Top GOP campaign committees dominate Dems in 2025 fundraising
The Republican National Committee — led by Chairman Michael Whatley and finance Chair Vice President JD Vance — racked up $96,419,883 in contributions and has $80,782,884 cash on hand, an FEC filing Sunday shows.
Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin and finance Chair Chris Korge meanwhile amassed $69,224,921 and recorded a $15,220,609 war chest.
Advertisement
6 The Republican National Committee, led by Chairman Michael Whatley, has racked up more than $96 million in contributions so far this year.
Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post
For upcoming Senate races, the National Republican Senatorial Committee's donations tally was $48,625,839, while the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee pulled down $40,311,986.31 in contributions.
Among House campaigns, the National Republican Congressional Committee got $68,955,791 in donations, compared with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's 66,009,100 in total fundraising.
Advertisement
But the NRSC has just $7,801,380 cash on hand, whereas the DSCC has a $13,509,018 war chest.
Still, the GOP committee recorded being exactly $2 million in debt, while the top Senate Democratic campaign arm was $5,250,000 in debt.
6 Vice President JD Vance is finance chairman of the top GOP fundraising arm.
Aimee Dilger/SOPA Images/Shutterstock
The DCCC meanwhile slightly surged ahead of the NRCC with its total cash on hand: $39,717,727 to $37,575,291, respectively.
Advertisement
The fundraising totals come as Democrats are still 2.5 percentage points ahead of Republicans on a generic 2026 ballot of congressional races, according to the RealClearPolitics polling aggregator.
The DNC has been plagued by internal strife since former Vice President Kamala Harris's disastrous 2024 presidential defeat. The MAGA coalition has likewise been strained by tech billionaire Elon Musk's explosive split from President Trump.
6 Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin's organization amassed nearly $70 million so far this year.
Getty Images for One Fair Wage
Musk went ballistic on Trump and congressional Republicans over their tax-and-spending package signed into law July 4, which the Tesla and SpaceX owner called a 'disgusting abomination,' even going so far as to float the creation of a new political party, the 'America Party.'
Advertisement
As for the Dems, while also struggling with leadership challenges, their fundraising drought led some party bosses to consider taking out a loan. Martin has said he remains optimistic that they will not have to fall back on that lifeline.
Cracks in the blue coalition began to appear with the bitter departure of former DNC Vice Chair David Hogg, who attempted to inject $20 million into primary coups against incumbent moderate Dems.
6 Cracks in the blue coalition began to appear with the bitter departure of former DNC Vice Chair David Hogg.
The Washington Post via Getty Images
Hogg's 'Leaders We Deserve' group was opposed by Martin, who mounted a pressure campaign on Hogg to force him to bend the knee and sign a neutrality pledge.
The 25-year-old refused to comply and soon faced a complaint that his election to the post had been a violation of the DNC's 'gender parity' rules. Rather than go through another round of DNC elections, Hogg stepped down from the role due to 'fundamental disagreements' with his colleagues.
Hogg has not been the only DNC leader to split from the beleaguered institution. A week after his departure, two top union chiefs followed suit.
6 The DNC's Martin has insisted the Dems' lagging finances won't be an issue for long.
PBS NewsHour
Randi Weingarten, leader of the American Federation of Teachers, and Lee Saunders, head of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, declined offers to retain at-large memberships with the DNC.
Advertisement
'While I am proud to be a Democrat, I appear to be out of step with the leadership you are forging, and I do not want to be the one who keeps questioning why we are not enlarging our tent and actively trying to engage more and more of our communities,' Weingarten wrote in a letter to Martin.
To add to the DNC's predicament, the rise of New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani has further widened divides in the Democratic coalition.
6 Hogg's 'Leaders We Deserve' group was opposed by Martin, who mounted a pressure campaign on Hogg to capitulate.
ABC
Advertisement
Top Dem leaders have withheld endorsements of the Democratic Socialist, including prominent figures in blue New York.
Empire State Democrats Gov. Kathy Hochul, Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries have yet to take a stance on Mamdani's bid for mayor, even as lefty members of the party have rushed to back him.
