Dan Crenshaw
Republican candidate · 2022 general election · Texas
Dan Crenshaw
Republican
Races
- U.S. U.S. House District 2 · challenger
Campaign finance
FEC data through Dec 31, 2022. Covering the 2022 two-year cycle only.
The 2022 cycle at a glance
Where the money came from
These categories divide total receipts of $15,916,739 exactly once, so they add back up to the reported total.
| Source | Amount | Share of receipts |
|---|---|---|
| Individual contributions | $13,477,279 | 84.7% |
| PAC and other committee contributions | $894,816 | 5.6% |
| Party committee contributions | $0 | 0.0% |
| Candidate self-funding | $0 | 0.0% |
| Loans | $0 | 0.0% |
| Other receipts, including transfers | $1,544,643 | 9.7% |
| Total receipts | $15,916,739 | 100% |
Financial position
Cash, debt, refunds, loans, and transfers as reported through Dec 31, 2022 for the 2022 cycle. These are factual reported values, not a judgement about whether a campaign is healthy, viable, or strong. Independent expenditures are never added to or subtracted from any of them: that money was never the campaign's.
| Measure | Amount |
|---|---|
| Cash on hand at coverage end | $1,137,444 |
| Debts and obligations owed by the committee | $0 |
| Debts and obligations owed to the committee | Not reported |
| Contributions refunded to individuals | $345,291 |
| Contributions refunded to committees | $3,740 |
| Transfers received from other authorized committeesAlready raised money moving between the candidate's own committees, not new fundraising. | $1,320,693 |
| Transfers made to other authorized committees | $100,000 |
| Repayments of candidate loans | $0 |
| Repayments of other loans | $0 |
Calculated from the reported values
Each row below is arithmetic MyRepTracker performed on the values above. Where the FEC published the figure itself, the row says so and no calculation was made.
| Measure | Amount | How it was produced |
|---|---|---|
| Contributions net of refunds | $14,023,064 | Calculated as individual + committee + party + candidate contributions, minus contributions refunded to individuals and committees. |
| Operating expenditures net of offsets | Not reported | An input this calculation needs is not published by the source behind this record. |
| Outstanding candidate loans | $0 | Calculated as loans received from the candidate minus repayments of those loans. |
| Other outstanding loans | $0 | Calculated as other loans received minus repayments of those loans. |
| Total contributions refunded | $349,031 | Calculated as refunds to individuals plus refunds to committees. |
Change since the previous filing
Both columns come from committee C00660795, so the two periods are comparable. A change is the difference between what 30G 2022 reported and what YE 2022 reported, and the direction is stated in words rather than shown only as a sign. 30G 2022 reported through Nov 28, 2022 and YE 2022 through Dec 31, 2022.
| Measure | 30G 2022Reported through Nov 28, 2022 | YE 2022Reported through Dec 31, 2022 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cash on hand at period end | $1,783,847 | $1,137,444 | Down $646,403 |
| Debts owed by the committee | $0 | $0 | No change |
| Contribution refunds in the period | $9,315 | $2,425 | Down $6,890 |
Cash compared with one period's spending
Cash on hand of $1,137,444 set beside the $681,355 this campaign spent during YE 2022, through Dec 31, 2022, which is 1.7 times that period's spending. This is a ratio between two reported numbers over one named period. It is not a forecast of how long the money will last, and campaigns do not spend evenly across a cycle.
Outside spending
Independent expenditures are spending by other organizations that is not coordinated with the campaign. This money was never received or controlled by Dan Crenshaw. Supporting and opposing spending are kept apart rather than combined into one number, and neither is added to campaign receipts.
Spent supporting
Spent opposing
What the money was spent on
These categories divide $15,569,169 of itemized spending across 4,821 transactions, through Dec 31, 2022. That subtotal covers the FEC's published operating-expenditure records, which do not include transfers, loan repayments, refunds, or contributions the campaign made, and is 93.6% of the $16,632,010 in total disbursements reported for the 2022 cycle. Every share below is a share of that subtotal and never of total spending. Purposes were classified under taxonomy spend-1.3.
