Skip to main content
← All data ties

Alabama campaign finance next to federal obligations

USAspending.gov records $307,568,607,509.51 in federal obligations to Alabama recipients across 287,505 awards. FEC.gov candidate committees tagged to Alabama reported $58,532,087.11 in receipts across 633 filers. Republican committees account for $53,843,036.78 of those receipts, about 92.0% — the most lopsided Republican-committee share in this join family. That share describes candidate committees. It does not describe the 287,505 awards, and donations do not fund those obligations.

Key figures

  • Alabama USAspending obligations are $307,568,607,509.51 across 287,505 awards.
  • Alabama FEC candidate receipts are $58,532,087.11 across 633 committees.
  • Republican committees reported about 92.0% of those receipts; Democratic committees about 7.8%.
  • That lopsided FEC split cannot be applied to federal awards.
  • Donations do not fund the obligations on this page.

Alabama’s award extract beside a 92% receipt share

The spending extract is $307,568,607,509.51 and 287,505 awards. The FEC extract is $58,532,087.11 and 633 candidate committees. Award count sits beside Indiana’s 287,874, Kentucky’s 287,766, and Tennessee’s 287,801 in this family — four similar row totals with different dollar books and different FEC mixes. Alabama’s FEC mix is the outlier: about 92.0% Republican-committee receipts. That outlier stays on the FEC side of the join.

Open Alabama federal spending for obligations. Open Alabama FEC totals for receipts. All spending ties lists other pairs. AL is a shared code, not a payment trail.

USAspending.gov in Alabama

The $307,568,607,509.51 total is obligations, not outlays. The 287,505 rows are award actions. Repeat recipients add rows. This packet has no unique-vendor census and no party field on awards.

Alabama federal spending is the live award hub. It does not list FEC donors.

FEC.gov: $53,843,036.78 Republican-committee receipts

Alabama candidate receipts are $58,532,087.11 from 633 committees. Republican committees reported $53,843,036.78 (about 92.0%). Democratic committees reported $4,589,908.45 (about 7.8%). Other and unaffiliated filers reported $99,141.88 (about 0.2%). About 92.0% is a share of $58,532,087.11. It is not a share of $307,568,607,509.51.

633 is a filing count, close to Kentucky’s 613 in this family, with a different receipt total and a more lopsided party mix. Filing-count similarity is not award similarity. Party codes stay on the FEC side.

92% of receipts is not 92% of awards

A near-unanimous FEC split invites a false headline about “Republican Alabama spending.” USAspending awards in this packet have no party field. Printing 92.0% next to 287,505 awards invents a statistic. Adding $58,532,087.11 to the obligation total invents a combined checkbook.

Correlation is not causation. Different statutes, different filers. Massachusetts’s about 90.7% Democratic share in this family is the mirror image on the other party code — and equally unusable on awards.

How to cite Alabama

Name USAspending.gov for $307,568,607,509.51 and 287,505 awards. Name FEC.gov for $58,532,087.11, 633 committees, Republican $53,843,036.78, Democratic $4,589,908.45, other $99,141.88. State-office campaigns file under Alabama law and never enter either extract. Local procurement is outside USAspending.gov.

Independent expenditures are not extra packet facts. Live hubs: Alabama federal spending and Alabama FEC totals. All spending ties is the join index.

Montgomery campaigns stay off the Alabama obligation book

Alabama state-office campaigns file under Alabama law. Those reports never enter $58,532,087.11 and never enter $307,568,607,509.51. Local procurement is outside USAspending.gov. Award count 287,505 sits with Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee in this family. Alabama’s FEC mix is the outlier: Republican $53,843,036.78 (about 92.0%). Massachusetts’s about 90.7% Democratic share is the mirror image on the other party code. Both are unusable on awards.

Independent expenditures are not extra packet facts. Democratic $4,589,908.45 (about 7.8%) and other $99,141.88 (about 0.2%) complete the split among 633 committees. 633 is close to Kentucky’s 613 with a different receipt total. Filing-count similarity is not award similarity. Mapping 92.0% onto 287,505 awards invents a party field.

Cite USAspending.gov for $307,568,607,509.51 and 287,505 awards. Cite FEC.gov for $58,532,087.11 and 633 committees. Alabama federal spending and Alabama FEC totals are the live hubs. All spending ties is the join index. Donations do not fund the obligations.

About 92.0% Republican of $58,532,087.11 among 633 committees is a receipt share. $307,568,607,509.51 across 287,505 awards is an obligation total. They refresh independently. Quote both sources. Alabama federal spending and Alabama FEC totals stay separate. All spending ties is the index. Donations do not fund the obligations on this page.

Questions

Do Alabama campaign donations pay for federal awards?
No. USAspending obligations of $307,568,607,509.51 and FEC receipts of $58,532,087.11 are different datasets joined only by state. Agencies record 287,505 awards as obligations. A shared AL code is not a funding path.
How much federal spending is obligated in Alabama?
USAspending.gov records indexed here show $307,568,607,509.51 in obligations across 287,505 awards tagged to Alabama. That figure is an obligation total, not an outlay series and not an FEC receipt total.
How much have Alabama federal candidates raised?
FEC.gov aggregates show $58,532,087.11 in candidate receipts across 633 federal committees tagged to Alabama. Republican filers reported $53,843,036.78 (about 92.0%). Democratic filers reported $4,589,908.45 (about 7.8%). That split does not describe awards.
Does the 92% Republican receipt share apply to Alabama contracts?
No. About 92.0% is a share of FEC candidate-committee receipts only. This packet has no party field on the 287,505 USAspending awards.

Join of USAspending.gov state obligations with FEC.gov candidate receipts for the same state. These are different datasets — donations do not fund the obligations on this page.