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 (nonqualified) › 2025–2026
FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C00885491 · files quarterly
4 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 the premier anti-election sabotage coordinated PAC, working side by side with state parties and grassroots organizations to protect free and fair elections and strengthen the institutions that sustain American democracy.
By closing critical gaps in the pro-democracy landscape, we have proven cycle after cycle to be an essential part of ensuring our electoral system remains secure, resilient, and accountable.
Our focus is expanding voter protection efforts and building a durable defense against election interference by ensuring the folks on the ground have the resources they need in a fast-changing political environment.
This work goes beyond any single election.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · democracydefenderspac.org
Heading as listed on democracydefenderspac.org ↗ (opens democracydefenderspac.org at this heading)
After losing the 2020 election by more than seven million votes, Donald Trump and his allies launched an unprecedented effort to overturn the results – filing more than 60 baseless legal challenges and pressuring officials to subvert the will of the voters.
“The ultimate rulers of our democracy are not a President and senators and congressmen and government officials, but the voters of this country.”
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · democracydefenderspac.org/the-threat
Our work is grounded in results – and driven by what it will take to win the fights ahead.
Across the country, we have helped secure decisive victories in high-stakes races that protect the integrity of our elections and the rule of law.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · democracydefenderspac.org/the-path-forward
Looking ahead to 2026, the challenge is clear: the volume of critical races across key states will determine the future of our elections, and the need for strategic coordination and targeted investment has never been greater.
We are focused on identifying and supporting candidates and campaigns in priority states — including states like Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — that are best positioned to defend the rule of law, protect access to the ballot, and strengthen democratic institutions.
That means engaging early, scaling resources where they are most needed, and ensuring that no consequential race is left behind simply because it lacks national attention.
The path forward will require vigilance, precision, and sustained commitment.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · democracydefenderspac.org/the-path-forward
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.
No candidate-directed contributions or explicitly supportive independent expenditures were returned.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Other PACs and committees | 1 | $3K · 100% |
| All recipients | 1 | $3K |
No recipient here is matched to a candidate with a state on record.
Bars drawn to $3K, the largest gift total here. 2025–2026 filings.
Nothing loaded
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 |
|---|---|
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · Connected to DEMOCRACY PAC II · 1 payment | $1M |
$1M 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 |
|---|---|
| PAC (nonqualified) · 1 payment | $3K |
$3K across 1 recipient committee, or <0.1% 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.
The 14 largest sources are listed. Each as the committee named it on this line, $3.4M from 3 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 $4,260,299
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 contributions · 67% | $452,500 |
| 5 contributions · 22% | $151,600 |
| 2 contributions · 3.8% | $25,919 |
| 2 contributions · 3.7% | $25,000 |
| 1 contribution · 2.2% | $15,000 |
| 3 contributions · 0.3% | $1,750 |
| 1 contribution · 0.1% | $1,000 |
Total reported disbursements $3,147,074
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.
Total itemized disbursements $3,912
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.
$3.1M spent from Jan 2025 to Oct 2026. Most in one report: $944.2K, Jul 1 – Sep 30, 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.
Besides giving through its PAC, Democracy Defenders Action 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.
Each firm reports what this client paid it.
Matched by name: these reports are filed for “DEMOCRACY DEFENDERS ACTION”, found by searching “DEMOCRACY DEFENDERS”. 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.
Democracy Defenders PAC is registered with the Federal Election Commission as a Hybrid PAC (nonqualified). 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.
Democracy Defenders PAC is matched to organization records using the FEC committee identity, structured identifiers, and corroborated organization data.
LittleSis data is shared under CC BY-SA 4.0.
| $700 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 1 contribution · 46% of ranked | $300,000 |
| Written instead of an employer · 24 contributions · 26% of ranked | $167,550 |
| 1 contribution · 15% of ranked | $100,000 |
| Written instead of an employer · 5 contributions · 8.3% of ranked | $54,250 |
| 1 contribution · 2.3% of ranked | $15,000 |
| 1 contribution · 1.9% of ranked | $12,500 |
| 2 contributions · 0.2% of ranked | $1,100 |
| 20 contributions · <0.1% of ranked | $500 |
A further $23,419 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 ($1,610) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 1 contribution · 46% of ranked | $300,000 |
| Written instead of an occupation · 23 contributions · 24% of ranked | $155,050 |
| 1 contribution · 15% of ranked | $100,000 |
| 1 contribution · 7.7% of ranked | $50,000 |
| 1 contribution · 2.3% of ranked | $15,000 |
| 3 contributions · 2.1% of ranked | $13,600 |
| Written instead of an occupation · 1 contribution · 1.9% of ranked | $12,500 |
| 1 contribution · 0.4% of ranked | $2,500 |
A further $23,419 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 ($1,610) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
All 11 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 1 payment · <0.1% of all spending | $3,000 |
| 9 payments · <0.1% of all spending | $562 |
| 1 payment · <0.1% of all spending | $350 |
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.