kvlak limn

Money & Accountability · FEC Bulk Data

Who Pays For
Politics

Federal law writes every contribution over $200 into a public ledger, with a name, an employer, and a ZIP code attached. This page reads that ledger: fourteen billion itemized dollars a cycle, climbing every two years, surging every October, and drawn from a donor class small enough to count. Eleven figures follow the money - by state, by trade, by tier, and to the committees where it finally lands.

$9.9B itemized individual $, 2024 58M itemized contributions 14% from small donors, 2024 Curated
Part I The Geography of Giving

Where the money comes from

Every itemized contribution carries the giver's home address, so the money can be mapped to the donor, not the recipient. Read that way, the national campaign wallet is three states deep: California, New York, and Texas together supply more than a third of every itemized dollar.

Fig. 1 · Choropleth
Alabama: $56M itemized (24% to Dem-aligned) Alaska: $13M itemized (53% to Dem-aligned) Arizona: $131M itemized (55% to Dem-aligned) Colorado: $167M itemized (63% to Dem-aligned) Florida: $898M itemized (39% to Dem-aligned) Georgia: $157M itemized (48% to Dem-aligned) Indiana: $87M itemized (44% to Dem-aligned) Kansas: $42M itemized (42% to Dem-aligned) Maine: $25M itemized (75% to Dem-aligned) Massachusetts: $367M itemized (85% to Dem-aligned) Minnesota: $110M itemized (58% to Dem-aligned) New Jersey: $178M itemized (67% to Dem-aligned) North Carolina: $147M itemized (46% to Dem-aligned) North Dakota: $20M itemized (23% to Dem-aligned) Oklahoma: $53M itemized (36% to Dem-aligned) Pennsylvania: $316M itemized (68% to Dem-aligned) South Dakota: $18M itemized (26% to Dem-aligned) Texas: $927M itemized (41% to Dem-aligned) Wyoming: $240M itemized (40% to Dem-aligned) Connecticut: $178M itemized (72% to Dem-aligned) Missouri: $88M itemized (51% to Dem-aligned) West Virginia: $15M itemized (37% to Dem-aligned) Illinois: $557M itemized (69% to Dem-aligned) New Mexico: $42M itemized (73% to Dem-aligned) Arkansas: $114M itemized (23% to Dem-aligned) California: $1.6B itemized (75% to Dem-aligned) Delaware: $17M itemized (78% to Dem-aligned) District of Columbia: $172M itemized (79% to Dem-aligned) Hawaii: $31M itemized (82% to Dem-aligned) Iowa: $36M itemized (51% to Dem-aligned) Kentucky: $49M itemized (51% to Dem-aligned) Maryland: $179M itemized (80% to Dem-aligned) Michigan: $172M itemized (62% to Dem-aligned) Mississippi: $22M itemized (24% to Dem-aligned) Montana: $32M itemized (56% to Dem-aligned) New Hampshire: $33M itemized (75% to Dem-aligned) New York: $966M itemized (74% to Dem-aligned) Ohio: $211M itemized (42% to Dem-aligned) Oregon: $77M itemized (76% to Dem-aligned) Tennessee: $120M itemized (39% to Dem-aligned) Utah: $47M itemized (33% to Dem-aligned) Virginia: $239M itemized (58% to Dem-aligned) Washington: $241M itemized (81% to Dem-aligned) Wisconsin: $124M itemized (60% to Dem-aligned) Nebraska: $56M itemized (39% to Dem-aligned) South Carolina: $69M itemized (33% to Dem-aligned) Idaho: $25M itemized (45% to Dem-aligned) Nevada: $302M itemized (44% to Dem-aligned) Vermont: $17M itemized (89% to Dem-aligned) Louisiana: $57M itemized (33% to Dem-aligned) Rhode Island: $19M itemized (85% to Dem-aligned)
Itemized $ raised, by donor state
  • < $50M
  • $50-150M
  • $150-500M
  • $500M-1.1B
  • > $1.1B
Fig. 1. Itemized individual contributions by the contributor's home state, one two-year cycle. Colored by raw total, so the map partly tracks population - Fig. 2 corrects for it. Every state's exact figure is in the ledger below. 2024 cycle, FEC bulk itemized data.
All 51 rows · state table
StateItemized $SharePer adultTo DemTop sector
California $1.6B 16.1% $52 75% Retired
New York $966M 9.8% $62 74% Retired
Texas $927M 9.4% $42 41% Retired
Florida $898M 9.1% $51 39% Retired
Illinois $557M 5.7% $56 69% Retired
Massachusetts $367M 3.7% $65 85% Retired
Pennsylvania $316M 3.2% $31 68% Retired
Nevada $302M 3.1% $124 44% Health Professionals & Pharma
Washington $241M 2.5% $40 81% Retired
Wyoming $240M 2.4% $542 40% Retired
Virginia $239M 2.4% $35 58% Retired
Ohio $211M 2.1% $23 42% Retired
Maryland $179M 1.8% $37 80% Retired
Connecticut $178M 1.8% $62 72% Retired
New Jersey $178M 1.8% $25 67% Retired
Michigan $172M 1.8% $22 62% Retired
District of Columbia $172M 1.7% $306 79% Retired
Colorado $167M 1.7% $37 63% Retired
Georgia $157M 1.6% $19 48% Retired
North Carolina $147M 1.5% $18 46% Retired
Arizona $131M 1.3% $23 55% Retired
Wisconsin $124M 1.3% $27 60% Retired
Tennessee $120M 1.2% $22 39% Retired
Arkansas $114M 1.2% $49 23% Retired
Minnesota $110M 1.1% $25 58% Retired
Missouri $88M 0.9% $19 51% Retired
Indiana $87M 0.9% $17 44% Retired
Oregon $77M 0.8% $23 76% Retired
South Carolina $69M 0.7% $17 33% Retired
Louisiana $57M 0.6% $16 33% Retired
Alabama $56M 0.6% $14 24% Retired
Nebraska $56M 0.6% $38 39% Retired
Oklahoma $53M 0.5% $17 36% Retired
Kentucky $49M 0.5% $14 51% Retired
Utah $47M 0.5% $19 33% Retired
New Mexico $42M 0.4% $26 73% Retired
Kansas $42M 0.4% $19 42% Retired
Iowa $36M 0.4% $14 51% Retired
New Hampshire $33M 0.3% $29 75% Retired
Montana $32M 0.3% $37 56% Retired
Hawaii $31M 0.3% $28 82% Retired
Maine $25M 0.3% $23 75% Retired
Idaho $25M 0.3% $18 45% Retired
Mississippi $22M 0.2% $10 24% Retired
North Dakota $20M 0.2% $33 23% Retired
Rhode Island $19M 0.2% $22 85% Retired
South Dakota $18M 0.2% $27 26% Retired
Delaware $17M 0.2% $22 78% Retired
Vermont $17M 0.2% $34 89% Retired
West Virginia $15M 0.2% $11 37% Retired
Alaska $13M 0.1% $23 53% Retired