The difference between that subtotal and total disbursements is spending reported without itemization, which cannot be categorized.
| Purpose | Amount | % Share | Transactions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Administration, salary, and overhead | $13,668,612 | 87.8% | 4,010 |
| Events | $680,881 | 4.4% | 201 |
| Advertising and media | $455,839 | 2.9% | 256 |
| Fundraising and solicitation | $236,978 | 1.5% | 19 |
| Travel | $206,723 | 1.3% | 259 |
| Technology and digital services | $167,995 | 1.1% | 15 |
| Consulting, type not specified | $83,295 | 0.5% | 8 |
| Unclassified filing descriptions Spending whose reported purpose could not be placed in the taxonomy. It is counted, not guessed at. | $68,846 | 0.4% | 53 |
| Classified | $15,500,323 | 99.6% | |
| Unclassified filing descriptions | $68,846 | 0.4% | |
| Itemized spending categorized here | $15,569,169 | 100% | 4,821 |
Political committees that contributed directly
Money received by the authorized campaign committee from PACs and other political committees. This is not outside spending.
This total will usually differ from the PAC figure in the summary above. The summary is what the campaign reported receiving in total; this ranking adds up the individual contributions that were itemized, which is a different record made at a different time. Neither is a correction of the other, and the gap is not an error in either one.
Itemized rows as published by the FEC on Sep 6, 2026. The summary figures above come from the candidate's own reports through the coverage date.
| Rank | Committee | Amount | Share | Transactions | Last activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE C00083857 | $15,000 | 1.6% | 4 | Mar 25, 2022 |
| 2 | CMR POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE C00469429 | $12,500 | 1.3% | 5 | Jun 30, 2022 |
| 3 | AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION PAC (BANKPAC) C00004275 | $10,000 | 1.1% | 3 | Oct 6, 2022 |
| 4 | UBS AMERICAS INC. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (UBS PAC) C00012245 | $10,000 | 1.1% | 2 | Aug 3, 2022 |
| 5 | HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE C00096156 | $10,000 | 1.1% | 3 | Jun 28, 2022 |
Organizations spending independently
Supporting Dan Crenshaw
Itemized rows as published by the FEC on Sep 6, 2026. The summary figures above come from the candidate's own reports through the coverage date.
| Rank | Committee | Amount | Share | Transactions | Last activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CLEARPATH ACTION FUND, INC. C00608943 | $50,000 | 100.0% | 2 | Sep 14, 2022 |
Opposing Dan Crenshaw
Itemized rows as published by the FEC on Sep 6, 2026. The summary figures above come from the candidate's own reports through the coverage date.
| Rank | Committee | Amount | Share | Transactions | Last activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | TEXANS FOR TRUE CONSERVATIVES C00739011 | $935 | 100.0% | 1 | Feb 2, 2022 |
What that outside spending purchased
Each independent expenditure carries a short description the spending committee wrote, and these categories are those descriptions sorted under taxonomy outside-1.0. Spending supporting Dan Crenshaw and spending opposing them are broken down separately and never combined, and every share below is a share of that one direction's total.
The largest category is usually "Advertising, medium not specified". That is not a leftover: it is spending the committee described only as a media buy or as advertising, without saying whether it aired on television, ran online, or arrived in the mail. MyRepTracker reports what was filed rather than assigning it a medium.
Supporting Dan Crenshaw
| Purpose | Amount | % Share | Transactions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct mail | $30,000 | 60.0% | 1 |
| Digital and online advertising | $20,000 | 40.0% | 1 |
| Classified | $50,000 | 100.0% | |
| Unclassified filing descriptions | $0 | 0.0% | |
| Total independent spending | $50,000 | 100% | 2 |
Opposing Dan Crenshaw
| Purpose | Amount | % Share | Transactions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct mail | $935 | 100.0% | 1 |
| Classified | $935 | 100.0% | |
| Unclassified filing descriptions | $0 | 0.0% | |
| Total independent spending | $935 | 100% | 1 |
Fundraising channels
Some money arrives through a committee that raised or collected it rather than from a committee that decided to give it. Those committees are listed here instead of among the political committees that contributed, because calling a payment processor or a shared fundraising account a donor would say something the filings do not. None of this is added to, or subtracted from, any total above.
Joint fundraising committees
A joint fundraising committee raises money for several campaigns at once and passes each participant its share. The amounts below are what each committee reported transferring to this campaign. The underlying contributions were made by individuals and committees to the joint effort, so a transfer is jointly raised money arriving, not a committee funding Dan Crenshaw.
Itemized rows as published by the FEC on Sep 6, 2026. The summary figures above come from the candidate's own reports through the coverage date.
| Rank | Committee | Amount | Share | Transactions | Last activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | THE GUARDIAN FUND C00493221 | $2,000 | 100.0% | 2 | Nov 4, 2021 |
Who the committees behind this money were
Every committee here is placed by the registration it filed with the FEC for the 2022 cycle: its designation, its committee type, and the organizational form it reported. That is the FEC's own record and involves no judgement by MyRepTracker, so this covers every itemized dollar. A committee's registration can change between cycles, and each cycle is judged by its own.
