Campaign-finance signals

Neutral "worth a look" observations computed from disclosed FEC filings for political committees and 2026 candidates. This is a documented registry, not a leaderboard or an accusation — a signal is not evidence of wrongdoing, and each one shows its caveats and links its source.

Every figure here is public FEC data. Many patterns shown are entirely legal (self-funding, leadership-PAC spending) — the tag on each signal says whether it's context, worth a look, or (for future signals) reportable if unexplained. The FEC frequently declines to act, so a signal existing is never a finding.

Signals are ratio metrics on disclosed committee/candidate totals: a PAC's share of spending that reaches candidates, a leadership PAC's contribution share, and a candidate's self-funding share. Itemized-transaction signals (straw-donor clustering, vendor self-dealing) require deeper FEC data and are coming. Learn more →

Sort

114 signals of this kind.

EMILYS LIST Context

Direct-contribution share · $39,714,235

Of $39,714,235 spent in 2026, 2% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
DEMOCRATIC ACTION Context

Direct-contribution share · $17,961,941

Of $17,961,941 spent in 2026, 0.9% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
END CITIZENS UNITED Context

Direct-contribution share · $18,872,247

Of $18,872,247 spent in 2026, 3% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
FIGHT FOR THE PEOPLE PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $18,290,443

Of $18,290,443 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
D.R.I.V.E. - DEM, REP, IND VOTER ED (THE PAC OF THE INT'L BRHD OF TEAMSTERS) Context

Direct-contribution share · $7,082,569

Of $7,082,569 spent in 2026, 14.7% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
WIN THE ERA PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $8,369,607

Of $8,369,607 spent in 2026, 3% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
VOICE OF TEACHERS FOR EDUC/CMTE ON POL EDUC OF NY STATE UNTD TEACHERS (VOTE/COPE) OF NYSUT Context

Direct-contribution share · $8,827,655

Of $8,827,655 spent in 2026, 0.1% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $10,700,291

Of $10,700,291 spent in 2026, 1.4% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
1199 SEIU UNITED HEALTHCARE WORKERS EAST FEDERAL POLITICAL ACTION FUND Context

Direct-contribution share · $10,625,002

Of $10,625,002 spent in 2026, 0.2% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
UAW - V - CAP (UAW VOLUNTARY COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM) 'INT'L UNION UNITED AUTOMOBILE AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA UAW Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,821,962

Of $3,821,962 spent in 2026, 12% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS & JOINERS OF AMERICA EASTERN ATLANTIC STATES REGIONAL COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE Context

Direct-contribution share · $8,814,265

Of $8,814,265 spent in 2026, 6% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $8,323,951

Of $8,323,951 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
SEAL PAC SUPPORTING ELECTING AMERICAN LEADERS PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $7,637,974

Of $7,637,974 spent in 2026, 12.1% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
DUNN'S DEMOCRACY DEFENDERS Context

Direct-contribution share · $6,028,665

Of $6,028,665 spent in 2024, 4.9% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
LOCAL 32BJ SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION AMERICAN DREAM POLITICAL ACTION FUND Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,186,203

Of $2,186,203 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
VOTE SAVE AMERICA Context

Direct-contribution share · $5,365,700

Of $5,365,700 spent in 2026, 1.9% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
NJ STATE LABORERS PAC/ LABORERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA (LIUNA) PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $5,316,691

Of $5,316,691 spent in 2026, 0.3% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE/FEDERAL - CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS Context

Direct-contribution share · $5,067,851

Of $5,067,851 spent in 2026, 0.3% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
LET AMERICA VOTE PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $4,979,140

Of $4,979,140 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
ELECT DIVERSE DEMOCRATS PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $4,973,592

Of $4,973,592 spent in 2024, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL 98 COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL EDUCATION Context

Direct-contribution share · $4,652,863

Of $4,652,863 spent in 2026, 3.4% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
SAM BROWN PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $4,406,286

Of $4,406,286 spent in 2022, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
CAMPAIGN FOR DEMOCRACY PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,380,873

Of $3,380,873 spent in 2026, 0.1% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL OF THE METRO AREA OF PHILADELPHIA AND VICINITY PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,989,798

Of $3,989,798 spent in 2026, 3.8% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
DIRECT SUPPLY, INC. PARTNERS PAC (DSI PARTNERS PAC) Context

Direct-contribution share · $4,248,271

Of $4,248,271 spent in 2026, 9.7% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
AMERICAN POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,707,630