Intensity, not mass

The map rewards population. Divide each state's itemized total by its voting-age adults and a different geography surfaces: Wyoming leads at $542 per adult - ahead of District of Columbia's $306 - while the median state gives $25 and Mississippi gives $10.

Fig. 2 · Dot plot
$0 $150 $300 $450 median $25 Wyoming Wyoming: $542 itemized per adult $542 District of Columbia District of Columbia: $306 itemized per adult $306 Nevada Nevada: $124 itemized per adult $124 Massachusetts Massachusetts: $65 itemized per adult $65 New York New York: $62 itemized per adult $62 Connecticut Connecticut: $62 itemized per adult $62 Illinois Illinois: $56 itemized per adult $56 California California: $52 itemized per adult $52 Florida Florida: $51 itemized per adult $51 Arkansas Arkansas: $49 itemized per adult $49 Texas Texas: $42 itemized per adult $42 Washington Washington: $40 itemized per adult $40 38 states between Mississippi (lowest) Mississippi: $10 itemized per adult $10
Fig. 2. Itemized dollars per voting-age adult, by the donor's home state, one cycle. Top 12 states shown; the per-adult column for all 51 rows is in the state ledger under Fig. 1. Denominator is curated 2020-Census voting-age population. Itemized totals are 2024 FEC bulk data; the per-adult denominator is a curated Census figure.