Contributed to Dan Crenshaw
Committees itemized $952,029 in contributions to this campaign.
| Kind of committee | Amount | % Share | Committees | Transactions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corporate PACs | $535,530 | 56.3% | 157 | 269 |
| Trade association PACs | $201,500 | 21.2% | 71 | 103 |
| Membership organization PACs | $72,065 | 7.6% | 21 | 41 |
| Non-connected committees | $70,034 | 7.4% | 30 | 39 |
| Leadership PACs | $35,900 | 3.8% | 8 | 13 |
| Corporations without capital stock | $19,000 | 2.0% | 4 | 6 |
| Cooperative PACs | $9,000 | 0.9% | 5 | 5 |
| Labor union PACs | $6,000 | 0.6% | 3 | 3 |
| Other candidates' committees | $3,000 | 0.3% | 2 | 2 |
| Itemized total for this direction | $952,029 |
Spent supporting Dan Crenshaw
Committees itemized $50,000 in independent spending supporting Dan Crenshaw.
| Kind of committee | Amount | % Share | Committees | Transactions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-connected committees | $50,000 | 100.0% | 1 | 2 |
| Itemized total for this direction | $50,000 |
Spent opposing Dan Crenshaw
Committees itemized $935 in independent spending opposing Dan Crenshaw.
| Kind of committee | Amount | % Share | Committees | Transactions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-connected committees | $935 | 100.0% | 1 | 1 |
| Itemized total for this direction | $935 |
What interests those committees advance
The FEC publishes no industry or interest field, so unlike the section above this one is a claim MyRepTracker makes. A committee is placed here only when there is a document behind the claim that a reader can open: its own statement of organization, its own published mission statement, or a named third party. Every assignment carries that document on the committee's own page. A committee's name is never evidence of anything.
Categorized is not the same as reviewed. Most of these sectors were assigned by machine from the committee's own filing rather than read by a person. Each committee's own page says which of the two its assignment is, and names the document behind it either way.
Coverage is partial on purpose, and the part that is not covered is shown at full size rather than left out. Leadership PACs, party committees, and other candidates' committees are excluded outright: their giving is an officeholder's or a party's decision, so no interest label describes it. Categories are taxonomy interest-1.7.
Contributed to Dan Crenshaw
Committees itemized $952,029 in contributions to this campaign. $38,900 of that came from leadership PACs, party committees, and other candidates' committees, which are not interest groups. Of the remaining $913,129, committees categorized as advancing an interest account for $687,795 and committees not yet categorized account for $225,334.
| Interest | Amount | % Share | Committees | Transactions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oil and gas Energy and natural resources | $129,500 | 14.2% | 28 | 54 |
| Pharmaceuticals Health | $78,000 | 8.5% | 28 | 46 |
| Telecommunications Communications and technology | $49,000 | 5.4% | 8 | 21 |
| Physicians and medical specialties Health | $48,050 | 5.3% | 18 | 30 |
| Insurance Finance, insurance, and real estate | $45,500 | 5.0% | 15 | 20 |
| Construction Construction | $34,000 | 3.7% | 8 | 14 |
| Electric utilities Energy and natural resources | $34,000 | 3.7% | 12 | 20 |
| Real estate Finance, insurance, and real estate | $29,500 | 3.2% | 6 | 10 |
| Technology Communications and technology | $27,730 | 3.0% | 10 | 18 |
| Health insurance Health | $26,500 | 2.9% | 9 | 15 |
| Agribusiness Agriculture | $26,115 | 2.9% | 12 | 15 |
| Automotive Transportation | $25,500 | 2.8% | 7 | 12 |
| Food and beverage Agriculture | $22,500 | 2.5% | 5 | 11 |
| Defense Defense | $20,000 | 2.2% | 5 | 10 |
| Commercial banking Finance, insurance, and real estate | $18,500 | 2.0% | 5 | 10 |
| Hospitals and nursing homes Health | $14,500 | 1.6% | 4 | 6 |
| Media and entertainment Communications and technology | $14,500 | 1.6% | 6 | 7 |
| Securities and investment Finance, insurance, and real estate | $11,000 | 1.2% | 2 | 3 |
| Air transport Transportation | $9,500 | 1.0% | 3 | 4 |
| Pro-Israel Ideological and single-issue | $7,900 | 0.9% | 1 | 3 |
| Credit unions Finance, insurance, and real estate | $5,000 | 0.5% | 1 | 2 |
| Transportation unions Labor | $3,500 | 0.4% | 2 | 2 |
| Nurses and nursing specialties Health | $2,500 | 0.3% | 1 | 1 |
| Lawyers and law firms Professional services | $2,000 | 0.2% | 1 | 2 |
| Mining Energy and natural resources | $2,000 | 0.2% | 1 | 1 |
| Trucking Transportation | $1,000 | 0.1% | 1 | 1 |
| Committees not yet categorized | $225,334 | 24.7% | 92 | 128 |
| Leadership PACs, party committees, and other candidates' committees Not part of the base the shares beside it are taken over. | $38,900 | Not applicable | 10 | 15 |
| Base the shares are taken over | $913,129 | 100% | ||
| Itemized total for this direction | $952,029 |
Spent supporting Dan Crenshaw
Committees itemized $50,000 in independent spending supporting Dan Crenshaw. Of that, committees categorized as advancing an interest account for $0 and committees not yet categorized account for $50,000.
