Senate Candidates Spend $15 Million on Out-of-State Fundraising Ads

Candidates in four competitive U.S. Senate races have allocated over $15 million to digital advertising aimed at fundraising outside their home states. An analysis by NPR of Google Ads in Iowa, Georgia, Ohio, and Texas shows that approximately 75% of this spending occurred in national markets rather than local ones.

The reliance on external funds is particularly high for certain Democrats. In Iowa and Georgia, more than 80% of itemized individual contributions to Josh Turek and Jon Ossoff, respectively, originated from outside the state. Platforms such as ActBlue and WinRed facilitate this flow by lowering the cost of soliciting small-dollar donations. Zachary Albert, a politics professor at Brandeis University, notes that these platforms make even $5 or $10 contributions profitable for campaigns due to reduced transaction costs.

Messaging in these national advertisements often diverges from local strategy. Michael Franz of the Wesleyan Media Project observes that candidates typically avoid party labels in local television ads to appeal to swing voters. In contrast, digital ads targeting out-of-state donors frequently emphasize party identity and national issues, such as the presidency or the composition of the Senate. For example, Sherrod Brown in Ohio promotes turning his state blue, while Mike Collins in Georgia seeks to keep his seat red.

Political scientists suggest this shift reflects a change in the primary stakeholders for candidates. Daniel Hopkins, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, explains that while candidates compete locally for votes, they compete nationally for attention and funding. This dynamic forces campaigns to appeal to a broader, often more partisan, donor base. Sarah Bryner of Public Agenda adds that donors in solidly one-party states often send money to competitive states like Georgia or Texas to influence outcomes.

The trend has historical roots in the development of grassroots fundraising infrastructure. Democrats established ActBlue in 2004, nearly 15 years before Republicans launched WinRed in 2019. While Democrats initially led in out-of-state fundraising due to weaker local networks in key states, Republicans have accelerated their efforts recently, driven by the mobilization of small-dollar donors under President Trump.

Regulatory responses remain limited. Hawaii will implement a cap on out-of-state donations in 2027, but Raymond La Raja of the University of Massachusetts notes that national regulation is difficult given Supreme Court rulings on coordinated spending. The National Republican Senatorial Committee has already spent three times more on advertisements this cycle than in the previous midterms. Other states, including Alaska, Colorado, and Virginia, have enacted laws requiring the disclosure of top donors in advertisements.

The Ossoff campaign stated that it is powered by small-dollar donors and does not accept money from corporate PACs or federal lobbyists. Other campaigns declined to comment or did not respond to requests. Despite the influx of external capital, Bryner points out that out-of-state donors cannot vote in the race, creating a potential disconnect between fundraising success and electoral victory.