How Super PACs Influence Elections: 2026 Midterms

To understand the current American political landscape, you need to know how Super PACs (political action committees) influence elections. Alongside traditional PACs, these groups pump tons of money into campaigns at every level of the government. While money from PACs can help candidates run and win elections, the shady way these groups operate shapes the health of our democracy, whose voices are heard, and what issues get attention.

As of early 2026, President Trump’s Super PAC, MAGA Inc., had over $300 million stocked up, ready to influence midterm races. While competing against such massive war chests can seem daunting, recent history shows it’s possible: Grassroots candidates won New York City’s 2025 primary elections despite Super PACs pouring $46 million into the race. Super PACs may have a staggering influence on elections, but voter power is resilient.

What Is a Super PAC?

Super PACs, formally called independent-expenditure-only committees, were created after the 2010 Citizens United and Speechnow.org v. FEC court decisions. These rulings allowed unlimited fundraising and political spending by outside groups, as long as they don’t coordinate directly with campaigns.

While they can’t give money directly to a candidate’s campaign or legally coordinate strategy with them, Super PACs can:

• Raise unlimited money from individuals, corporations, unions, and other groups.
• Spend without limits on ads, mailers, phone banking, and digital campaigns.
• Target voters directly with sophisticated data, microtargeted ads, and social media strategies.
• Fund large-scale operations like canvassing programs, rallies, or media blitzes.
• Support or oppose specific candidates through independent expenditures that shape public opinion.
• Dominate the conversation by outspending grassroots campaigns and flooding the airwaves.

Together, these abilities make Super PACs some of the most powerful players in modern elections, even though they’re technically independent from the campaigns they influence.

PAC vs. Super PAC: What’s the Difference?

To put Super PACs in context, it helps to compare them directly with traditional PACs. Both exist to raise money and influence elections, but they play by very different rules.

PACs were created in the 1940s as a legal way for groups of people, like unions, trade associations, and corporations, to pool donations and support candidates. The idea was that instead of unlimited individual contributions, there would be clear limits, transparency, and accountability. Today, PACs must register with the Federal Election Commission (FEC), file reports about their donors and spending, and follow strict contribution caps.

PACs can:

• Raise money from members, employees, or donors tied to an organization or cause.
• Contribute directly to candidates, with a $5,000 cap per candidate, per election.
• Donate to political parties, within capped annual limits.
• Coordinate with campaigns on messaging, strategy, and events.
• Bundle contributions from many supporters to demonstrate broad backing.

PACs are still popular because they provide direct access to candidates, which Super PACs legally can’t do. PACs may not have the unlimited spending power of Super PACs, but the money they do spend often buys influence and fosters direct ties with lawmakers.

Super PACs, by contrast, don’t buy access in the same way. Instead, they wield power by spending millions to shape the environment around a candidate, through ads, mailers, and digital campaigns. While they can’t hand over a check to a candidate, the sheer scale of their spending still builds influence. Lawmakers know which Super PACs used their funds to help them win, and they often feel pressure to take those donors’ priorities seriously.

In short: PACs buy access inside the campaign, while Super PACs shape public opinion from the outside.

LEARN MORE: Understand the tangled web that is money in politics.

Key PACs and Super PACs in 2026

Some notable Super PAC groups shaping the midterm elections right now include:

• MAGA Inc.: A pro-Trump Super PAC that has raised unprecedented sums to influence federal races. It’s emblematic of the scale of outside spending.
• Fairshake: A crypto-focused Super PAC with goals to get a crypto market structure bill passed, Fairshake is part of a larger group of cryptocurrency PACs led by companies like Coinbase, a16z, and Ripple. In 2024, Fairshake raised over $260 million, and the crypto Super PAC group has grown a war chest of nearly $200 million for the coming midterms.
• United Democracy Project: A Super PAC affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) that spends heavily in congressional primaries to back candidates aligned with strong U.S.-Israel relations.
• American Bridge 21st Century: A key liberal Super PAC focused on opposition research and ad campaigns. In early 2024, it launched a $140 million offensive against Donald Trump, spending $25 million alone on abortion-related ads.
• American Priorities: Led by a former Bernie Sanders campaign strategist, American Priorities is a progressive Super PAC focusing on candidates who take a more critical approach to Israel. Its goals are to counter the pro-Israel groups that consistently spend millions to shape party primaries.
• Leading the Future: A Silicon Valley–backed Super PAC launched in 2025 to promote policies favorable to the artificial intelligence industry. It has already raised tens of millions to influence candidates in the 2026 midterms.

