Follow the Money: Where Super PACs Are Going All In on the 2026 US Midterms

Courtesy of Caleb Chen/CREW.

In the latter weeks of the 2026 midterms, the ad bill has officially topped $10 billion, making this the most expensive midterm cycle and the most expensive election overall in U.S. history, projected to reach $11.6 billion by November 3, 2026, Election Day.

Albeit, the congressional pendulum may be bound to swing, but does money flip the script? Democratic Senate candidates have outraised their Republican counterparts in most major battlegrounds, yet Republican-aligned super political action committees (PACs) have outspent their Democratic colleagues by hundreds of millions of dollars. 

Following where PACs and super PACs invest reveals which races their strategists regard as make-or-break for control of Congress. Buried in the numbers, it’s worth understanding, first and foremost, that federal law, or the Federal Election Commission (FEC) in this case, classifies political committees by how they raise and spend funds. 

Traditional PACs are authorized to donate directly to candidates, yet face a strict limit of, generally, $5,000 per candidate, per election. Super PACs are strictly prohibited from providing contributions directly to candidates, but can raise and spend unlimited sums. They do so through independent expenditures (I.E.s), which include but are not limited to: broadcast, cable, CTV, digital, radio and satellite. They may explicitly express support or opposition for a candidate without any coordination with said candidate’s campaign. I.E. spending reached a record $2 billion through September. In the 2022 midterm cycle, I.E.s increased 51% after adjusting for inflation. Others operate as hybrid PACs (also known as Carey committees), which keep a limited contribution account alongside an unlimited I.E. account.  

Quantitatively, this midterm cycle is projected to reach a total expenditure of $3.4 billion for Senate advertising and $2 billion for House advertising. Additionally, as of October 5, groups (e.g. super PACs, hybrid PACs, nonprofits) have spent nearly $2 billion on federal races, of which super PACs are responsible for about $1.5 billion. 

Per OpenSecrets’s analysis of Federal Election Commission data, the top ten outside groups spending are ranked as follows: 1) the Senate Leadership Fund, a Republican super PAC, at about $174 million; 2) Texas PAC, also a Republican super PAC at about $133 million; 3) No Going Back PAC at about $128 million; 4) WinSenate PAC, the top Democratic spender, at about $109 million; 5) Congressional Leadership Fund, a Republican hybrid PAC at about $67 million; 6) Americans for Prosperity Action, a Koch-funded hybrid PAC at about $67 million; 7) Defend American Jobs, a crypto industry super PAC, at about $56 million; 8) United Democracy Project, the super PAC affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) at approximately $53 million; 9) House Majority PAC, a Democratic hybrid PAC, at about $49 million, and 10) Texans for a Conservative Majority, at about $35 million. Thus, of the ten outside groups that have spent the most this midterm cycle, seven are affiliated with the Republican party. 

Spending has mostly been allocated to Senate campaigns, with it accounting for nearly $980 million. The top states are ranked as follows: 1) Texas leads by a vast margin, at about $287 million; 2) Michigan, at about $179 million; 3) Ohio, at about $177 million; 4) Iowa, at about $86 million; 5) Maine, at about $77 million; 6) North Carolina, at $72 million; 7) Alaska, at about $53 million; 8) Kentucky, at nearly $47 million.

Outside groups are now spending on par with the candidates themselves. House and Senate candidates spent about $2 billion through September, roughly matching the aforementioned $2 billion spent by outside groups. Nationwide, Democratic congressional candidates have spent about $1.1 billion, compared with $782 million for Republicans. Nine of the ten biggest-spending candidates are Democrats, led by State Representative James Talarico (D) at $47 million and Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA) at about $40 million. In Texas, Senate candidates have spent about $90 million, less than a third of the roughly $287 million outside groups have spent on the race. House candidates, on the other hand, have spent $1 billion, more than double the $618 million spent by Senate candidates, given that funds are  spread across hundreds of districts. The most expensive House race thus far is Maryland’s 6th District, where total expenditure has reached a combined $37 million.

Republicans’ half-a-billion-dollar spending blitz since the summer has not appeared to move the polls, though super PAC spending typically peaks in the final weeks. Forecasters have largely moved the other way. Much of the Cook Political Report's Senate rating changes this year have favored Democrats, moving Ohio, Texas and Iowa to Toss Up and North Carolina to Lean Democrat. Minnesota, by contrast, is a rare exception, shifting from toss-up towards leaning Republicans. In Texas, this cycle’s most expensive race in terms of outside spending, a University of Houston poll taken October 10 to 14 found Talarico at 48% and Paxton at 46%, within the margin of error. Money has not guaranteed results, either. In Maryland’s 6th District, former Representative David Trone spent about $25 million and still lost the June Democratic primary to Representative April McClain Delaney (D-MD) by six points. 

All the while, oversight is thin, as many of the most competitive races are classified as toss-ups. The FEC has gone more than a year without a quorum, leaving it unable to investigate or penalize violations, while anonymous donations in the 2026 elections have already surpassed $1 billion. When November 3 arrives and ballots are counted, the results will reveal whether nearly $2 billion in outside group spending has paid off.