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.
- < $50M
- $50-150M
- $150-500M
- $500M-1.1B
- > $1.1B
All 51 rows · state table
| State | Itemized $ | Share | Per adult | To Dem | Top sector |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | $2.5B | 17.7% | $82 | 68% | Technology |
| New York | $1.3B | 9.5% | $86 | 66% | Finance |
| Texas | $1.1B | 8.3% | $52 | 41% | Energy |
| Florida | $1.0B | 7.4% | $57 | 44% | Real Estate |
| Illinois | $560M | 4.0% | $57 | 63% | Finance |
| Massachusetts | $520M | 3.8% | $95 | 72% | Education |
| Pennsylvania | $500M | 3.6% | $49 | 55% | Health |
| Virginia | $470M | 3.4% | $70 | 58% | Defense |
| Washington | $460M | 3.3% | $76 | 69% | Technology |
| New Jersey | $420M | 3.0% | $59 | 62% | Finance |
| Maryland | $360M | 2.6% | $76 | 70% | Lawyers & Lobbyists |
| Georgia | $330M | 2.4% | $42 | 52% | Health |
| Ohio | $300M | 2.2% | $33 | 47% | Manufacturing |
| North Carolina | $300M | 2.2% | $37 | 50% | Health |
| Michigan | $275M | 2.0% | $35 | 52% | Manufacturing |
| Colorado | $265M | 1.9% | $58 | 60% | Energy |
| Minnesota | $235M | 1.7% | $53 | 61% | Health |
| Arizona | $215M | 1.6% | $39 | 49% | Real Estate |
| Connecticut | $205M | 1.5% | $71 | 64% | Finance |
| District of Columbia | $200M | 1.4% | $357 | 88% | Lawyers & Lobbyists |
| Tennessee | $175M | 1.3% | $33 | 38% | Health |
| Missouri | $160M | 1.2% | $34 | 43% | Finance |
| Wisconsin | $160M | 1.2% | $35 | 51% | Manufacturing |
| Oregon | $155M | 1.1% | $45 | 68% | Technology |
| Indiana | $130M | 0.9% | $25 | 42% | Pharma |
| South Carolina | $115M | 0.8% | $28 | 40% | Real Estate |
| Nevada | $110M | 0.8% | $44 | 53% | Hospitality |
| Kentucky | $100M | 0.7% | $29 | 39% | Energy |
| Alabama | $92M | 0.7% | $24 | 33% | Health |
| Louisiana | $90M | 0.7% | $26 | 36% | Energy |
| Oklahoma | $85M | 0.6% | $28 | 28% | Energy |
| Utah | $78M | 0.6% | $32 | 34% | Technology |
| Kansas | $72M | 0.5% | $33 | 37% | Agriculture |
| Iowa | $70M | 0.5% | $29 | 44% | Agriculture |
| New Hampshire | $62M | 0.4% | $55 | 54% | Finance |
| Arkansas | $55M | 0.4% | $24 | 34% | Retail |
| New Mexico | $52M | 0.4% | $32 | 61% | Energy |
| Nebraska | $50M | 0.4% | $34 | 38% | Agriculture |
| Hawaii | $48M | 0.3% | $43 | 71% | Hospitality |
| Mississippi | $48M | 0.3% | $21 | 35% | Health |
| Maine | $45M | 0.3% | $40 | 58% | Health |
| Idaho | $42M | 0.3% | $28 | 31% | Agriculture |
| Rhode Island | $42M | 0.3% | $48 | 66% | Health |
| Delaware | $40M | 0.3% | $49 | 63% | Finance |
| Montana | $38M | 0.3% | $42 | 45% | Agriculture |
| West Virginia | $35M | 0.3% | $24 | 32% | Energy |
| Vermont | $32M | 0.2% | $62 | 78% | Education |
| Alaska | $30M | 0.2% | $54 | 43% | Energy |
| South Dakota | $26M | 0.2% | $38 | 34% | Agriculture |
| North Dakota | $24M | 0.2% | $39 | 30% | Energy |
| Wyoming | $22M | 0.2% | $48 | 22% | Energy |
Intensity, not mass
The map rewards population. Divide each state's itemized total by its voting-age adults and a different geography surfaces: the District of Columbia gives $357 per adult, nearly four times the closest state, while the median state gives $42 and Mississippi gives $21.