PACs, by contrast, operate with stricter limits. They can’t spend unlimited amounts, but they still wield influence by donating directly to candidates and buying access inside campaigns.

Notable PACs include:

• National Association of Realtors PAC: One of the biggest-spending trade PACs, giving capped contributions directly to candidates across both parties.
• EMILY’s List PAC: A well-known Democratic PAC that directly supports pro-choice women candidates.
• NRA Political Victory Fund: The PAC of the National Rifle Association, which donates directly to candidates who support gun rights. It’s one of the most recognized issue-based PACs in the country.
• National Beer Wholesalers Association PAC: A powerful industry PAC that contributes to candidates from both major parties.
• Laborers’ International Union of North America PAC: A major union PAC that contributes to candidates supportive of organized labor.

While PACs and Super PACs are among the most visible players in campaign finance, they’re not the only ones shaping the money flow in elections. National party committees like the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Republican National Committee (RNC), political nonprofits (often called “dark money” groups), and joint fundraising committees also raise and spend large sums. Together, these groups create a complex web of funding streams that fuel modern campaigns.

How PACs and Super PACs Impact Elections

As the 2026 midterms approach, Super PACs are positioning themselves to influence not just who wins elections, but what policies Congress prioritizes once those candidates take office.

There are four main ways PACs and Super PACs are influencing our elections and beyond:

#1: Amplifying Money in Politics

Super PACs, with their ability to raise and spend unlimited sums, reshape the financial scale of modern campaigns.

In 2025, the Wisconsin Supreme Court election became the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history, with spending topping $100 million. Billionaire Elon Musk alone poured more than $14 million into backing conservative Brad Schimel. Despite this flood of money, the liberal candidate Sandra Susan Crawford ultimately won with 55% of the vote.

The race shows both sides of the coin: Super PACs can supercharge the scale of spending in a campaign, but voter power can still overcome even record-breaking outside influence.

#2: Shaping Candidate Viability

PACs and Super PACs, through funding and outside spending, determine who has the resources to stay in the race.

PACs give candidates capped but direct contributions that help cover essentials like staff and campaign infrastructure. Super PACs, meanwhile, spend independently to flood the airwaves with political ads or launch voter outreach efforts on a candidate’s behalf. While they’re not coordinating directly with campaigns, their outside spending can extend a candidate’s reach and allow campaigns to focus their limited funds on other priorities.

Progressive Super PAC, American Priorities, is focusing its spending on competitive primaries in 2026 to improve the viability of candidates who are critical of America’s support and funding of Israel. AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups are poised with nearly $100 million and a massive network of members to elect candidates who wish to strengthen the U.S.-Israel partnership, and to undermine candidates who don’t.

Ultimately, candidates without PAC or Super PAC backing often struggle to raise enough money or visibility to remain viable, no matter their grassroots appeal.

#3: Controlling the Narrative

PACs buy access inside campaigns, but Super PACs dominate the public conversation. Their ads can define a candidate before voters ever meet them, or flood districts with attack messages that shift polling.

A candidate might want to talk about education or local infrastructure, but if a Super PAC pours millions into attack ads about crime or immigration, those become the issues voters see most.

Candidates may also feel compelled to set the record straight on those attacks, shifting their own campaign focus from positive policy ideas to defending their name. This power to set the agenda can drown out grassroots priorities and distort what the election is really about.

In the 2024 presidential cycle, MAGA Inc. spent millions on ads targeting Vice President Harris on immigration, painting her as the "border czar." These ads ran heavily in battleground states like Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, and Arizona, shifting attention away from substantive debates on health care or the economy.

Rather than just promoting candidates, PACs and Super PACs are redefining the stakes of elections themselves, often sidelining the topics most important to everyday voters.