Intensity vs allegiance

Every state, plotted by how hard its donors give against where the money leans. The heaviest givers cluster blue - Massachusetts, New York, California - but the pattern is intensity, not ideology: Wyoming's donors give harder than the median state and lean 78 percent Republican.

Fig. 3 · Scatter
$-weighted US lean 60% median $25/adult gives hard · leans R gives light · leans R gives light · leans D 20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90% $30$60$90$120 share of itemized $ to Dem-aligned committees itemized $ per adult California: $52 per adult, 75% to Dem-aligned CA New York: $62 per adult, 74% to Dem-aligned NY Texas: $42 per adult, 41% to Dem-aligned TX Florida: $51 per adult, 39% to Dem-aligned FL Illinois: $56 per adult, 69% to Dem-aligned Massachusetts: $65 per adult, 85% to Dem-aligned MA Pennsylvania: $31 per adult, 68% to Dem-aligned Nevada: $124 per adult, 44% to Dem-aligned Washington: $40 per adult, 81% to Dem-aligned WA Wyoming: $542 per adult, 40% to Dem-aligned WY Virginia: $35 per adult, 58% to Dem-aligned VA Ohio: $23 per adult, 42% to Dem-aligned Maryland: $37 per adult, 80% to Dem-aligned MD Connecticut: $62 per adult, 72% to Dem-aligned CT New Jersey: $25 per adult, 67% to Dem-aligned Michigan: $22 per adult, 62% to Dem-aligned Colorado: $37 per adult, 63% to Dem-aligned Georgia: $19 per adult, 48% to Dem-aligned North Carolina: $18 per adult, 46% to Dem-aligned Arizona: $23 per adult, 55% to Dem-aligned Wisconsin: $27 per adult, 60% to Dem-aligned Tennessee: $22 per adult, 39% to Dem-aligned Arkansas: $49 per adult, 23% to Dem-aligned Minnesota: $25 per adult, 58% to Dem-aligned Missouri: $19 per adult, 51% to Dem-aligned Indiana: $17 per adult, 44% to Dem-aligned Oregon: $23 per adult, 76% to Dem-aligned South Carolina: $17 per adult, 33% to Dem-aligned Louisiana: $16 per adult, 33% to Dem-aligned Alabama: $14 per adult, 24% to Dem-aligned Nebraska: $38 per adult, 39% to Dem-aligned Oklahoma: $17 per adult, 36% to Dem-aligned OK Kentucky: $14 per adult, 51% to Dem-aligned Utah: $19 per adult, 33% to Dem-aligned UT New Mexico: $26 per adult, 73% to Dem-aligned Kansas: $19 per adult, 42% to Dem-aligned Iowa: $14 per adult, 51% to Dem-aligned New Hampshire: $29 per adult, 75% to Dem-aligned Montana: $37 per adult, 56% to Dem-aligned Hawaii: $28 per adult, 82% to Dem-aligned Maine: $23 per adult, 75% to Dem-aligned Idaho: $18 per adult, 45% to Dem-aligned Mississippi: $10 per adult, 24% to Dem-aligned MS North Dakota: $33 per adult, 23% to Dem-aligned Rhode Island: $22 per adult, 85% to Dem-aligned South Dakota: $27 per adult, 26% to Dem-aligned Delaware: $22 per adult, 78% to Dem-aligned Vermont: $34 per adult, 89% to Dem-aligned VT West Virginia: $11 per adult, 37% to Dem-aligned Alaska: $23 per adult, 53% to Dem-aligned
Fig. 3. Fifty states; each dot one state, one cycle. The District of Columbia ($306 per adult, 79% to Dem-aligned) is off this chart on both axes and excluded. Crosshairs mark the dollar-weighted national lean and the median state's intensity. Full values for every state are in the ledger under Fig. 1. 2024 cycle, FEC bulk itemized data.
Part II The Trades

Which industries pay

Each donor's employer and occupation, coded to a sector. The single largest bloc in American campaign finance is not an industry at all: it is the retired, $2.87B strong, ahead of finance and real estate and more than every trade below them.

