District of Columbia campaign finance next to federal obligations

DC’s scale gap is the relationship

The join is DC: FEC receipts of $6.8 million next to USAspending obligations of $264,978,830,057. 109 candidate committees sit beside 100,593 awards. If donations funded awards, this pair would be the first to break the story. Headquarters, pass-throughs, and place-of-performance rules can place large obligations on the DC code without a matching campaign-receipt book.

District of Columbia campaign finance, District of Columbia USAspending, and All FEC ties are the three links. This is not the Washington State join. WA is a different page.

Pass-through and headquarters effects can place obligations on DC. That is a reason to read the caveat, not a license to invent a headquarters share. This packet does not publish one.

State-office campaigns in District of Columbia file under state law and sit outside $6.8 million. Local procurement paid without a federal award sits outside $264,978,830,057. This page names two federal disclosure systems — FEC.gov candidate receipts and USAspending.gov awards — and stops. A third system would be a different citation.

Almost all FEC receipts sit on the Democratic line

Democratic committees reported $6.8 million (99.8%). Republican committees reported $0.0 million (0.1%). Other filers reported $0.0 million (0.1%). 109 committees is a tiny roster. It can still include residual and presidential filers tagged to DC. Sort the live hub.

Local DC races file under District law, outside $6.8 million. Do not treat $6.8 million as ‘Washington money’ in a national-donor sense. This packet’s FEC total is candidate-committee receipts tagged to DC, not a donor-origin series.

Do not call $6.8 million ‘K Street money.’ This FEC total is candidate-committee receipts tagged to DC, not a lobbying-registrant series and not a donor-origin series.

109 is a filing count, not a November ballot census. 100,593 is an action count, not unique vendors. Keep those nouns attached to the integers when citing District of Columbia.

DC obligations are an award extract, not a campaign extract

$264,978,830,057 covers award obligations USAspending attributes to the District. 100,593 is the action count. Many national organizations file awards to a DC address. That is a USAspending coding fact, not an FEC fact, and not a claim about 109 campaigns.

Do not compute a mean award. Do not divide $264,978,830,057 by $6.8 million. Headquarters effects are not a packet field you can quote as a dollar.

Quote District of Columbia campaign finance for the live FEC roster of 109 committees and $6.8 million in receipts. Quote District of Columbia USAspending for $264,978,830,057 and 100,593 awards. All FEC ties keeps DC in a series of geographic joins. None of those pages adds receipts to obligations or assigns FEC party codes to awards.

What this page refuses to claim about the capital

That 99.8% Democratic receipts describe 100,593 awards. That $6.8 million funded $264,978,830,057. That DC ‘punches above its weight’ — weight is not a field here. Quote the two totals. Stop.

Independent expenditures mentioning DC candidates can be paid from elsewhere. Those expenditures sit outside both packet totals. Maryland and Virginia are different joins.

District of Columbia’s 109 committees and 100,593 awards answer different questions. Keep $6.8 million on the FEC.gov sentence and $264,978,830,057 on the USAspending.gov sentence even when a headline wants a single number. A single number would mix statutes. This join will not publish one.

Do not fold Maryland or Virginia into DC

This packet does not split $264,978,830,057 among Northwest, Southeast, or federal buildings. 100,593 awards and 109 committees are District-wide as USAspending and FEC stored them.

Adding DC’s $264,978,830,057 to Maryland or Virginia obligations would invent a capital-region total this join does not publish. Keep the three ties on three pages.

Amended candidate reports move $6.8 million. Award restatements move $264,978,830,057. Rewrite only the sentence whose source moved. District of Columbia campaign finance and District of Columbia USAspending are the live tables; this prose is a packet snapshot for DC.

District of Columbia citation

FEC.gov: $6.8 million; 109 committees; Democratic $6.8 million; Republican $0.0 million; other $0.0 million. USAspending.gov: $264,978,830,057; 100,593 awards. Campaign contributions are not federal awards.

Do not rank District of Columbia as more influential because $6.8 million sits beside $264,978,830,057. Influence is not a field in this packet. The join is DC geography only.

Questions

Is this the District of Columbia or Washington State?

The District (DC). FEC candidate receipts are $6.8 million from 109 committees. USAspending obligations are $264,978,830,057 across 100,593 awards. Washington State is a separate WA join with its own hubs. LobbyVault joins the DC extracts only. FEC.gov and USAspending.gov remain the originating systems.

Do DC campaign donations fund federal awards recorded in DC?

No. $6.8 million is FEC candidate receipts. $264,978,830,057 is USAspending obligations. A shared DC code is not a funding path. Headquarters and place-of-performance rules can place awards on DC without touching a campaign account.

Why is DC’s FEC party split so lopsided?

Democratic committees reported $6.8 million, or 99.8% of $6.8 million. Republican committees reported $0.0 million. Other filers reported $0.0 million. Those shares describe 109 candidate committees, not 100,593 awards. LobbyVault joins the DC extracts only. FEC.gov and USAspending.gov remain the originating systems.

Where are the District’s hubs?

District of Columbia campaign finance on LobbyVault, District of Columbia USAspending on SpendingVault, All FEC ties for other joins. Later bulk files override this snapshot. Do not merge DC with Maryland or Virginia here. LobbyVault joins the DC extracts only. FEC.gov and USAspending.gov remain the originating systems.