| Interest | Amount | % Share | Committees | Transactions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Committees not yet categorized | $50,000 | 100.0% | 1 | 2 |
| Base the shares are taken over | $50,000 | 100% | ||
| Itemized total for this direction | $50,000 |
Spent opposing Dan Crenshaw
Committees itemized $935 in independent spending opposing Dan Crenshaw. Of that, committees categorized as advancing an interest account for $0 and committees not yet categorized account for $935.
| Interest | Amount | % Share | Committees | Transactions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Committees not yet categorized | $935 | 100.0% | 1 | 1 |
| Base the shares are taken over | $935 | 100% | ||
| Itemized total for this direction | $935 |
Last-minute contributions reported before an election
In the days just before an election, a campaign must tell the FEC within 48 hours about any contribution or loan of $1,000 or more. These notices arrive faster than the regular reporting schedule, and the same money is reported again in the report covering those days. Nothing here is added to receipts: it is a preview of money the ordinary reports will carry, not money beside them.
Reported on notices
Still only provisional
The most recent notice was filed on Nov 5, 2022. A notice stops being the only record of its money once a regular report covers the same days; those are marked reconciled below and the amounts appear in Dan Crenshaw's reported totals through the ordinary schedule.
| Filed | Amount | Entries | Covers | State | Filing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 5, 2022 amendment | $1,000 | 1 | Nov 4 to Nov 4, 2022 | Covered by a regular report | FEC filing ↗ |
| Nov 2, 2022 | $12,613 | 8 | Oct 31 to Nov 1, 2022 | Covered by a regular report | FEC filing ↗ |
| Oct 28, 2022 | $21,100 | 10 | Oct 26 to Oct 27, 2022 | Covered by a regular report | FEC filing ↗ |
| Oct 26, 2022 | $31,622 | 16 | Oct 24 to Oct 25, 2022 | Covered by a regular report | FEC filing ↗ |
| Oct 21, 2022 | $1,000 | 1 | Oct 20 to Oct 20, 2022 | Covered by a regular report | FEC filing ↗ |
| Feb 25, 2022 | $22,400 | 16 | Feb 23 to Feb 24, 2022 | Covered by a regular report | FEC filing ↗ |
| Feb 23, 2022 | $1,500 | 1 | Feb 22 to Feb 22, 2022 | Covered by a regular report | FEC filing ↗ |
| Feb 21, 2022 | $8,400 | 5 | Feb 19 to Feb 19, 2022 | Covered by a regular report | FEC filing ↗ |
| Feb 18, 2022 | $22,600 | 13 | Feb 16 to Feb 18, 2022 | Covered by a regular report | FEC filing ↗ |
| Feb 16, 2022 | $1,000 | 1 | Feb 15 to Feb 15, 2022 | Covered by a regular report | FEC filing ↗ |
The 10 most recent notices of 11 are listed. The amount and count above cover all of them.
Where the individual money was reported from
Contributions from individuals that the campaign itemized, grouped by the state each contributor gave as their address. Contributions of $200 or less in aggregate are not itemized and carry no address, so they are not here at all. These places account for $5,994,663 of the $14,797,972 this campaign reported from individuals and from transfers by its other authorized committees, across 43,764 itemized contributions.