Fig. 4 · Ranked
  1. 01 Retired $2.87B
    D 65% · R 35% 2.3M donors
  2. 02 Finance, Insurance & Real Estate $594M
    D 52% · R 48% 174k donors
  3. 03 Lawyers & Lobbyists $379M
    D 81% · R 19% 179k donors
  4. 04 Health Professionals & Pharma $367M
    D 73% · R 27% 198k donors
  5. 05 Technology & Internet $212M
    D 76% · R 24% 155k donors
  6. 06 Media & Entertainment $123M
    D 92% · R 8% 50k donors
  7. 07 Education $119M
    D 90% · R 10% 141k donors
  8. 08 Energy & Natural Resources $89M
    D 33% · R 67% 37k donors
  9. 09 Retail & Hospitality $73M
    D 49% · R 51% 80k donors
  10. 10 Transportation $30M
    D 43% · R 57% 45k donors
  11. 11 Defense & Aerospace $21M
    D 56% · R 44% 23k donors
  12. 12 Manufacturing & Industry $17M
    D 51% · R 49% 22k donors
  13. 13 Agriculture $16M
    D 35% · R 65% 10k donors

Fig. 4. Itemized dollars by employer-coded sector, one cycle, with each sector's party split (D share of money going to clearly aligned committees) and distinct donor count. Coding is a conservative keyword crosswalk; unmatched donors are uncounted, not guessed. 2024 cycle, FEC bulk itemized data.

The realignment ledger

The same ten sectors, 2016 against 2024. The drift is not symmetric: the professional class - education, media, the bar - keeps moving toward Democrats while energy, agriculture, and manufacturing move the other way. Technology is the exception that proves nothing is permanent: six points back toward Republicans.

Fig. 5 · Slope
2016 2024 50 · even split 66 92 Media & Entertainment Media & Entertainment: 66% to Dem-aligned in 2016, 92% in 2024 (+26 toward D) 70 90 Education Education: 70% to Dem-aligned in 2016, 90% in 2024 (+20 toward D) 64 81 Lawyers & Lobbyists Lawyers & Lobbyists: 64% to Dem-aligned in 2016, 81% in 2024 (+17 toward D) 68 76 Technology & Internet Technology & Internet: 68% to Dem-aligned in 2016, 76% in 2024 (+8 toward D) 55 73 Health Professionals & Pharma Health Professionals & Pharma: 55% to Dem-aligned in 2016, 73% in 2024 (+18 toward D) 52 65 Retired Retired: 52% to Dem-aligned in 2016, 65% in 2024 (+13 toward D) 45 52 Finance, Insurance & Real Estate Finance, Insurance & Real Estate: 45% to Dem-aligned in 2016, 52% in 2024 (+7 toward D) 44 51 Manufacturing & Industry Manufacturing & Industry: 44% to Dem-aligned in 2016, 51% in 2024 (+7 toward D) 36 35 Agriculture Agriculture: 36% to Dem-aligned in 2016, 35% in 2024 (1 pts toward R) 34 33 Energy & Natural Resources Energy & Natural Resources: 34% to Dem-aligned in 2016, 33% in 2024 (1 pts toward R)
moved toward Democrats moved toward Republicans
Fig. 5. Share of each sector's itemized dollars going to Democratic-aligned committees, 2016 cycle vs 2024 cycle; unaligned recipients excluded from the split. Values printed at both ends. The 2024 end is FEC bulk data; the 2016 end is curated.
Part III The Calendar

The October surge

Month by month, the money keeps political time. It idles through the off year, wakes for the primaries, then triples in the final stretch: October 2024 alone booked $1.34B - more than the cycle's first seven months combined.

