollup-test
ASA supports policies that promote access to safe and effective pain care and has a significant interest in reducing the misuse, abuse, and diversion of opioid medications that have led to unintended deaths.
ASA collaborates with other societies and government entities to further these efforts.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/improving-access-to-high-quality-pain-care
Principles that ASA wants to ensure in any proposed changes to the Affordable Care Act or other legislation related to access to health care (PDF)
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/health-care-reform
Heading as listed on asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/health-care-reform ↗ (opens asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/health-care-reform at this heading) · “Health Care Reform” on asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/health-care-reform ↗ (opens asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/health-care-reform at this heading)
In 2001, a final rule was adopted which amended the Medicare and Medicaid anesthesia Conditions of Participation (COPs) for hospitals, critical access hospitals (CAHs) and ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs).
The final rule continued the requirement for physician supervision of nurse anesthetists but allowed state governors to “opt-out” of this requirement under certain circumstances.
Since amending the Medicare safety rule, governors in 25 states have opted-out.
Opt-out is a failed policy experiment.
The 27 states that have opted-out are:
- Iowa (December 2001)
- Nebraska (February 2002)
- Idaho (March 2002)
- Minnesota (April 2002)
- New Hampshire (June 2002)
- New Mexico (November 2002)
- Kansas (March 2003)
- North Dakota (October 2003)
- Washington (October 2003)
- Alaska (October 2003)
- Oregon (December 2003)
- Montana (January 2004)
- South Dakota (March 2005)
- Wisconsin (June 2005)
- California (July 2009)
- Kentucky (April 2012)
- Arizona (March 2020)
- Oklahoma (November 2020)
- Utah (February 2022: partial opt-out limited to Critical Access Hospitals and specified rural hospitals)
- Michigan (May 2022)
- Arkansas (May 2022)
- Wyoming (May 2023: partial opt-out limited to Critical Access Hospitals and hospitals with 25 licensed beds or less)
- Delaware (June 2023)
- Colorado (2010 partial opt-out / 2023 full opt-out)
- Massachusetts (May 2024)
- Vermont (July 2026)
- Ohio (July 2026)
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/opt-outs
Heading as listed on asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/opt-outs ↗ (opens asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/opt-outs at this heading) · “Opt-Outs” on asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/opt-outs ↗ (opens asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/opt-outs at this heading)
Physician anesthesiologists are highly trained medical specialists.
They evaluate, monitor, and supervise patient care before, during, and after surgery.
Additionally, they diagnose and treat any complications that may occur – from cardiac arrest to excessive bleeding.
In recent years, a growing number of state nurse anesthetist associations have promoted legislation or regulation to diminish or eliminate laws requiring nurse anesthetists to work within the relationship of a physician.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · asahq.org/advocacy-and-asapac/advocacy-topics/supervision-of-nurse-anesthetists
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 | 95 | $557,000 | $0 | $557,000 | 51% |
| Democratic | 90 | $477,500 | $0 | $477,500 | 44% |
| Other or unresolved | 22 | $61,000 | $0 | $61,000 | 5.6% |
| Shown support | 207 | $1,095,500 | $0 | $1,095,500 | 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 | 91 | $487.5K · 17% |
| Republican candidates | 94 | $552K · 19% |
| Other or unresolved candidates | 23 | $66K · 2.3% |
| Republican party committees | 1 | $5K · 0.2% |
| Other party committees | 4 | $300K · 10% |
| Other PACs and committees | 94 | $1.5M · 51% |
| All recipients | 307 | $2.9M |
| State | Candidates | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| California | 27 | $158K |
| Florida | 14 | $86.5K |
| New York | 11 | $81.5K |
| Texas | 14 | $80K |
| Georgia | 11 | $61K |
| North Carolina | 13 | $58K |
| Missouri | 7 | $54K |
| Pennsylvania |
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 12 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 17,630 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $2.7M. FEC contributor lists are public records and cannot be used for commercial solicitation.
Total reported receipts $3,500,415
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 |
|---|---|
| 12,348 contributions · 77% | $2,058,339 |
| 5,267 contributions · 23% | $620,173 |
| 2 contributions · 0.2% | $5,000 |
| 4 contributions · <0.1% | $800 |
| 1 contribution · <0.1% | $500 |
| 3 contributions · <0.1% | $482 |
| 2 contributions · <0.1% | $166 |
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.
