2008 list of major PACs fundraisingEdit

It's 2015, seven years later. Can we find a more up to date list? Capitalismojo (talk) 04:30, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

2012 list - scratchpadEdit

Group Total Raised
Restore Our Future $142,097,336
American Crossroads $104,746,670
Priorities USA Action $65,166,859
Majority PAC $37,498,257
House Majority PAC $30,470,122
Freedomworks for America $19,636,548
Winning Our Future $17,007,762
Club for Growth Action $16,584,207
Ending Spending Action Fund $13,250,766

Total of Top Nine: $ 446 million


Super PACs spending over $10 million Total Spent through Nov 30, 2012

Restore Our Future $142,655,346
American Crossroads $91,115,447
Priorities USA Action $66,482,084
Winning Our Future $17,008,038

Regular PACs with spending over $10 million Total Spent through Nov 30, 2012

Republican National Committee $42,252,251
Americans for Prosperity $33,542,058
Crossroads GPS $22,146,304
American Future Fund $19,038,220
Americans for Job Security $15,223,067


Trump proposes PAC contributions to underwrite inauguration activities . . .illegal???Edit

I'm neither a lawyer nor an American. Is this http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/23/us/politics/trump-inaugural-donors.html?rref=collection%2Fnewseventcollection%2FThe%20Trump%20White%20House a legal use of PAC funds? "the decision to limit donations from certain [unidentified] groups was 'in line with the president-elect’s thoughts on ethics reform.' " that just makes one laugh. If the use of PAC funds is legal it presumably would be so for everyone - or vice versa. . .? (talk) 22:52, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modifiedEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Political action committee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:56, 7 December 2017 (UTC)


Is it weird that the article keeps switching between "Super PAC" and "super PAC"? Shouldn't it be consistent? Theotherchairduck (talk) 19:05, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Hybrid PACEdit

Given that the more notable topic of "super PACs" is only covered as a section in this article, it seems reasonable that coverage of Hybrid PACs should also be presented here as a section. signed, Rosguill talk 22:40, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

I had actually noticed that myself, when I created the article. I do think that "Super PAC" would also merit its own article, as there's an abundance of material available, far more than there is for Hybrid PAC (although Hybrid PACs are a more recent creation). I think this article should have two short sections on each type, with hatnotes pointing to the main articles for each topic. Ewen Douglas (talk) 23:45, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
That sounds reasonable to me. I was honestly quite surprised to find that Super PAC wasn't an independent article. signed, Rosguill talk 23:48, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
Return to "Political action committee" page.