elect.info
DATA COVERAGE not externally verified tier raw_mirror vintage 2026-08-27 coverage 1980-2024 · 2026 Midterms in flight! money live · figures computing (best estimates)
Dollar figures are still computing and reflect best estimates while the corrected-financial reconciliation completes. Relationships, counts, and dates are final.

Tuberville, Thomas H

candidate · S0AL00230
Tuberville, Thomas H AL · REP · Senate · AL · incumbent
The seat — demographics, elections & money for this district full page ↗

Person: Tuberville, Thomas H · every race, every cycle

4 cycles2 committees42 contributing committees345 vendors

Raised — contributing committees / cycle

Spent — vendor payments / cycle

IE support — independent expenditures for this candidate / cycle

Transferred out — other candidates funded / cycle

All four, combined -- 2016-2028

20162028
Raised Spent IE support Transferred out

2016–2028 · entity counts (money-dark); dollar trends light up at the flip. "Raised" is committee-routed contributions only — individual donors stay held pending the privacy decision, and there is no distinct bundler surface yet (#2488).

In the 2026 Senate field

AL

Tuberville, Thomas H ranks #29 of 117 Senate candidates nationally in 2026.

#CandidateStatePartyRaised
1 Ossoff, T. Jonathan GA DEM $214,842,226
2 Sullivan, Dan AK REP $109,507,676
3 Graham, Lindsey O. SC REP $55,788,928
4 Peters, Gary MI DEM $42,624,020
5 McConnell, Mitch KY REP $41,405,744
6 Hickenlooper, John W. CO DEM $40,916,604
7 Daines, Steve MT REP $23,656,650
8 Booker, Cory A. NJ DEM $22,038,180
29 Tuberville, Thomas H (this candidate) AL REP $3,169,467

The national Senate field for 2026, ranked by money raised. Party affiliation shown as filed — third-party and state-party labels (DFL, WFP, etc.) are not merged into DEM/REP.

Campaign contact

AUBURN, AL, 36830

Website, phone and social accounts arrive with the campaign-contact ingest (FEC F1 + social sources).

Money raised vs spent

coming

Raised-vs-spent over time — the per-cycle totals surface is coming.

Where the money comes from

by source type

Conduits (ActBlue / WinRed) 61% · PACs 37% · Party committees 1% · Super PACs 0%

Source typeContributionsAmount
Conduits (ActBlue / WinRed)31958$1,820,459
PACs473$1,116,186
Party committees1$44,600
Super PACs2$7,000
Total (committee-sourced)$2,988,245

Money received from committees, split by the type of the paying committee (PAC, Super PAC, party, joint-fundraising, conduit). Individual (person) giving is aggregated separately with privacy suppression and is not included here.

Transfers in

from committees
Payer typeTransfersAmount
Joint-fundraising committees8$64,364
Total$64,364

Committee-to-committee transfers received by this candidate's principal committee, split by the type of the sending committee.

Individual-donor conduit dependency

lifetime

25% by dollars

12607 of 29378 individual contributions on file routed through a conduit, lifetime -- not per-cycle (the underlying edge source can't be cleanly split by year). Conduit dollars are the true donor's money, passed through a platform; not double-counted.

PAC vs. individual money

by dollars

Individual (direct) 84% · Committee-routed (PAC / party / JFA / conduit) 16%

29378 individual contributions to this candidate's principal committee vs 32434 committee-routed contributions across every committee this candidate has authorized ($15,793,426 vs $2,988,245). Two different grains -- individual money is scoped to the principal committee only; committee-routed money spans every authorized committee -- combined here as the closest count-first read of PAC- vs individual-dependence available today. Part of the funding-concentration strip (#2730); donor-sector concentration and top-vendor share are not yet available.

Where the money goes

beneficiaries

Money disbursed by this candidate's principal committee: contributions to other candidates (the "raises big, then funds allies" signal), transfers to committees by destination type, vendor spending, and independent expenditures made.

Where the donors are

precinct-floored · suppressed
Partial data. About 15% of donor money is geocoded, concentrated in 9 states (AK, AL, AR, AZ, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL). Every other state — including the largest donor states (CA, NY, TX) — currently has zero geocoded rows. A blank state means not yet geocoded, never no donors here. Not a complete picture of donor geography.
Loading…

Aggregated itemized individual giving, geocoded to donor home address, suppressed for privacy (small or single-donor-dominated cells withheld). Unitemized giving has no geography.

Who runs it

Treasurer · JONES, RANDALL E

Board / senior staff arrive from the payroll-disbursement derivation.

Committees

authorized
CommitteeRoleType
Alabama Senate Republican Nominee Fund - Tommy Tuberville Authorized committee S
Tuberville For Senate, Inc. Principal campaign committee S

Money in

committee & PAC contributions

Contributing committees & PACs · 2026:

No committee contributions on file for this cycle.

Cross-party support

who funds both sides

24 of this candidate's 40 top committee funders also fund the other side.

Committee / PACOverall givingD / R
Aflac Political Action Committee (Aflac Pac) 51% / 49%
L3Harris Technologies, Inc. Pac 51% / 49%
American Council Of Engineering Companies (Acec/Pac) 46% / 54%
Employees Of Rtx Corporation Political Action Committee 46% / 54%
Leidos Inc. Political Action Committee 46% / 54%
Bae Systems Inc. Political Action Committee (Bae Systems Usa Pac) 42% / 58%
Bhfs-E, Pc Pac (Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck Political Action Committee) 42% / 58%
Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar Cooperative Political Action Committee 38% / 62%
Airbus Americas, Inc. Political Action Committee 37% / 63%
Regions Financial Corporation Political Action Committee 36% / 64%
Southeast Cotton Committee (Secc) Southern Cottongrowers Inc/Se Cotton Ginners Assn 34% / 66%
The Farm Credit Council Political Action Committee 34% / 66%

Each committee's overall giving split by recipient party (by dollars).

Super PAC spending

$ held · counts

No independent expenditures on file for 2026 (2016 excluded).

Money out — top vendors

$ shown
VendorPaidPaymentsCategory
Anedot $135,117 346
Revv, Llc $22,515 183
The Prosper Group $103,650 116
Win Red Technical Services Llc $13,890 106
Win Red Technical Services Llc $8,423 103
Win Red Technical Services Llc $79,897 101
The Prosper Group $42,024 96
The Prosper Group $564,845 84
Chain Bridge Bank $4,383 83
Roc $30,243 51
Club For Growth Pac $3,789 46
Roc $1,606 45

Payment counts from the principal committee; dollar totals held. Arc maps of where money goes arrive with the geo layer.

Right of response

No response on file. The subject of this page may add a statement here.

Is this you? Claim this page to respond. Statements are the subject's own words, verified and moderated — the underlying data is unchanged.

One-stop candidate summary · money-dark until the corrected-financial refresh. Data as of March 11, 2026, 11 a.m..