Fig. 6 · Monthly flow
$0.5B $1.0B $1.5B election Oct '24 · $1.34B '23-24 cycle '19-20 cycle Jan '23Jul '23Jan '24Jul '24 Dec '24
'23-24 cycle '19-20 cycle
Fig. 6. Itemized individual contributions by transaction month, the '23-24 and '19-20 cycles aligned month-for-month. Peak month labeled. Month-by-month figures in the table below. The 2024 series is FEC bulk data; the 2020 series is curated.
Month-by-month table · both cycles
Month of cycle'19-20'23-24
Jan '23 / Jan '19 $125M $77M
Feb '23 / Feb '19 $135M $126M
Mar '23 / Mar '19 $215M $255M
Apr '23 / Apr '19 $170M $159M
May '23 / May '19 $180M $180M
Jun '23 / Jun '19 $260M $348M
Jul '23 / Jul '19 $215M $162M
Aug '23 / Aug '19 $225M $196M
Sep '23 / Sep '19 $305M $294M
Oct '23 / Oct '19 $280M $216M
Nov '23 / Nov '19 $290M $229M
Dec '23 / Dec '19 $500M $360M
Jan '24 / Jan '20 $380M $249M
Feb '24 / Feb '20 $410M $334M
Mar '24 / Mar '20 $620M $515M
Apr '24 / Apr '20 $430M $372M
May '24 / May '20 $470M $591M
Jun '24 / Jun '20 $680M $600M
Jul '24 / Jul '20 $830M $757M
Aug '24 / Aug '20 $960M $906M
Sep '24 / Sep '20 $1290M $1249M
Oct '24 / Oct '20 $1560M $1338M
Nov '24 / Nov '20 $1080M $228M
Dec '24 / Dec '20 $990M $124M

Cycle over cycle

The pot never shrinks for long. Itemized individual money has multiplied 1.6-fold since 2008: presidential years tower over midterms, but each presidential step clears the last, and the small-donor share (strip below) has doubled over the same years.

Fig. 7 · By cycle
2008: $6.1B itemized $6.1B '08 2010: $4.2B itemized $4.2B '10 2012: $7.3B itemized $7.3B '12 2014: $5.0B itemized $5.0B '14 2016: $8.4B itemized $8.4B '16 2018: $8.9B itemized $8.9B '18 2020: $12.6B itemized $12.6B '20 2022: $11.2B itemized $11.2B '22 2024: $9.9B itemized $9.9B '24
Presidential cycle Midterm cycle
Fig. 7. Total itemized individual contributions per two-year cycle, 2008-2024, nominal dollars. Values printed on every column. 2024 is FEC bulk data; earlier cycles curated.
Share from sub-$200 givers
  • 18% '08
  • 20% '10
  • 22% '12
  • 24% '14
  • 30% '16
  • 34% '18
  • 38% '20
  • 33% '22
  • 14% '24

The tilt of the ledger

Follow the dark band along the floor. In 2008, donors giving $100,000 or more supplied 15 cents of every itemized dollar; by 2024 it was 43.4. The ground it took came almost entirely from gifts under $5,000.

Fig. 8 · Stacked share
0%25%50%75%100% 2008: $100,000+ donors supplied 15% of itemized dollars 2008: $5,000 - 99,999 donors supplied 33% of itemized dollars 2008: $1,000 - 4,999 donors supplied 30% of itemized dollars 2008: $200 - 999 donors supplied 22% of itemized dollars 15% 2008 2012: $100,000+ donors supplied 19% of itemized dollars 2012: $5,000 - 99,999 donors supplied 34% of itemized dollars 2012: $1,000 - 4,999 donors supplied 28% of itemized dollars 2012: $200 - 999 donors supplied 19% of itemized dollars 19% 2012 2016: $100,000+ donors supplied 22% of itemized dollars 2016: $5,000 - 99,999 donors supplied 35% of itemized dollars 2016: $1,000 - 4,999 donors supplied 26% of itemized dollars 2016: $200 - 999 donors supplied 17% of itemized dollars 22% 2016 2020: $100,000+ donors supplied 26% of itemized dollars 2020: $5,000 - 99,999 donors supplied 36% of itemized dollars 2020: $1,000 - 4,999 donors supplied 24% of itemized dollars 2020: $200 - 999 donors supplied 14% of itemized dollars 26% 2020 2024: $100,000+ donors supplied 43.4% of itemized dollars 2024: $5,000 - 99,999 donors supplied 27.2% of itemized dollars 2024: $1,000 - 4,999 donors supplied 18.4% of itemized dollars 2024: $200 - 999 donors supplied 11% of itemized dollars 43.4% 2024
$200 - 999$1,000 - 4,999$5,000 - 99,999$100,000+
Fig. 8. Each column is one presidential cycle's itemized dollars, split by the donor's cycle-total giving. Darker means bigger donors; the $100,000+ tier is labeled. All values in the table below. 2024 is FEC bulk data; earlier cycles curated.
All tiers, all cycles · table
Cycle$200 - 999$1,000 - 4,999$5,000 - 99,999$100,000+
2008 22% 30% 33% 15%
2012 19% 28% 34% 19%
2016 17% 26% 35% 22%
2020 14% 24% 36% 26%
2024 11% 18.4% 27.2% 43.4%
Part IV The Donor Class

