Independent-expenditure filings at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) record $60.5 million spent on the Texas Senate race between 8 and 15 September1. An independent expenditure is money spent for or against a candidate by a group that does not coordinate with them. TEXAS PAC accounts for most of the eight days: $31.8 million supporting Ken Paxton and $28.7 million attacking James Talarico. A committee confident of winning does not spend nearly half its money defending its own candidate, so TEXAS PAC is pricing this seat as competitive whatever the published ratings say.
TEXAS PAC registered with the FEC on 28 August and No Going Back PAC Inc. on 1 September. Between them they have reported over $85 million while filing only Statements of Organization and forty-eight-hour expenditure notices23. Neither has filed a Form 3X, the periodic report that itemises receipts, and neither appears in the FEC's Schedule A receipts data. A forty-eight-hour notice discloses the buy and not the buyer, so a reader can audit the advertising and not the advertiser. A single outlet, political.org, reported on 11 September that the Senate Leadership Fund stood up TEXAS PAC4. That report is uncorroborated, and the filings themselves name no affiliated organisation for either committee.
The candidates' own accounts point the other way. Through 30 June, the most recent complete filing period, Talarico had raised $68.56 million to Paxton's $9.25 million and held $21.55 million in cash against a $1.76 million reserve5. Cook Political Report and Sabato's Crystal Ball both still rate the seat Leans Republican, one step short of a tossup, because they weigh Paxton's ideological position rather than his bank balance. TEXAS PAC spent more than six times Paxton's entire reported fundraising in eight days.
Republican committees already held the cash advantage at every tier in the spring, and coordinated party spending lost its caps in June. Those two channels have named contributors behind them. This third one does not, and its Form 3X falls due on 15 October, after several states begin receiving completed postal ballots. Federal law permits every part of that sequence, so the opacity here comes from a filing timetable rather than from concealment.
