24SEP

No Going Back PAC spends $29.2m in week

2 min read

11:45UTC

The super PAC tied to MAGA Inc reported $29.2m of new spending across 49 federal races between 16 and 22 September, more than doubling its total.

← Back to Republicans spend first, Democrats hold cash Jump to analysis ↓

PoliticsAssessed

Key takeaway

Trump's new Super PAC doubled its spending in a week and now reaches 49 races.

No Going Back PAC, which shares its treasurer and contact details with MAGA Inc, Donald Trump's main Super PAC, reported $29.2m of new independent expenditures dated 16 to 22 September⁠¹⁠². The money spread across 49 federal races, five for the Senate and 44 for the House, according to its 48-hour filings with the FEC. A super political action committee may raise and spend without limit provided it does not consult the campaigns it helps, which is what separates an independent expenditure from a party's coordinated buys.

CNBC had counted about $21m in the committee's filings as of 12 September, concentrated in a handful of Senate contests⁠³. Its total is now at least $50m, more than double in about a week. Its House spending in that single week, about $12.3m, exceeds the NRCC's entire August coordinated total, according to the two sets of filings.

Its biggest buys were in the Ohio Senate race ($5.82m), Michigan Senate ($4.49m), North Carolina Senate ($2.92m), New York's 3rd District ($2.05m), Texas Senate ($1.87m) and New Hampshire Senate ($1.76m)⁠⁴. The Texas money lands on top of two new committees that had already reported $85m of Senate advertising there without naming a donor.

Four of its five Senate races are among the NRSC's five largest coordinated recipients in August. Iowa, the NRSC's second-biggest bet, is missing from the Super PAC's list. The overlap puts party coordination and Super PAC advertising behind the same Senate candidates, from committees that by law cannot plan it together.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

A Super PAC called No Going Back PAC just reported spending $29.2m trying to influence 49 different congressional races, more than double what CNBC had counted for it only a week and a half earlier. Under federal law, groups like this must tell the FEC within 48 hours whenever they spend a large sum trying to help or hurt a candidate, but they do not have to say who gave them the money in the first place.

Deep Analysis

Root Causes

No Going Back PAC's spending growth is structurally tied to the 48-hour notice requirement rather than a voluntary disclosure choice. Federal law compels a filing within two days of any independent expenditure over $10,000 in the pre-election window, so the doubling shows up as reportable activity almost as soon as it happens.

The PAC's initial Statement of Organization, by contrast, carried no donor names, since that filing only registers the committee's existence and does not trigger the same disclosure requirement.

What could happen next?

Consequence
Because donor identity is not required alongside the 48-hour spending notice, voters in the 49 targeted races will see the scale of outside spending against or for their candidate without knowing who is funding it before they vote.

Source Landscape

This story draws on neutral-leaning sources from United States

United States

Primary parallel: SpeechNow.org v. FEC (2010), decided weeks after Citizens United, created the modern Super PAC by holding that a group making only independent expenditures cannot be subject to contribution limits, the direct legal ancestor of No Going Back PAC's structure.

Counter-parallel: The 2012 election cycle's super PACs mostly filed monthly or quarterly, letting large single donors go unreported for weeks; the 48-hour notice regime that flagged this week's $29.2m jump is a later procedural tightening, so today's faster disclosure of spending totals coexists with the same absence of donor identity SpeechNow.org established.

Consensus view: Critics of dark-money disclosure timing treat a PAC that doubles its reported spend in a week, without a matching donor disclosure, as a sign that 2026's outside-spending surge is running through vehicles built for speed rather than transparency, since federal law only forces a 48-hour notice on independent expenditures, not a donor list.

Counter-view: A more favourable reading of the same 48-hour notices is that they make No Going Back PAC's activity more visible in real time than most super PACs a decade ago, when disclosure often waited for a quarterly report; faster reporting rules are themselves a post-Citizens United reform, not a gap.

Key tension: Whether the current disclosure regime, built around speed rather than donor identity, gives voters meaningfully more information than it did in 2012, or just more frequent updates about the same anonymity.

Sources:Federal Election Commission·Federal Election Commission·Federal Election Commission

Mentions:Donald Trump →MAGA →New Hampshire →Iowa →NRCC →Citizens United →New York →Texas →CNBC →Michigan →North Carolina →New York's 3rd District →NO GOING BACK PAC INC. →MAGA Inc →SpeechNow.org v. FEC →Super PAC →

First Reported In

Update #18 · Republicans spend first, Democrats hold cash

Federal Election Commission· 24 Sept 2026

Read original →

Causes and effects

This Event

No Going Back PAC spends $29.2m in week

Trump's political operation has widened from a handful of Senate races to 49 contests in a single week of filings.

Led to

Ohio Senate race draws $44.1m in a week

No Going Back PAC added $4.93m in Ohio after $5.82m the previous week.

Occurred 30 Sept 2026

Read story →

Different Perspectives

University of Florida Election Lab

The lab, run by Michael McDonald, estimates about 124.3 million ballots, a raw midterm record, and turnout of about 49.4% of eligible voters, second to 2018's 50.05%. The raw record reflects population growth more than a record rate, so the late count is working through a near-2018 electorate.

Thune's critics on the right, including Senator Ron Johnson

Ron Johnson backed the failed 31-15 motion to delay Thune's re-election, after activists such as Mike Cernovich blamed the leader for the defeat. Their complaint is that Republicans could have passed the SAVE Act; in January it meets a Democratic Senate instead.

Senator John Thune

Thune was re-elected Senate Republican leader by acclamation on 10 November after a motion to delay failed 31-15. He kept the filibuster that stopped the SAVE Act, the choice his critics on the right blame for the defeat.

House Republicans under Jim Jordan

House Republicans elected Jordan minority leader by 106 votes to 73 over Steve Scalise on 10 November, after Speaker Mike Johnson declined to run. They replaced the leadership that lost the majority, while Senate Republicans kept theirs.

Donald Trump

Trump asked on Truth Social on 9 November whether anybody believed the election "was honest" and blamed the machines, having told The New York Times on polling night he would accept the results. No Republican campaign had sued over a 2026 result by 10 November, so the claim has no case behind it.

Judge David O. Carter

Carter closed the Justice Department's suit over about 20,000 California mail ballots on 10 November after the department withdrew it, writing that the suit "attempted to disrupt an ongoing election". The closure leaves the department with no court order touching a 2026 California ballot.

Written with AI from Lowdown's published reporting. Not individually reviewed by an editor. Editorial standards.