Washington — Democrats who once dreamed of retaking the U.S. Senate in 2026 have new hope thanks to an unpopular president and California’s donor machine in action.
Californians provided the most out-of-state cash to Democrats in nearly every highly competitive race, and in many cases out-gave in-state donors, according to a Times analysis of campaign finance filings covering the first three months of 2026.
Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff, who took in more than $14 million overall, received almost as much from California supporters as he did from supporters in his home state who contributed at least $200 and whose identities were disclosed.
Democratic Senate candidate James Tallarico in Texas has raised a staggering $27 million so far this year, with California donors contributing less than $1.2 million to support his campaign — second only to Texas supporters among donors whose names were disclosed.
Donors giving less than $200 are not required to be identified in campaign finance reports and constitute a significant portion of donors to both Ossoff’s and Tallarico’s campaigns.
Republicans currently control the Senate with 53 of the chamber’s 100 seats. There are 35 seats up for grabs this year, including special elections in Florida and Ohio.
The GOP is still winning a crucial cash race
While the majority of seats are currently in Republican hands, Voting seems likely to be a close contest Some of them have given Democrats hope that they might be able to reduce or reverse their losses in November.
Top Democratic candidates have outpolled their Republican rivals in the most competitive Senate races, but Republicans are currently winning the cash race among big money committees that can accept far larger checks than the $7,000 limit on donations to candidate committees.
Those Democratic candidates continue a grand tradition of relying on donors in the nation’s most populous state to fund their campaigns.
“California has been a rich gold mine for many candidates and it continues to be,” said Michael Beckel, director of money in politics reform at Issue One, a bipartisan advocacy group.
Democratic Senate candidates in some races raised more money from California donors than from donors in their home states, according to campaign finance reports filed Wednesday.
Alaska Democratic Representative Mary Peltola, who is challenging incumbent Republican Senator Dan Sullivan, brought in nearly $900,000 from California donors who contributed at least $200. Alaska donors contributed a little more than $520,000 to Peltola over the same period.
Two of the three leading Democratic candidates in Michigan’s open Senate race, Representative Haley Stevens and physician Abdul El-Sayed, reported taking more from California donors than from donors in Michigan. California was the second-largest bank of support for the other top Democratic contender, state Senator Mallory McMorrow.
And in Nebraska, independent Dan Osborn, who is challenging incumbent Republican Pete Ricketts, took in $80,000 more from disclosed donors from California than from Nebraskans.
Dozens of California donors donated to at least five Senate candidates across the country, according to The Times’ analysis of filing data.
Burbank playwright and screenwriter Winnie Holzman has donated to Democratic candidates in nine major races and said she was motivated to donate to them and other candidates and political groups because of concerns about President Trump’s administration’s policies and what she views as violations of the law.
“It’s not just about who is in the Senate,” said Holzman, who wrote the screenplay for the play “Wicked” and co-wrote its film adaptation. “But if enough Democrats were in the Senate right now, there would be a lot more ability to push back on this.”
The impressive fundraising by Democrats comes with an important caveat.
The two most prominent political committees supporting Republican Senate candidates – the party-affiliated National Republican Senatorial Committee and the Senate Leadership Fund super PAC – have both outspent rival Democratic groups by significant margins this cycle.
For the NRSC, a fundraising gain of $11.5 million since the beginning of 2025 has translated into a modest advantage of $2 million in cash in the bank as of 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 to spend at the end of March than Democratic rival Senate Majority PAC.
and pro-Trump super PACs MAGA Inc. There was a staggering $312 million in the bank at the end of February.
However, money raised by candidate campaign committees brings few advantages over money raised by other committees. Most importantly, candidates are able to buy advertisements at cheaper rates than other political committees.
That’s a significant difference in a year when ad spending in Senate races is expected to exceed $2.8 billion.
senate map
While political analysts expect Democrats to do well in congressional races – early indications suggest there is a strong possibility the party will win control of the House – winning control of the Senate would be possible. very high order.
“The Senate is being won or lost in red states,” said Kyle Kondik, managing editor of Sabato’s Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics.
Even in the best-case scenario for Democrats, to regain control of the chamber they would need to win at least two states such as Iowa, Alaska, Ohio or Texas, all of which went to Trump by double-digit margins in the 2024 presidential election.
With both sides likely to raise and spend large sums of money, Kondik said fundraising could reach the point of diminishing returns.
“Obviously you would like more rather than less, but the actual impact is quite controversial,” he said.
And history shows that the ability to raise money does not necessarily translate into electoral success in November.
Take the example of Texas Democrat Beto O’Rourke.
In his 2018 challenge of incumbent Republican Ted Cruz, O’Rourke brought in more than $80 million, more than double Cruz’s $35 million fundraising haul.
But it wasn’t enough to keep the former congressman from El Paso over the top.
O’Rourke lost the race by 2.5 percentage points.
