Republican-linked groups spend big to boost weak Democratic primary candidates
Shola Lawal
Republican-aligned PACs have spent over $4.3 million to boost niche Democratic primary candidates, aiming to defeat them in November's midterms. This tactic has sparked debate over the influence of money in U.S. politics. Both parties have used similar strategies in the past.
Political action committees linked to the Republican Party are actively funding Democratic candidates in ongoing primary elections, seeking to elevate weaker contenders that the GOP believes will be easier to defeat in the November midterms, according to U.S. media reports. These instances have been documented in New Jersey, Maine, Texas, Pennsylvania, and Nebraska.
Midterm elections serve as a referendum on the sitting administration and determine which party controls Congress—a critical factor for President Donald Trump's policy agenda in his final two years in office. Democrats, currently in the minority in both the House and Senate, are striving to flip control in November.
What is a PAC?
A Political Action Committee (PAC) is an independent organization that raises money to lobby for or against a political party or candidate. They wield significant influence over campaigns and help decide who gets presented to voters. PACs date back to 1944, initially forming around labor unions and interest groups. Traditional PACs face fundraising and contribution limits for a single candidate. However, in 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that special-interest organizations and unions have free-speech rights under the First Amendment, striking down limits on independent political spending. This paved the way for “super PACs,” which can raise and spend unlimited sums to advocate for candidates but cannot directly donate to them.
These groups must file financial reports with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) revealing their donors, but the deadline is after the election, meaning voters only learn about PAC activities after casting their ballots. Parties or lobbying groups also create “pop-up” super PACs to funnel money into campaigns while concealing donor identities—a practice known as “dark money.” For example, the controversial American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is linked to the super PAC United Democracy Project, which vigorously lobbies for military and diplomatic support for Israel.
GOP super PACs backing Democrats?
Recent filings with the FEC reveal that two “pop-up” super PACs—Real Change PAC and Lead Left—have spent over $4.3 million boosting controversial Democratic candidates whom Republicans consider easy to beat in the midterms. Both are linked to Conservative Americans PAC, a Republican super PAC founded in 2023, and funded by the nonprofit American Prosperity Alliance, which can legally hide its donors from public disclosure, ensuring the true funding sources remain concealed.
Strategic results
Outcomes have been mixed. Lead Left PAC spent over $750,000 on ads in Texas for Maureen Galindo, a sex therapist accused of making anti-Semitic remarks while criticizing Israel. Galindo denied the allegations and lost her primary to rival Johnny Garcia. In Maine, Real Change PAC backed state auditor Matt Dunlap with a $500,000 contribution, helping him defeat primary opponent Joe Baldacci. In Nebraska, Lead Left PAC spent $435,000 attacking John Cavanaugh, who narrowly lost to activist Denise Powell. Democrats have also used this strategy. In 2022, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) successfully boosted Republican John Gibbs against incumbent Representative Peter Meijer in Michigan; Democratic candidate Hillary Scholten then beat Gibbs in the general election.
Bipartisan reactions
Samantha Bullock, a spokesperson for Conservative Americans PAC, confirmed the group’s strategy to Politico, calling it retaliation for Democrats’ past “interference” in Republican primaries. “Republicans are leveling the playing field after more than a decade of Democrats meddling in our primaries,” Bullock said, adding the GOP “would be fools not to take advantage.” In contrast, the DCCC condemned the move. Spokesperson Justin Chermol said the GOP tactic has “backfired” and painted their outlook as “grim.”
Money’s influence
Since 2010, super PAC intervention has turned U.S. elections into a game of money. Securing funding from wealthy PACs gives candidates the power to raise millions for ad campaigns, media ops, and staff salaries. Fundraising hauls can also scare off potential opponents. Millions more are spent attacking rivals. Unlike before 2010, when donations were capped, donors can now pour vast sums into campaigns without public blowback by using “pop-up” PACs or shadowy groups that hide identities. Candidates who lack such support struggle to win primaries and rarely reach ordinary voters.
