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 › Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) › 2025–2026
Super PAC (independent expenditure-only)Washington, District of ColumbiaActive
Connected organization: Defending Our Values PAC
FEC filings through Sep 30, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C00930503 · files quarterly
“Public First Action is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to educating Americans on key AI issues and advancing an AI policy agenda in Washington D.C. and across the country that prioritizes the public interest.
Public First Action stands as a counterforce that will defend the public interest against those who aim to buy their way out of sensible rule-making.”
Public First, on its own site, publicfirstaction.us
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.
3 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.
Artificial intelligence is rapidly reshaping how we work, communicate, and protect our national security.
While AI has the potential to deliver real benefits, it also poses serious risks if deployed without accountability, transparency, or public oversight.
Public First Action advocates for AI policies that put people first—protecting families and workers, preserving democratic accountability, and ensuring the United States remains secure and competitive in a changing world.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · publicfirstaction.us/issues
Although artificial intelligence has the potential to improve lives in many ways, it poses real risks to jobs, families, national security, and public safety.
Effective AI governance requires proactive safety standards, transparency and accountability mechanisms, and protections for whistleblowers alerting the public and policymakers to dangerous activities.
We must ensure that risks are identified and addressed before harm occurs, while holding AI developers accountable for the real-world impacts of their systems.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · publicfirstaction.us/issues
To maintain our edge in AI development and to mitigate national security risks, the federal government should restrict the export of advanced chips to countries of concern like China.
Stricter export controls should include restrictions on selling our adversaries more powerful chips than what they can produce domestically, location verification mechanisms on exported advanced chips, increased funding for anti-smuggling enforcement, and significant penalties for chip diversion.
73% of Americans think AI companies should be liable for harms caused by their technology.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · publicfirstaction.us/issues
States are often best positioned to respond quickly to emerging harms. Federal standards shouldn't preempt stronger state protections.
Competition between states drives innovation in finding effective policies to protect the public from AI harms.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · publicfirstaction.us/issues
Congress has rejected proposals that would block states from regulating artificial intelligence.
Preempting state AI laws without a strong federal standard would mean that states can’t protect families from harmful AI products.
AI already poses significant threats to economic stability, privacy, children, national security, and public safety.
- There have been numerous cases of psychosis and teen suicide linked to chatbot use.
- AI chatbots have allowed users to create child sexual abuse material.
- AI can be used to create images and videos indistinguishable from reality.
- These, and even more severe, risks and dangers are only growing as AI becomes more capable and widely deployed.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · publicfirstaction.us/issues
Artificial intelligence has the potential to reshape the global balance of power.
The nation that leads in AI will have decisive advantages in economic competitiveness, military capability, and technological innovation.
America leads for now, but maintaining that lead depends on our control of the powerful computer chips that make advanced AI possible.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · publicfirstaction.us/issues
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 | 2 | $4.3M · 100% |
| All recipients | 2 | $4.3M |
No recipient here is matched to a candidate with a state on record.
Bars drawn to $4M, 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.
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) · Connected to PUBLIC FIRST · 8 payments | $4M |
| Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) · Connected to JOBS AND DEMOCRACY PAC · 1 payment | $300K |
$4.3M across 2 recipient committees, or 98% 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.
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 9 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 9 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $3.9M. FEC contributor lists are public records and cannot be used for commercial solicitation.
Each as the committee named it on this line.
Total reported receipts $4,910,605
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 Sep 30, 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 |
|---|---|
| 7 contributions · 93% | $3,654,900 |
| 2 contributions · 6.5% | $255,000 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 6 contributions · 81% of ranked | $3,154,900 |
| 1 contribution · 13% of ranked | $500,000 |
| 1 contribution · 6.4% of ranked | $250,000 |
Total reported disbursements $4,432,043
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 Sep 30, 2026.
$4.4M spent from Jan 2026 to Sep 2026. Most in one report: $3.4M, Apr 1 – Jun 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.
No lobbying disclosures matched
Public First is registered with the Federal Election Commission as a Super PAC (independent expenditure-only). Its FEC record names Defending Our Values PAC 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.
Public First is matched to organization records using the FEC committee identity, structured identifiers, and corroborated organization data.
| 1 contribution · 0.1% of ranked |
| $5,000 |
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 ($555) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 5 contributions · 55% of ranked | $2,154,900 |
| 1 contribution · 26% of ranked | $1,000,000 |
| 1 contribution · 13% of ranked | $500,000 |
| 1 contribution · 6.4% of ranked | $250,000 |
| 1 contribution · 0.1% of ranked | $5,000 |
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 ($555) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Total itemized disbursements $4,416,701
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 Sep 30, 2026.
All 23 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
1 payment was reported as a lump sum, such as a card or payroll bill, with the detail filed underneath as memo entries. Those entries, $263 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 |
|---|---|
| 8 payments · 91% of all spending | $4,040,000 |
| 1 payment · 6.8% of all spending | $300,000 |
| 2 payments · 1% of all spending | $45,000 |
| 4 payments · 0.5% of all spending | $20,000 |
| 1 payment · 0.2% of all spending | $9,000 |
| 1 payment · <0.1% of all spending | $1,970 |
| 3 payments · <0.1% of all spending | $403 |
| 1 payment · <0.1% of all spending | $263 |
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.