'You can't really have a party that stands for anything when you have a Marxist running, and the three main leaders in New York of the Democratic Party — Jeffries, Schumer and Hochul — are all hiding in the weeds,' said New York ex-Gov. George Pataki (R) on WABC 770 AM The 'Cats Roundtable' program Sunday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
28 minutes ago
- New York Post
New Yorkers are still unsure if they'd welcome a socialist mayor, even as Zohran Mamdani leads pack: poll
They're not sold on the socialist. A majority of New Yorkers are uneasy about the possibility socialist Zohran Mamdani will take over City Hall — as a new poll points to a potential mayoral horse race if the firebrand's opponents thin out the crowded field. The proudly far-left Democratic nominee, maintained his frontrunner status in a four-way race with former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, incumbent Mayor Eric Adams and Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa, according to the poll released Tuesday and paid for by Wick Insights. Advertisement 4 The majority of New Yorkers have concerns about electing Zohran Mamdani as the next mayor of New York City. Paul Martinka But the race becomes neck-and-neck if Mamdani only faces Andrew Cuomo in a head-to-head contest, although the poll found the Queens assemblyman carries the highest favorability of any mayoral candidate. 'Understandably, Adams and Cuomo remain very unpopular,' said political prognosticator Ken Frydman. Advertisement 'Neither of them will become more popular before Election Day. In fact, they may become even more unpopular by then.' 'Voters tend to favor politicians with big smiles and winning personalities like Mamdani more than politicians with dour expressions and personalities like Cuomo.' 4 A poll released Tuesday paid for by Wick Insights shows Mamdani is the current frontrunner in a four-way race for mayor ahead of incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo, and Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa. James Keivom The poll — which surveyed 500 likely voters and did not include longshot independent candidate Jim Walden — provides a portrait of a New York City electorate not yet convinced about electing the untested Mamdani. Advertisement The lack of overwhelming support for the Democratic nominee, who has failed to gain the party establishment's backing, could be because New Yorkers are still uneasy about electing a socialist mayor. The poll shows just 46% of voters would welcome a socialist mayor, while 44% say they would oppose one in Gracie Mansion. 4 Political prognosticator Ken Frydman notes, 'Adams and Cuomo remain very unpopular.' John Roca for NY Post A further 10% said they were not sure whether they'd support or oppose electing a socialist mayor, the poll found. Advertisement And a slim majority of New Yorkers — 53% — said Mamdani's dreamy socialist vision for the Big Apple won't work in the real world, according to the survey. Mamdani, however, was viewed by roughly half of voters as the candidate most focused on the cost of living and to stand up for working people. He was also the only mayoral candidate whose favorability wasn't deep underwater, although the percentage of voters who viewed him favorably — 43% — was the same as those who did unfavorably. The fresh-faced Democrat Mamdani was the clear frontrunner with 39% support in the four-way race with two independents — Adams and Cuomo — and the Republican Sliwa, the poll found. 4 Mamdani leads the four candidates in the poll, receiving 39% of the vote with Cuomo in second place at 21%, Sliwa at third place with 18%, and Adams finishing fourth, recording a lacking 9% from voters in the upcoming general election. Michael McWeeney Cuomo, who was trounced by the upstart socialist in the Democratic primary in June, held onto his second-place status with 21%, while Sliwa came in third with 18%. In a distant fourth, the poll had Adams with an abysmal 9% of support. Mamdani would also handily beat Adams and Sliwa in face-to-face contests, but it was a different story with Cuomo, the poll found. Advertisement Cuomo came in just slightly ahead of Mamdani, 42% to 41%, well within the margin of error for the poll. But political insiders have been leery of taking too much stock in a single poll after the Democratic primary took nearly all of them off guard. Nearly every poll, save one, had Cuomo beating Mamdani in the ranked-choice primary — although they did show the socialist steadily narrowing the gap. Advertisement In the end, Mamdani trounced Cuomo by a 56% to 44% margin and garnered more primary votes than any Big Apple Democrat in more than three decades. Still, Cuomo's spokesman Rich Azzopardi welcomed the poll's finding. 'Make no mistake — this is a race and the governor is talking directly to voters about his practical plans to make New York City more affordable, safer and better run, in direct contrast to Zohran Mamdani's substance-free bumper sticker slogans and Adams' record of mismanagement, self-dealing and, according to his own former police commissioner, corrupting and demoralizing the NYPD,' he said.
