Democratic Senate hopefuls put California cash in the bank

WASHINGTON— Democrats, who once thought taking back the U.S. Senate in 2026 was a long shot, have discovered new hope, thanks to an unpopular president and a boost to California’s donor machine.

Californians provided the most money to Democrats from out of state in nearly every heated race, and in some cases provided more than in-state donors, according to a Times analysis of campaign finance files covering the first three months of 2026.

Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia, who received donations totaling more than $14 million, received as much money from supporters in California as he received from supporters in his own state, among identified donors who contributed at least $200.

In Texas, Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico has raised a staggering $27 million so far this year; California donors contributed just under $1.2 million to support his campaign; Among donors whose names have been disclosed, he is second only to Texas supporters.

Donors giving less than $200 do not need to be reported on campaign finance reports, and these donors make up a significant share of those who gave to Ossoff and Talarico’s campaigns.

Republicans currently hold 53 of the Senate’s 100 seats. This year, 35 seats are in the race, including special elections in Florida and Ohio.

GOP still wins key cash race

Although most seats are held by Republicans, Poll showing potential for tight races In many, it gave Democrats hope they could close or reverse the deficit in November.

Top Democratic candidates have outperformed their GOP rivals in the most competitive Senate races, but Republicans are winning the cash race among big-money committees that can accept checks much larger than the $7,000 cap on donations to candidate committees.

Democratic candidates have continued a tradition of relying on donors in the nation’s most populous state to fund their campaigns.

“California has been and continues to be a rich goldmine for many candidates,” said Michael Beckel, money director for political reform at Issue One, a bipartisan advocacy group.

Democratic Senate candidates raised more money from California donors than donors in their home states in several races, according to campaign finance reports filed Wednesday.

Democratic former Rep. Mary Peltola of Alaska, who is challenging incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan, brought in nearly $900,000 from California donors who contributed at least $200. Alaska donors contributed just over $520,000 to Peltola during the same period.

Two of the three leading Democratic candidates in Michigan’s open Senate race, Rep. Haley Stevens and physician Abdul El-Sayed, reported receiving more help from California donors than from donors in Michigan. California was the second-largest support base for state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, the other leading Democratic candidate.

And in Nebraska, independent Dan Osborn, who is challenging incumbent Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts, received $80,000 more from California donors than he received from Nebraskans.

Dozens of California donors have given to at least five Senate candidates nationwide, according to The Times’ analysis of filing data.

Burbank playwright and screenwriter Winnie Holzman has donated to Democratic candidates in nine key races and said she was inspired to donate to them — and other candidates and political groups — because of her concerns about President Trump’s administration’s policies and what she sees as violations of the law.

“This isn’t just about who is in the Senate,” said Holzman, who wrote the screenplay for the play “Wicked” and co-wrote the film adaptations. “But if there were enough Democrats in the Senate right now, there would be a lot more opportunity to reverse this.”

Democrats’ impressive fundraising efforts come with an important caveat.

The two most prominent political committees backing Republican Senate candidates—the party-affiliated National Republican Senatorial Committee and the Senate Leadership Fund super PAC—outperformed rival Democratic groups by significant margins this cycle.

For the NRSC, an $11.5 million fundraising advantage since the start of 2025 has translated into a modest $2 million cash-in-the-bank advantage by the end of February compared to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

But the Senate Leadership Fund, which can accept unlimited amounts of cash from donors, had $91.6 million more spending at the end of March than its Democratic rival, the Senate Majority PAC.

And pro-Trump super PAC MAGA Inc. At the end of February, there was a stunning $312 million in the bank.

However, money raised by candidate campaign committees offers some advantages over money raised by other committees. Most importantly, candidates can purchase ads cheaper than other political committees.

That’s a significant distinction in a year when advertising spending in Senate races is expected to exceed $2.8 billion.

senate map

While political analysts expect Democrats to likely do well in congressional races (early signs point to a strong possibility the party will regain control of the House of Representatives), gaining control of the Senate will also be possible. a much longer order.

“The Senate will be won or lost in red states,” said Kyle Kondik, editor-in-chief of the Sabato Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia Center for Politics.

Even in a best-case scenario for Democrats, they would likely need to win at least two states like Iowa, Alaska, Ohio or Texas to regain control of the chamber, all of which went to Trump by double-digit margins in the 2024 presidential election.

Given the large sums of money that both parties will raise and spend, Kondik said the returns on fundraising may reach a point of diminishing returns.

“Obviously you’d rather have more than less, but the actual impact is highly debatable,” he said.

And history shows that fundraising prowess does not necessarily translate into electoral success in November.

Take the example of Texas Democrat Beto O’Rourke.

O’Rourke raised more than $80 million in his 2018 fight against incumbent Republican Ted Cruz; this was more than double Cruz’s $35 million fundraising volume.

But that wasn’t enough to put the then-El Paso congressman over the top.

O’Rourke lost the race by about 2.5 percentage points.