#4: Influencing Behavior After the Election

The influence of PACs and Super PACs doesn’t end when the ballots are counted. Candidates who benefit from large outside spending know exactly which groups backed them and which could fund their opposition in the next cycle.

A Super PAC funded by the AI Industry, Leading the Future, raised more than $50 million in the second half of 2025, mostly from an OpenAI founder and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. The group is spending heavily to support AI-friendly candidates and oppose those pushing for tighter AI regulations.

In early 2026 primaries, the influence of AI-backed Super PACs is already proving successful: 19 out of 20 candidates backed by AI-industry Super PACs won their primaries in North Carolina and Texas.

Andreessen Horowitz also has its hand in cryptocurrency Super PAC networks, alongside Coinbase and Ripple, backing candidates who support legislation intended to expand crypto markets and reduce regulatory barriers.

PAC and Super PAC spending create subtle but powerful incentives to prioritize donor interests in office, whether it’s pushing certain bills forward, avoiding controversial votes, or granting access to lobbyists tied to major funders.

Even when no explicit deal is made, the expectation of future support shapes how lawmakers govern.

LEARN MORE: Explore all the ways big money affects our local elections.

Why Super PACs and PACs Matter for Democracy

At the end of the day, PACs and Super PACs don’t just shape campaigns. They shape the health of democracy itself.

Their influence raises some big problems:

• Wealthy Donors Dominate: When billionaires or industries pour millions into Super PACs, their priorities dominate the conversation. Everyday voters may still cast ballots, but their $20 donations or grassroots energy can’t compete with a flood of TV ads, mailers, and digital campaigns.
• Policy Tilts Toward Funders: Candidates know exactly who spent to help them win. Even without explicit coordination, that support creates pressure once they’re in office. Lawmakers may prioritize policies that protect those interests over community needs.
• Transparency Isn’t Always Real: While PACs and Super PACs must disclose their donors, “dark money” groups often funnel funds into them, hiding the true source of political influence. Voters are left guessing who is really behind the ads they see.
• Local Elections Feel Nationalized: As seen in Boston and New York City, local races are no longer immune from outside spending. That means neighborhood priorities can get drowned out by national partisan talking points.

PACs and Super PACs may operate within legal rules, but their influence distorts the promise of one person, one vote. If unchecked, big money risks making elections more about donors and less about democracy.

Curbing Outside Influence in Elections

Super PACs aren’t going away anytime soon. In fact, they’re likely to grow even more sophisticated, using data analytics, AI, and digital platforms to micro-target voters. That makes reform, transparency, and voter awareness even more critical.

Here’s what you can do to combat Super PAC influence in the 2026 midterms:

• Back candidates who reject Super PAC money. Supporting grassroots and Independent candidates who run people-powered campaigns sends a clear message about what kind of democracy we want.
• Support small-donor matching. Programs like New York City’s 8-to-1 match amplify grassroots donations, giving regular voters more weight compared to big-dollar checks.
• Experiment with democracy vouchers. In cities like Seattle, every voter gets vouchers they can donate to local candidates, turning ordinary residents into campaign funders.
• Push for contribution limits. Stronger caps on how much PACs and individuals can give would help level the playing field.

Reform isn’t theoretical. It’s already happening at the state and city level. The more communities experiment with these solutions, the harder it becomes for big money to dominate unchecked. Change doesn’t just come from lawmakers. Voters, donors, and candidates themselves can choose to prioritize people-powered politics over Super PAC dollars.

LEARN MORE: Check out more ways we can reform campaign finance rules to strengthen our democracy.

PACs, Super PACs, and the Future of Elections

PACs and Super PACs have become fixtures of American elections, shaping who runs, what issues dominate, and how candidates govern once elected. Their influence may be legal, but it often undermines the core principle of one person, one vote.

The good news is, voters aren’t powerless. From small-donor programs to democracy vouchers to candidates who refuse Super PAC support, reforms are already proving that people-powered politics can work.

At GoodParty.org, we’re building the tools and community to make that future possible, empowering Independent candidates, boosting grassroots campaigns, and putting voters back at the center of democracy.

Photo by Kaboompics.com