Chicago Tribune
28 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Columbia University agrees to pay more than $220M in deal with Trump to restore federal funding
NEW YORK — Columbia University announced Wednesday it has reached a deal with the Trump administration to pay more than $220 million to the federal government to restore federal research money that was canceled in the name of combating antisemitism on campus. Under the agreement, the Ivy League school will pay a $200 million settlement over three years, the university said. It will also pay $21 million to resolve alleged civil rights violations against Jewish employees that occurred following the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, the White House said. 'This agreement marks an important step forward after a period of sustained federal scrutiny and institutional uncertainty,' acting University President Claire Shipman said. The school had been threatened with the potential loss of billions of dollars in government support, including more than $400 million in grants canceled earlier this year. The administration pulled the funding because of what it described as the university's failure to squelch antisemitism on campus during the Israel-Hamas war. Columbia has since agreed to a series of demands laid out by the Republican administration, including overhauling the university's student disciplinary process and applying a contentious, federally endorsed definition of antisemitism not only to teaching but to a disciplinary committee that has been investigating students critical of Israel. Wednesday's agreement — which does not include an admission of wrongdoing — codifies those reforms while preserving the university's autonomy, Shipman said. Education Secretary Linda McMahon called the deal 'a seismic shift in our nation's fight to hold institutions that accept American taxpayer dollars accountable for antisemitic discrimination and harassment.' 'Columbia's reforms are a roadmap for elite universities that wish to regain the confidence of the American public by renewing their commitment to truth-seeking, merit, and civil debate,' McMahon said in a statement. As part of the agreement, Columbia agreed to a series of changes previously announced in March, including reviewing its Middle East curriculum to make sure it was 'comprehensive and balanced' and appointing new faculty to its Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies. It also promised to end programs 'that promote unlawful efforts to achieve race-based outcomes, quotes, diversity targets or similar efforts.' The university will also have to issue a report to a monitor assuring that its programs 'do not promote unlawful DEI goals.' In a post Wednesday night on his Truth Social platform, President Donald Trump said Columbia had 'committed to ending their ridiculous DEI policies, admitting students based ONLY on MERIT, and protecting the Civil Liberties of their students on campus.' He also warned, without being specific, 'Numerous other Higher Education Institutions that have hurt so many, and been so unfair and unjust, and have wrongly spent federal money, much of it from our government, are upcoming.' The pact comes after months of uncertainty and fraught negotiations at the more than 270-year-old university. It was among the first targets of Trump's crackdown on pro-Palestinian campus protests and on colleges that he asserts have allowed Jewish students be threatened and harassed. Columbia's own antisemitism task force found last summer that Jewish students had faced verbal abuse, ostracism and classroom humiliation during the spring 2024 demonstrations. Other Jewish students took part in the protests, however, and protest leaders maintain they aren't targeting Jews but rather criticizing the Israeli government and its war in Gaza. Columbia's leadership — a revolving door of three interim presidents in the last year — has declared that the campus climate needs to change. Also in the settlement is an agreement to ask prospective international students 'questions designed to elicit their reasons for wishing to study in the United States,' and establishes processes to make sure all students are committed to 'civil discourse.' In a move that would potentially make it easier for the Trump administration to deport students who participate in protests, Columbia promised to provide the government with information, upon request, of disciplinary actions involving student-visa holders resulting in expulsions or suspensions. Columbia on Tuesday announced it would suspend, expel or revoke degrees from more than 70 students who participated in a pro-Palestinian demonstration inside the main library in May and an encampment during alumni weekend last year. The pressure on Columbia began with a series of funding cuts. Then Mahmoud Khalil, a former graduate student who had been a visible figure in the protests, became the first person detained in the Trump administration's push to deport pro-Palestinian activists who aren't U.S. citizens. Next came searches of some university residences amid a federal Justice Department investigation into whether Columbia concealed 'illegal aliens' on campus. The interim president at the time responded that the university was committed to upholding the law. Columbia was an early test case for the Trump administration as it sought closer oversight of universities that the Republican president views as bastions of liberalism. Yet it soon was overshadowed by Harvard University, which became the first higher education institution to defy Trump's demands and fight back in court. The Trump administration has used federal research funding as its primary lever in its campaign to reshape higher education. More than $2 billion in total has also been frozen at Cornell, Northwestern, Brown and Princeton universities. Administration officials pulled $175 million from the University of Pennsylvania in March over a dispute around women's sports. They restored it when school officials agreed to update records set by transgender swimmer Lia Thomas and change their policies. The administration also is looking beyond private universities. University of Virginia President James Ryan agreed to resign in June under pressure from a U.S. Justice Department investigation into diversity, equity and inclusion practices. A similar investigation was opened this month at George Mason University.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Most US adults still support legal abortion 3 years after Roe was overturned, an AP-NORC poll finds