The few who fund the many

Read the two sides against each other. The top tier - donors giving $100,000+ a cycle - is 8k people, a group that would not fill a college football stadium and 0.2% of itemized donors. They supply 44% of the itemized money.

Fig. 9 · Distribution
Share of donors Cycle total per donor Share of dollars
0.2%
$100,000 and up 8k donors · $4.3B
44.0%
0.6%
$25,000 - $99,999 22k donors · $951M
9.8%
5.6%
$5,000 - $24,999 195k donors · $1.7B
17.7%
27.2%
$1,000 - $4,999 949k donors · $1.8B
18.6%
66.3%
$200 - $999 2.3M donors · $963M
9.9%

Fig. 9. Each row is a donor tier by cycle-total itemized giving; left bar is its share of donors, right bar its share of dollars, both on 0-100% scales. Sub-$200 giving is unitemized - no names are disclosed - and excluded here; it adds roughly $2.5B more per cycle. 2024 cycle, FEC bulk itemized data.

Part V The Destination

Where it lands

Follow the dollar to its destination and less than half now reaches a candidate's own committee. Roughly 22% flows to super PACs - vehicles that may raise without limit and spend without coordinating with any campaign - and the parties themselves take a thinner slice than either.

Fig. 10 · Split
Recipient typeItemized $ShareTo Dem
Traditional PACs $4.6B 47.1% 24%
Candidate committees $2.3B 22.9% 67%
Super PACs $2.2B 22.0% 12%
Party committees $785M 8.0% 58%
Leadership & joint funds $4M 0.0% 0%

Fig. 10. Itemized individual dollars by the recipient committee's FEC type code, one cycle; deeper indigo means a larger share, and every segment's value is in the ledger above. 2024 cycle, FEC bulk itemized data.

The drift since Citizens United

The same dollars, four destinations, one direction. Since 2010 - the first cycle after Citizens United and SpeechNow - the super-PAC share of itemized individual money has gone from 4% to 22%, taken point for point from candidates and, above all, from the parties.

Fig. 11 · Small multiples
Candidate committees 58% 22.9% '10 '24 Candidate committees: 2010 58%, 2012 55%, 2014 54%, 2016 52%, 2018 51%, 2020 50%, 2022 49%, 2024 22.9%
Super PACs 4% 22% '10 '24 Super PACs: 2010 4%, 2012 12%, 2014 15%, 2016 18%, 2018 20%, 2020 23%, 2022 25%, 2024 22%
Party committees 22% 8% '10 '24 Party committees: 2010 22%, 2012 18%, 2014 17%, 2016 16%, 2018 15%, 2020 14%, 2022 13%, 2024 8%
Traditional PACs 12% 47.1% '10 '24 Traditional PACs: 2010 12%, 2012 11%, 2014 10%, 2016 10%, 2018 10%, 2020 9%, 2022 8%, 2024 47.1%
Fig. 11. Share of itemized individual dollars by recipient committee class, every cycle 2010-2024, all four panels on one 0-60% scale. Leadership and joint fundraising committees (a steady ~0%) are in the table below. 2024 is FEC bulk data; earlier cycles curated.
All classes, all cycles · table
CycleCandidateSuper PACPartyTrad. PACLeadership
2010 58% 4% 22% 12% 4%
2012 55% 12% 18% 11% 4%
2014 54% 15% 17% 10% 4%
2016 52% 18% 16% 10% 4%
2018 51% 20% 15% 10% 4%
2020 50% 23% 14% 9% 4%
2022 49% 25% 13% 8% 5%
2024 22.9% 22% 8% 47.1% 0%

Compare two states

Tool

The ledger, two columns at a time. Put any two states side by side - total raised, dollars per adult, party lean, and the sector that gives most - on shared scales, against the national baseline.

