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 › Hybrid PAC (qualified) › 2025–2026
Hybrid PAC (qualified)Denver, ColoradoActive
Connected organization: Unite America Reform Fund
FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C00677773 · files monthly
“Unite America is a philanthropic venture fund that invests in nonpartisan election reform to foster a more representative and functional government.”
Unite America PAC Inc., on its own site, uniteamerica.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.
10 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.
We are focused on addressing the biggest solvable problem in politics today — how partisan primaries disenfranchise millions of voters and disincentivize our leaders from working together to solve problems.
Our Solutions ↗ (opens uniteamerica.org at this heading)
Open primaries to all voters & candidates
Require majority winners for elections
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org
Heading as listed on uniteamerica.org ↗ (opens uniteamerica.org at this heading) · “Country over party.” on uniteamerica.org ↗ (opens uniteamerica.org at this heading)
We’re solving the Primary Problem — the biggest solvable cause of dysfunction in our politics.
We focus our resources where we can most effectively change incentives for leaders to put voters first.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/priorities
Our current election system robs voters of real choices and leads to unrepresentative results.
At Unite America, we believe that two things should be true about every election in America.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/priorities
Winning election reform does not require a Constitutional amendment or an act of Congress.
Instead, each state can enact reforms through ballot initiatives and state legislatures.
We’re focused on advancing three specific changes to our election system at the state level.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/priorities
Heading as listed on uniteamerica.org/priorities ↗ (opens uniteamerica.org/priorities at this heading) · “A Democracy That Puts Voters First.” on uniteamerica.org/priorities ↗ (opens uniteamerica.org/priorities at this heading)
Every voter can choose any candidate, and every leader is accountable to a true majority.
All candidates are listed on a single primary ballot and all eligible voters can participate, regardless of party.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/priorities
Leaders should earn broad support, not just cater to a narrow base.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/priorities
Washington is divisive and dysfunctional.
Our elected officials are seemingly incapable of making progress on any issue we care about –– even when a majority of us agree on solutions.
If we want politicians who are motivated to fix problems, we must fix the system.
Our leaders fail to make progress on the issues we care about — even when a clear majority of us can agree on solutions — yet they keep getting reelected.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/priorities
We are focused on addressing the biggest, solvable problem in our politics today: partisan primaries.
Partisan primaries produce politicians who do not represent a majority of voters, are beholden to party politics and special interests, and generally refuse to compromise to solve problems.
Partisan primaries disenfranchise millions of voters, producing politicians who do not represent a majority of voters, are beholden to party politics and special interests, and refuse to work together to solve problems.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/priorities
Open, all-candidate primaries, combined with instant runoff general elections, give more power to voters and produce leaders who must represent all of their constituents.
Three states have already adopted this reform for federal elections — freeing six U.S. senators and dozens of U.S. House members from the grips of partisan primaries.
With each state that follows, more members of Congress will be incentivized to put country over party.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/priorities
The top finishers advance to the general election, where whoever earns a majority of votes wins.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/priorities
Heading as listed on uniteamerica.org/priorities ↗ (opens uniteamerica.org/priorities at this heading) · “Our top objective is to replace closed primaries with open, all-candidate primaries.” on uniteamerica.org/priorities ↗ (opens uniteamerica.org/priorities at this heading)
Number of Members of Congress liberated by securing open, all-candidate primaries in 10 states.
Number of Independent Voters enfranchised by eliminating closed party primaries in 16 states.
Alaska became the first state in the nation to use game-changing electoral reforms in 2022.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/priorities
Heading as listed on uniteamerica.org/priorities ↗ (opens uniteamerica.org/priorities at this heading) · “A Democracy That Puts Voters First.” on uniteamerica.org/priorities ↗ (opens uniteamerica.org/priorities at this heading)
Unite America invests in party-neutral changes to the way we vote that puts voters first and produce more accountability, better representation and better results.
To date, we’ve invested over $70 million across dozens of states, working with campaigns and partners to expand open, all-candidate primaries.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/who-we-are
Specifically, we are focused on solving how closed primaries disenfranchise voters and disincentivize our leaders from solving problems.
For example, Unite America was the largest funder of the campaign to enact Alaska’s top-four primary system which, upon first use in 2022, increased participation, improved representation, and dampened polarization.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/who-we-are
that put voters first and produce more accountability, better representation and better results.
To date, we have invested over $50M in dozens of state campaigns and national organizations working to advance nonpartisan primaries, instant runoffs, and independent redistricting commissions.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/who-we-are
how partisan primaries disenfranchise voters and disincentivize our leaders from solving problems.
For example, Unite America was the largest funder of the campaign to enact Alaska’s top-four primary system –– which, upon first use in 2022, increased participation, improved representation, and dampened polarization.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/who-we-are
By allowing millions of independents to vote in primaries, LAVA would deliver the greatest voting rights expansion in half a century.