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.
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, $3.10B strong, ahead of finance and real estate and more than every trade below them.
- 01 Retired $3.10B
- 02 Finance, Insurance & Real Estate $2.30B
- 03 Lawyers & Lobbyists $1.15B
- 04 Technology & Internet $980M
- 05 Health Professionals & Pharma $760M
- 06 Education $720M
- 07 Energy & Natural Resources $480M
- 08 Manufacturing & Industry $360M
- 09 Media & Entertainment $340M
- 10 Retail & Hospitality $260M
- 11 Defense & Aerospace $150M
- 12 Agriculture $140M
- 13 Transportation $130M
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. Figures illustrative.
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.
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 $1.73B - more than the cycle's first seven months combined.
Month-by-month table · both cycles
| Month of cycle | '19-20 | '23-24 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan '23 / Jan '19 | $125M | $145M |
| Feb '23 / Feb '19 | $135M | $155M |
| Mar '23 / Mar '19 | $215M | $240M |
| Apr '23 / Apr '19 | $170M | $195M |
| May '23 / May '19 | $180M | $205M |
| Jun '23 / Jun '19 | $260M | $295M |
| Jul '23 / Jul '19 | $215M | $245M |
| Aug '23 / Aug '19 | $225M | $255M |
| Sep '23 / Sep '19 | $305M | $345M |
| Oct '23 / Oct '19 | $280M | $315M |
| Nov '23 / Nov '19 | $290M | $330M |
| Dec '23 / Dec '19 | $500M | $575M |
| Jan '24 / Jan '20 | $380M | $430M |
| Feb '24 / Feb '20 | $410M | $465M |
| Mar '24 / Mar '20 | $620M | $700M |
| Apr '24 / Apr '20 | $430M | $565M |
| May '24 / May '20 | $470M | $610M |
| Jun '24 / Jun '20 | $680M | $795M |
| Jul '24 / Jul '20 | $830M | $940M |
| Aug '24 / Aug '20 | $960M | $1090M |
| Sep '24 / Sep '20 | $1290M | $1420M |
| Oct '24 / Oct '20 | $1560M | $1730M |
| Nov '24 / Nov '20 | $1080M | $1195M |
| Dec '24 / Dec '20 | $990M | $1060M |
Cycle over cycle
The pot never shrinks for long. Itemized individual money has multiplied 2.3-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.
- 18% '08
- 20% '10
- 22% '12
- 24% '14
- 30% '16
- 34% '18
- 38% '20
- 33% '22
- 36% '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 30. The ground it took came almost entirely from gifts under $5,000.
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% | 22% | 37% | 30% |
The few who fund the many
Read the two sides against each other. The top tier - donors giving $100,000+ a cycle - is 10k people, a group that would not fill a college football stadium and 0.2% of itemized donors. They supply 30% of the itemized money.
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. Figures illustrative.
Where it lands
Follow the dollar to its destination and less than half now reaches a candidate's own committee. Roughly 27% 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.
| Recipient type | Itemized $ | Share | To Dem |
|---|---|---|---|
| Candidate committees | $6.8B | 47.6% | 51% |
| Super PACs | $3.9B | 27.3% | 47% |
| Party committees | $1.7B | 11.9% | 49% |
| Traditional PACs | $1.2B | 8.4% | 46% |
| Leadership & joint funds | $700M | 4.9% | 50% |
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. Figures illustrative.
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 27%, taken point for point from candidates and, above all, from the parties.
All classes, all cycles · table
| Cycle | Candidate | Super PAC | Party | Trad. PAC | Leadership |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 48% | 27% | 12% | 8% | 5% |
Compare two states
ToolThe 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.