Total reported disbursements $3,553,375
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.
$3.6M spent from Jan 2025 to Oct 2026. Most in one report: $472.9K, May 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.
Besides giving through its PAC, American Society of Anesthesiologists pays lobbyists to press Congress and federal agencies. Each quarter it, or a firm it hires, files a public report under the Lobbying Disclosure Act saying which topics it worked on, what it spent, and whom it contacted. This is what those reports say.
Each report files its work under official topics. The bar shows how often each topic came up across the reports; open one to read what was filed under it. Naming a bill says the organization lobbied on it, not which side it took.
The organization’s own reports give its total lobbying costs, including any firms it hired; each firm reports what this client paid it.
Reported twice a year by the lobbying filer. $80 is political giving that also appears in FEC filings.
Matched by name: these reports are filed for “AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ANESTHESIOLOGISTS”, found by searching “AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ANESTHESIOLOGISTS”. Lobbying and FEC records share no ID, so an organization that lobbies under another name is missed. Source: LDA.gov, accessed Oct 27, 2026. Senate Office of Public Records cannot vouch for the data or analyses derived from these data after the data have been retrieved from LDA.gov.
organization Linked public record: Wikidata organization 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.
American Society of Anesthesiologists PAC is matched to organization records using the FEC committee identity, structured identifiers, and corroborated organization data.
| 10 |
| $48.5K |
The largest 8 of 40 states.
Bars drawn to $250K, 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 |
|---|---|
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · 4 payments | $250K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · Connected to FRIENDS OF ANDY BARR COMMITTEE · 2 payments | $180K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · 1 payment | $125K |
| Party committee (qualified) · 7 payments | $120K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to COLE COMBINED COMMITTEE · 5 payments | $120K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · 1 payment | $50K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · 2 payments | $50K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · 1 payment | $50K |
| Hybrid PAC (nonqualified) · 4 payments | $45K |
| Hybrid PAC (nonqualified) · 2 payments | $40K |
| Hybrid PAC (qualified) · 1 payment | $35K |
| Hybrid PAC (qualified) · Connected to EQUALITY CONGRESS PROJECT PAC · 1 payment | $35K |
$2.9M across 310 recipient committees, or 81% of everything this committee reports spending. The largest 12 are shown. A further $26K 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.
| Employer as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an employer · 533 contributions · 6.7% of ranked | $91,037 |
| 371 contributions · 3.4% of ranked | $46,226 |
| 199 contributions · 3.2% of ranked | $43,072 |
| 123 contributions · 2.9% of ranked | $39,676 |
| Written instead of an employer · 153 contributions · 2.3% of ranked | $31,958 |
| 126 contributions · 1.8% of ranked | $24,015 |
| 240 contributions · 1.8% of ranked | $23,998 |
| 165 contributions · 1.6% of ranked | $21,736 |
A further $14,040 came from donors whose answer names no employer (None, 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 ($734,321) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 9,741 contributions · 55% of ranked | $1,481,990 |
| 4,585 contributions · 27% of ranked | $726,042 |
| 864 contributions · 4.9% of ranked | $131,852 |
| 296 contributions · 1.5% of ranked | $40,138 |
| 222 contributions · 1.3% of ranked | $33,889 |
| 109 contributions · 0.5% of ranked | $14,374 |
| Written instead of an occupation · 105 contributions · 0.4% of ranked | $11,963 |
| 98 contributions · 0.4% of ranked | $9,895 |
A further $6,877 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 ($734,321) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Total itemized disbursements $3,047,202
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 · 7% of all spending | $250,000 |
| 2 payments · 5.1% of all spending | $180,000 |
| 89 payments · 4.3% of all spending | $151,702 |
| 1 payment · 3.5% of all spending | $125,000 |
| 7 payments · 3.4% of all spending | $120,000 |
| 5 payments · 3.4% of all spending | $120,000 |
| 1 payment · 1.4% of all spending | $50,000 |
| 2 payments · 1.4% 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.