From Texas
From everywhere else
Money from outside Texas is not money from outside the country, and neither figure is evidence that anything unlawful happened. People may contribute to campaigns in states they do not live in, and United States citizens living abroad may contribute at all.
What kind of place it came from
| Kind of place | Amount | Contributions | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| States and the District of ColumbiaContributors who gave an address in one of the fifty states or the District of Columbia. | $5,992,479 | 43,735 | >99.9% |
| United States territoriesPuerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands. | $1,207 | 23 | <0.1% |
| Armed Forces addressesMilitary mailing addresses used by service members stationed away from home. They are real addresses; they are simply not states. | $42 | 2 | <0.1% |
| Not placedContributions the FEC could not attribute to a place. They are reported here and are never assigned to a state or counted in the in-state and out-of-state split. | $935 | 4 | Not counted |
Places, largest first
Top 10 of 55 places shown as bars. Every place is in the table below.
| Place | Amount | Contributions | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas this campaign's state | $1,858,751 | 10,215 | 31.0% |
| California | $497,503 | 4,361 | 8.3% |
| Florida | $443,098 | 3,037 | 7.4% |
| New York | $197,589 | 1,668 | 3.3% |
| Virginia | $187,336 | 1,336 | 3.1% |
| Pennsylvania | $177,163 | 1,576 | 3.0% |
| Illinois | $174,165 | 1,230 | 2.9% |
| Washington | $147,123 | 1,221 | 2.5% |
| Arizona | $131,432 | 1,041 | 2.2% |
| Colorado | $128,792 | 872 | 2.1% |
| Michigan | $116,651 | 1,136 | 1.9% |
| Ohio | $106,338 | 1,043 | 1.8% |
| North Carolina | $104,374 | 939 | 1.7% |
| Georgia | $103,074 | 859 | 1.7% |
| New Jersey | $88,949 | 771 | 1.5% |
| Massachusetts | $87,019 | 787 | 1.5% |
| Tennessee | $81,994 | 639 | 1.4% |
| Maryland | $81,385 | 634 | 1.4% |
| Wisconsin | $78,475 | 662 | 1.3% |
| Indiana | $72,338 | 704 | 1.2% |
| Oregon | $67,886 | 626 | 1.1% |
| Minnesota | $67,687 | 637 | 1.1% |
| Missouri | $63,729 | 501 | 1.1% |
| South Carolina | $59,319 | 650 | 1.0% |
| Kentucky | $57,742 | 368 | 1.0% |
| Nevada | $57,127 | 454 | 1.0% |
| Alabama | $54,827 | 497 | 0.9% |
| Oklahoma | $50,173 | 384 | 0.8% |
| Connecticut | $48,103 | 331 | 0.8% |
| District of Columbia | $45,309 | 103 | 0.8% |
| Idaho | $43,607 | 332 | 0.7% |
| Wyoming | $43,257 | 195 | 0.7% |
| Kansas | $42,714 | 394 | 0.7% |
| Utah | $41,443 | 235 | 0.7% |
| Louisiana | $41,129 | 317 | 0.7% |
| Mississippi | $38,938 | 231 | 0.6% |
| Arkansas | $33,427 | 325 | 0.6% |
| Iowa | $33,152 | 364 | 0.6% |
| Nebraska | $33,064 | 296 | 0.6% |
| New Hampshire | $29,641 | 206 | 0.5% |
| New Mexico | $25,162 | 249 | 0.4% |
| Montana | $23,087 | 137 | 0.4% |
| Hawaii | $20,360 | 172 | 0.3% |
| Alaska | $18,720 | 130 | 0.3% |
| Maine | $17,585 | 162 | 0.3% |
| Delaware | $17,197 | 129 | 0.3% |
| West Virginia | $15,666 | 143 | 0.3% |
| Vermont | $12,182 | 111 | 0.2% |
| South Dakota | $11,195 | 162 | 0.2% |
| North Dakota | $7,808 | 71 | 0.1% |
| Rhode Island | $7,694 | 92 | 0.1% |
| Not reported not placed | $935 | 4 | Not counted |
| Puerto Rico | $607 | 21 | <0.1% |
| Virgin Islands | $600 | 2 | <0.1% |
| Armed Forces Pacific | $42 | 2 | <0.1% |
| Reported with a place | $5,993,728 | 43,760 | 100% |
Contributions are transactions, not people: one contributor giving every month is counted once for each contribution. No contributor's name, address, employer, or occupation is stored or shown anywhere on this site.
- $935 could not be attributed to a place and is left out of the in-state and out-of-state figures rather than assigned to a state.