It would abolish closed primaries nationally and ensure every eligible voter’s right to participate in every taxpayer-funded election.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · uniteamerica.org/let-america-vote-act
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 | 2 | $7,500 | $0 | $7,500 | 50% |
| Democratic | 1 | $5,000 | $0 | $5,000 | 33% |
| Other or unresolved | 1 | $2,500 | $0 | $2,500 | 17% |
| Shown support | 4 | $15,000 | $0 | $15,000 | 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 | 1 | $5K · 14% |
| Republican candidates | 2 | $7.5K · 21% |
| Other or unresolved candidates | 1 | $2.5K · 7.1% |
| Other PACs and committees | 1 | $20K · 57% |
| All recipients | 5 | $35K |
| State | Candidates | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| Massachusetts | 1 | $5K |
| Pennsylvania | 1 | $5K |
| Maine | 1 | $2.5K |
| Utah | 1 | $2.5K |
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.
The 15 largest sources are listed. Each as the committee named it on this line, $1.6M from 6 sources in all, with its largest individual donors, whose gifts it files here too. Individuals' gifts on this line are not itemized in the data the site holds, so the list need not add up to the row.
Total reported receipts $12,706,360
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 |
|---|---|
| 47 contributions · 35% | $3,241,955 |
| 72 contributions · 22% | $2,097,597 |
| 40 contributions · 21% | $2,003,760 |
| 40 contributions · 8.6% | $806,400 |
| 2 contributions · 8% | $750,000 |
Total reported disbursements $10,783,698
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.
$10.8M spent from Jan 2025 to Oct 2026. Most in one report: $3.2M, July 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
Unite America PAC Inc. is registered with the Federal Election Commission as a Hybrid PAC (qualified). Its FEC record names Unite America Reform Fund 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.
Unite America PAC Inc. is matched to organization records using the FEC committee identity, structured identifiers, and corroborated organization data.
Bars drawn to $20K, the largest gift total here. 2025–2026 filings.
| Name | Amount |
|---|
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · Connected to UNITE AMERICA PAC INC. · 1 payment | $27K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · Connected to UNITE AMERICA PAC INC. · 1 payment | $3.3K |
$30.3K from 2 committees, 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 (nonqualified) · 1 payment | $20K |
| House campaign committee · Connected to JAKE AUCHINCLOSS VICTORY FUND · 1 payment | $5K |
| House campaign committee · Connected to TEAM FITZ · 1 payment | $5K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · Connected to UNITE AMERICA PAC INC. · 1 payment | $3.3K |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · Connected to UNITE AMERICA PAC INC. · 1 payment | $3.3K |
| Senate campaign committee · Connected to COLLINS VICTORY COMMITTEE · 1 payment | $2.5K |
| Senate campaign committee · Connected to TEAM CURTIS JOINT FUNDRAISING COMMITTEE · 1 payment | $2.5K |
$41.5K across 7 recipient committees, or 0.4% of everything this committee reports spending.
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.
| 3 contributions · 2.7% | $255,000 |
| 20 contributions · 1.1% | $102,325 |
| 40 contributions · 0.6% | $58,244 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 7 contributions · 22% of ranked | $2,105,000 |
| 3 contributions · 21% of ranked | $2,000,000 |
| 3 contributions · 21% of ranked | $2,000,000 |
| 2 contributions · 11% of ranked | $1,000,000 |
| 2 contributions · 8.5% of ranked | $800,000 |
| 2 contributions · 8% of ranked | $750,000 |
| 2 contributions · 2.7% of ranked | $250,000 |
| 2 contributions · 1.1% of ranked | $100,000 |
A further $5,008 came from donors whose answer names no employer (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 ($39,431) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 8 contributions · 43% of ranked | $4,005,000 |
| 3 contributions · 21% of ranked | $2,000,000 |
| 20 contributions · 13% of ranked | $1,251,280 |
| 2 contributions · 8.5% of ranked | $800,000 |
| 2 contributions · 8% of ranked | $750,000 |
| 2 contributions · 1.1% of ranked | $100,000 |
| 1 contribution · 1.1% of ranked | $100,000 |
| 2 contributions · 1.1% of ranked | $100,000 |
A further $5,008 came from donors whose answer names no occupation (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 ($39,431) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Total itemized disbursements $50,860
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 33 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 1 payment · 0.2% of all spending | $20,000 |
| 25 payments · <0.1% of all spending | $5,840 |
| 1 payment · <0.1% of all spending | $5,000 |
| 1 payment · <0.1% of all spending | $5,000 |
| 1 payment · <0.1% of all spending | $3,500 |
| 1 payment · <0.1% of all spending | $3,270 |
| 1 payment · <0.1% of all spending | $3,250 |
| 1 payment · <0.1% of all spending | $2,500 |
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.