Three years after the Supreme Court opened the door to state abortion bans, most U.S. adults continue to say abortion should be legal — views that look similar to before the landmark ruling. The new findings from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll show that about two-thirds of U.S. adults think abortion should be legal in all or most cases. About half believe abortion should be available in their state if someone does not want to be pregnant for any reason. That level of support for abortion is down slightly from what an AP-NORC poll showed last year, when it seemed that support for legal abortion might be rising. Laws and opinions changed when Roe was overturned The June 2022 Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and opened the door to state bans on abortion led to major policy changes. Most states have either moved to protect abortion access or restrict it. Twelve are now enforcing bans on abortion at every stage of pregnancy, and four more do so after about six weeks' gestation, which is often before women realize they're pregnant. In the aftermath of the ruling, AP-NORC polling suggested that support for legal abortion access might be increasing. Last year, an AP-NORC poll conducted in June found that 7 in 10 U.S. adults said it should be available in all or most cases, up slightly from 65% in May 2022, just before the decision that overruled the constitutional right to abortion, and 57% in June 2021. The new poll is closer to Americans' views before the Supreme Court ruled. Now, 64% of adults support legal abortion in most or all cases. More than half the adults in states with the most stringent bans are in that group. Similarly, about half now say abortion should be available in their state when someone doesn't want to continue their pregnancy for any reason — about the same as in June 2021 but down from about 6 in 10 who said that in 2024. Adults in the strictest states are just as likely as others to say abortion should be available in their state to women who want to end pregnancies for any reason. Democrats support abortion access far more than Republicans do. Support for legal abortion has dropped slightly among members of both parties since June 2024, but nearly 9 in 10 Democrats and roughly 4 in 10 Republicans say abortion should be legal in at least most instances. Fallout from state bans has influenced some people's positions — but not others Seeing what's happened in the aftermath of the ruling has strengthened the abortion rights position of Wilaysha White, a 25-year-old Ohio mom. She has some regrets about the abortion she had when she was homeless. 'I don't think you should be able to get an abortion anytime,' said White, who calls herself a 'semi-Republican.' But she said that hearing about situations — including when a Georgia woman was arrested after a miscarriage and initially charged with concealing a death — is a bigger concern. 'Seeing women being sick and life or death, they're not being put first — that's just scary,' she said. 'I'd rather have it be legal across the board than have that.' Julie Reynolds' strong anti-abortion stance has been cemented for decades and hasn't shifted since Roe was overturned. 'It's a moral issue,' said the 66-year-old Arizona woman, who works part time as a bank teller. She said her view is shaped partly by having obtained an abortion herself when she was in her 20s. 'I would not want a woman to go through that,' she said. 'I live with that every day. I took a life.' Support remains high for legal abortion in certain situations The vast majority of U.S. adults — at least 8 in 10 — continue to say their state should allow legal abortion if a fetal abnormality would prevent the child from surviving outside the womb, if the patient's health is seriously endangered by the pregnancy, or if the person became pregnant as a result of rape or incest. Consistent with AP-NORC's June 2024 poll, about 7 in 10 U.S. adults 'strongly' or 'somewhat' favor protecting access to abortions for patients who are experiencing miscarriages or other pregnancy-related emergencies. In states that have banned or restricted abortion, such medical exceptions have been sharply in focus. This is a major concern for Nicole Jones, a 32-year-old Florida resident. Jones and her husband would like to have children soon. But she said she's worried about access to abortion if there's a fetal abnormality or a condition that would threaten her life in pregnancy since they live in a state that bans most abortions after the first six weeks of gestation. 'What if we needed something?' she asked. 'We'd have to travel out of state or risk my life because of this ban.' Adults support protections for seeking abortions across state lines — but not as strongly There's less consensus on whether states that allow abortion should protect access for women who live in places with bans. Just over half support protecting a patient's right to obtain an abortion in another state and shielding those who provide abortions from fines or prison time. In both cases, relatively few adults — about 2 in 10 — oppose the measures and about 1 in 4 are neutral. More Americans also favor than oppose legal protections for doctors who prescribe and mail abortion pills to patients in states with bans. About 4 in 10 'somewhat' or 'strongly' favor those protections, and roughly 3 in 10 oppose them. Such telehealth prescriptions are a key reason that the number of abortions nationally has risen even as travel for abortion has declined slightly. ___ The AP-NORC poll of 1,437 adults was conducted July 10-14, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 3.6 percentage points.