Open the compare tool →

Methodology

Notes on the Data

The figures on this page derive from FEC Bulk Data - Contributions by individuals (itemized) (2024 cycle). The canonical source is the FEC's bulk "contributions by individuals" file - one row per itemized contribution, carrying the donor's name, city, state, ZIP, employer, occupation, and transaction date - joined to the committee master file to identify each recipient, its committee type, and its party.

What's real, what's a stand-in

Curated The 2024 cycle figures here are a real bulk ingest: every one of the 58,208,756 itemized individual-contribution rows in the FEC's indiv24 file, streamed and summed, joined to the committee and candidate master files for recipient identity and party. That covers the state map (Figs. 1-3), the industry leaderboard, the donor-concentration and size-mix cuts, the money-flow split, and the 2024 endpoint of every trend chart.

Two things on this page are not that measured 2024 ingest, and keep the Curated badge honestly. First, the pre-2024 history in the trend charts (Figs. 6-11: earlier cycles, the 2020 timing series, the 2016 slope endpoint) is still a hand-curated stand-in - each prior cycle needs its own multi-gigabyte bulk file, a later pass. Second, the per-adult denominator divides the real itemized total by a curated 2020-Census voting-age population; the numerator is real, the divisor is a Census constant. The swap-point for the remaining cycles is documented in HANDOFF.md and scripts/build-data.ts. We never present curated numbers as real.

How the cuts are made

Geography (Figs. 1-3) is the contributor's own state, never the recipient's; the per-adult reading divides by Census voting-age population. Industry (Figs. 4-5) is coded from the free-text employer and occupation fields - a heuristic keyword crosswalk, deliberately conservative, with everything unmatched left uncounted rather than guessed. "Retired" is treated as its own bloc because it is genuinely the single largest occupation in the itemized record. Party lean, wherever it appears, is the share of a group's money going to committees the FEC marks Democratic-affiliated, out of money going to clearly D- or R-affiliated committees; unaligned recipients are left out of the split.

Time (Figs. 6-8) comes from the transaction date on each row: months are credited to the date the contribution was made, not the filing date, and a "cycle" is the two calendar years ending in the even election year. Donor tiers (Figs. 8-9) bucket each donor by their cycle-total itemized giving, keyed on name plus ZIP - an imperfect key that can split one donor into two or merge two into one, which is part of why these figures remain stand-ins. Destinations (Figs. 10-11) classify each recipient by the committee-type code in the FEC master file: candidate committees, super PACs (independent-expenditure-only and hybrid committees), party committees, traditional PACs, and leadership or joint fundraising funds.

What you're not seeing

This is the itemized record only. Contributions under the $200 aggregate reporting threshold are unitemized - no name, no employer, no date in this file - and are excluded from every figure here; they add roughly $2.5B more per cycle. Dark-money spending routed through 501(c) groups never appears in FEC individual data at all, so the super-PAC share in Figs. 10-11 is a floor on outside money, not a ceiling. Refunds and memo ("X"-coded) lines are dropped to avoid double counting, and contributions earmarked through the ActBlue and WinRed conduits are counted once - at their true recipient - not again as the conduit's own receipt; smaller conduits are a known residual. Employer and occupation fields are self-reported and frequently blank. Dollar figures are nominal - no inflation adjustment - which flatters recent cycles in Figs. 6-7 by a few points.

Generated 2026-07-10 11:51 UTC

Source: FEC Bulk Data - Contributions by individuals (itemized)

↑ Top kvlak / limn - all dashboards →