How this compares
Compared with U.S. House campaigns in Texas, 2022 cycle: 88 campaigns with a complete Federal Election Commission record for the cycle, out of 89 on file. This is a position in that group, not a score, a grade, or a judgement about the campaign.
Total receipts
Everything the authorized campaign committee took in for this cycle, including contributions, loans, and transfers.
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| This campaign | $15,916,739 |
| Lowest in the cohort | $0 |
| 25th percentile | $46,352 |
| Median | $431,837 |
| 75th percentile | $1,846,106 |
| Highest in the cohort | $15,916,739 |
| Campaigns counted | 88 |
87 of the 88 campaigns counted reported less than this one, which puts it at the 99th percentile of the cohort. Campaigns reporting the same value sit at the same position.
Share of receipts from political committees
Direct contributions from PACs and other political committees as a share of total receipts. Campaigns reporting no receipts at all have no share and are left out of this measure.
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| This campaign | 5.6% |
| Lowest in the cohort | 0.0% |
| 25th percentile | 0.0% |
| Median | 7.5% |
| 75th percentile | 29.1% |
| Highest in the cohort | 72.7% |
| Campaigns counted | 86 |
38 of the 86 campaigns counted reported less than this one, which puts it at the 44th percentile of the cohort. Campaigns reporting the same value sit at the same position.
Cash on hand
The balance reported at the end of the coverage period. Campaigns report at different times, so this compares balances as of each campaign's own coverage end.
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| This campaign | $1,137,444 |
| Lowest in the cohort | -$3,213 |
| 25th percentile | $900 |
| Median | $34,210 |
| 75th percentile | $317,164 |
| Highest in the cohort | $5,312,291 |
| Campaigns counted | 88 |
80 of the 88 campaigns counted reported less than this one, which puts it at the 91th percentile of the cohort. Campaigns reporting the same value sit at the same position.
Outside spending supporting
Independent expenditures by other organizations supporting the candidate. This money was never received or controlled by the campaign.
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| This campaign | $50,000 |
| Lowest in the cohort | $0 |
| 25th percentile | $0 |
| Median | $0 |
| 75th percentile | $7 |
| Highest in the cohort | $2,881,111 |
| Campaigns counted | 88 |
71 of the 88 campaigns counted reported less than this one, which puts it at the 81th percentile of the cohort. Campaigns reporting the same value sit at the same position.
Outside spending opposing
Independent expenditures by other organizations opposing the candidate, not coordinated with any campaign.
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| This campaign | $935 |
| Lowest in the cohort | $0 |
| 25th percentile | $0 |
| Median | $0 |
| 75th percentile | $0 |
| Highest in the cohort | $8,485,499 |
| Campaigns counted | 88 |
76 of the 88 campaigns counted reported less than this one, which puts it at the 86th percentile of the cohort. Campaigns reporting the same value sit at the same position.
- 1 of the 89 campaigns on file for this cohort have no complete record for the cycle and are not counted in any figure here.
Every comparison is drawn from one two-year cycle and one office. Only campaigns whose FEC record for that cycle is complete are counted; the rest are reported beside the cohort and are never counted as zero. One authorized committee is counted once however many candidacies report it, so where a candidate's committees are all reported by another FEC record, that record supplies the figures for both. A campaign is never compared with another cycle, with a career total, or with a candidate for a different office.
What these numbers mean
- Receipts are not the same as contributions
- Total receipts include everything the campaign took in, such as contributions, loans, and transfers. Contributions are only the money given by people and committees.
- Direct contributions are not outside spending
- A direct contribution is money received by the campaign's own authorized committee. An independent expenditure is money another organization spent on its own, without coordinating with the campaign. The Federal Election Commission treats these as different activities, and so does this page.
- The organizations named here are political committees
- Direct rankings count what one political committee gave to a campaign; outside-spending rankings count what a committee spent independently. A separate conduit section groups individual contributions only when the campaign's memo record supplies a registered conduit committee's FEC ID. It never attributes donors to employers or interest groups, and it never exposes contributor names. Sites using broader attribution rules may therefore report different organization totals.
- A cycle may be only partly reported
- Filings arrive throughout a two-year cycle. A current cycle shows only what has been filed and processed through the coverage date shown above, so it is not comparable with a finished cycle.
- This view is cycle specific
- It covers the 2022 two-year cycle only.
Source: Federal Election Commission ↗. MyRepTracker ingests FEC records directly and does not add its own influence, risk, or corruption score.