Skip to content
Welcome, thoughtbot's Giant Robots listeners!Start here
US Midterms 2026
27OCT

Democrats win the quarter, lose the bank

2 min read
13:20UTC

Filed FEC figures put the NRCC $13.7m ahead of the DCCC in the bank at 30 June, even though Democrats out-raised Republicans across the quarter itself.

PoliticsDeveloping
Key takeaway

Democrats are winning the fundraising quarter and losing the autumn advertising budget.

Filings made to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) on 20 July put the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) at $92.7m in cash on hand at 30 June, against $79.0m for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), a gap of $13.7m⁠1. Across the same three months the DCCC out-raised its rival, taking $37.4m to the NRCC's $35.4m⁠2.

Those filed receipts replace a number this briefing series published last month. On 21 June we reported the DCCC's second quarter at $45.3m, taking the figure from the committee's own announcement. That $45.3m was the DCCC's first-quarter total, announced on 20 April, and the second quarter had not closed when we ran it. The DCCC's real second-quarter receipts are the $37.4m now on the FEC record, and we have logged a correction against that earlier event.

The Republican lead holds at every tier, as it has since May: Republican National Committee (RNC) $128.5m against Democratic National Committee (DNC) $16.3m, and National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) $55.9m against Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) $41.0m.

The two headline numbers measure different things, which is how both parties can claim the quarter. Cash on hand is the balance banked since January 2025. Quarterly receipts count only the last three months of fundraising. October advertising comes out of the balance.

The Supreme Court struck the caps on party coordinated spending in June, and that ruling has made every banked dollar go further. Section 315(b) of the Communications Act obliges broadcasters to sell candidates their cheapest available rate in the 60 days before a general election. Party committees do not qualify for it when they spend independently, but spending coordinated with a candidate does. Striking the caps moved party money into the cheaper half of the advertising market, so an NRCC dollar sitting in the bank now reaches more voters this autumn than the same dollar would have reached in 2024.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Two different numbers get reported after every fundraising quarter: how much a campaign committee raised in the last three months, and how much it has left in the bank right now. The Democratic House committee (DCCC) raised more than the Republican one (NRCC) in the second quarter of 2026, but the NRCC still has more money banked overall, because banked cash reflects spending and saving across the whole two-year cycle rather than a single quarter. A recent Supreme Court ruling also made banked cash go further, because it lets party committees spend directly alongside a candidate's own campaign at cheaper advertising rates than an independent ad buy gets.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

Cash on hand and quarterly receipts measure different things. Receipts count money raised in the three months just ended; cash on hand is the balance built up since the cycle began in January 2025, after subtracting everything already spent.

A committee can out-raise its rival in a single quarter and still trail badly on the balance that actually pays for advertising, because that balance reflects eighteen months of fundraising and spending decisions, not three.

What could happen next?
  • Consequence

    Cash on hand determines reservation power for autumn broadcast inventory, which is bought months ahead of election day and prices upward as it approaches.

  • Meaning

    Removing the coordinated-spending caps converts committee balances into candidate-rate advertising, stretching each banked Republican dollar further than the same dollar would have gone under the old rules.

First Reported In

Update #14 · 0-for-17 in court, and the map that held

National Republican Congressional Committee· 26 Jul 2026
Read original →
Different Perspectives
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Department of Justice (DOJ)
DOJ appealed to the 9th Circuit after Judge David O. Carter did not rule by a noon deadline on 22 October that DOJ itself had set, seeking to have California set aside mail ballots from more than 20,000 listed voters. Its case is that ineligible votes cancel lawful ones; the panel dismissed the appeal 2-1 on 26 October.
Lower Costs Now
Lower Costs Now
Lower Costs Now reported $7.37m in Kansas on 24 and 25 October, part of $65.65m in Senate races since its first independent expenditure on 1 October, including $17.21m for Josh Turek in Iowa. Its FEC filings show $50.18m raised by 14 October.
MAGA Inc
MAGA Inc
MAGA Inc, the super PAC aligned with Donald Trump, filed $7.20m against James Talarico on 22 October, taking its Texas spending to $37.65m. Of that, $30.12m is against Talarico and $7.53m is for Ken Paxton, the Republican nominee.
Senate Majority PAC (SMP)
Senate Majority PAC (SMP)
SMP's pre-general report shows it spent $108.70m from 1 to 14 October, including $65.0m to WinSenate and $10.0m to Texas Forever, and ended with $32.72m. Texas Forever has reported $19.40m against Ken Paxton since 1 October.
Senate Leadership Fund (SLF)
Senate Leadership Fund (SLF)
SLF's pre-general report shows $88.42m in cash on 14 October and $18.98m raised in the fortnight, none of it from Elon Musk. It has since reported $12.07m against Sherrod Brown in Ohio, and its $2.7m to Plains PAC preceded that committee's first Kansas buy on 25 October.
National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC)
National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC)
The NRSC's pre-general report shows nothing spent with Ashley Hinson in Iowa, or with its nominees in six other states, from 1 to 14 October, after $5.54m with Hinson in September. It took no new loan and ended the fortnight with $25.20m in cash and $20m of debt.

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