Of $2,707,630 spent in 2026, 2.1% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
DEMOCRACY FOR AMERICA Context

Direct-contribution share · $4,014,109

Of $4,014,109 spent in 2022, 1% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
TEAPARTYEXPRESS.ORG Context

Direct-contribution share · $4,010,028

Of $4,010,028 spent in 2022, 2.6% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
KRISTI PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,091,417

Of $3,091,417 spent in 2024, 3.5% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
MASON TENDERS DISTRICT COUNCIL OF GREATER NEW YORK & LI PAC - FEDERAL Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,614,614

Of $3,614,614 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
HUCK PAC FOR AMERICA Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,660,380

Of $3,660,380 spent in 2026, 4% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
GATORPAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,246,679

Of $3,246,679 spent in 2024, 7.8% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
PROGRESSIVE CHANGE CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,617,050

Of $3,617,050 spent in 2026, 0.1% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
MOMS FED UP Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,103,421

Of $3,103,421 spent in 2026, 14.3% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
NEW YORK STATE LABORERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,899,309

Of $2,899,309 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
UNRIGGED PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,071,376

Of $3,071,376 spent in 2026, 0.1% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
HOLD THE LINE Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,170,328

Of $3,170,328 spent in 2026, 6% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
BLUEWAVEAMERICA Context

Direct-contribution share · $3,110,083

Of $3,110,083 spent in 2026, 3.9% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC REDISTRICTING PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,870,807

Of $2,870,807 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
BLUE VICTORY FUND PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,148,539

Of $2,148,539 spent in 2024, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
DEMOCRATS WIN FUND Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,375,860

Of $2,375,860 spent in 2026, 14.6% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
NEXT GENERATION PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $1,818,642

Of $1,818,642 spent in 2026, 0.7% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
PACE OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION - LOCAL, STATE, FEDERAL CANDIDATES Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,595,137

Of $2,595,137 spent in 2026, 7% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
BE A HERO PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,537,098

Of $2,537,098 spent in 2022, 0.5% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
DEMOCRATS DEFENDING DEMOCRACY Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,505,774

Of $2,505,774 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
JUSTICE PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $1,806,800

Of $1,806,800 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
PLUMBERS UNION LOCAL 690 POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,235,016

Of $2,235,016 spent in 2024, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
RANGER PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,315,803

Of $2,315,803 spent in 2026, 4.8% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
DRAGON PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,135,423

Of $2,135,423 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
MIDWEST VALUES PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,174,659

Of $2,174,659 spent in 2026, 7.5% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
ELECT DIVERSE DEMOCRATS 2026 Context

Direct-contribution share · $523,347

Of $523,347 spent in 2026, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
STOP PROJECT 2025 Context

Direct-contribution share · $1,531,496

Of $1,531,496 spent in 2026, 10.8% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
COURAGEOUS LEADERS Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,018,801

Of $2,018,801 spent in 2024, 6.6% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
FREEDOM'S DEFENSE FUND Context

Direct-contribution share · $2,003,420

Of $2,003,420 spent in 2022, 9.5% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
POLITICAL EDUCATION PATTERNS POLITICAL ARM INTL UNION OPERATING ENG LOCAL 18 Context

Direct-contribution share · $1,553,480

Of $1,553,480 spent in 2022, 9.8% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
DEFEAT REPUBLICANS PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $1,908,171

Of $1,908,171 spent in 2022, 5.6% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
IUOE OPERATING ENGINEERS Context

Direct-contribution share · $1,774,170

Of $1,774,170 spent in 2022, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
THE GOOD LAND COMMITTEE, INC. Context

Direct-contribution share · $1,835,267

Of $1,835,267 spent in 2022, 0% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
DEMOCRATIC TURNOUT PROJECT PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $1,666,808

Of $1,666,808 spent in 2026, 1.8% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.
ASPIRE PAC Context

Direct-contribution share · $1,773,329

Of $1,773,329 spent in 2026, 7.3% went directly to candidates or independent expenditures. Context, not a concern — the rest can be bundling, operations, or fundraising, which topline totals don't separate. The scam-PAC screen needs itemized Schedule B spending (being ingested).

A low direct-contribution share is common and legitimate — PACs also bundle contributions, run independent expenditures, and carry overhead, none of which show in this figure. Separating those (the scam-PAC screen) needs itemized Schedule B spending, which is being ingested. Not a finding.

See also the member-conflict registry at /conflicts, PACs & committees, and outside spending.