Senate Hopefuls Rely on Out-of-State Cash as Midterms Near

What happened

In four of this year's most competitive Senate races, the money is increasingly coming from somewhere else. An NPR analysis of Google Ads in Iowa, Georgia, Ohio and Texas found Democratic and Republican candidates spent more than $15 million on fundraising-related advertising in the 2025-26 election cycle. About three quarters of that spending went to ads that ran nationally, not locally.

For Georgia Sen. Jon Ossoff and Iowa Democratic nominee Josh Turek, more than 80% of itemized individual contributions came from out of state. In at least four competitive races, a majority of the money arrived from outside the state.

The pitch changes with the audience. On local television, candidates tend to avoid leaning hard on their party label, hoping to win over moderates and swing voters. In digital ads shown outside their states, the party label moves to the front, and the message turns national: attack or defend President Donald Trump, or turn a state blue or red.

Former Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown, who is trying to win his seat back, calls on donors to turn Ohio blue. Georgia Republican Rep. Mike Collins asks supporters to help turn his state's Senate seat red. Iowa Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson touts her "America First" credentials in her ads, while Ossoff attacks Trump directly.

Why it matters

Two platforms made this possible. ActBlue, launched by Democrats in 2004, and WinRed, launched by Republicans in 2019, cut the cost of collecting small donations online. Brandeis University politics professor Zachary Albert told NPR the platforms "really reduced the transaction costs for contributing," so even a $5 or $10 gift is worth chasing.

That changed who candidates answer to. University of Pennsylvania political scientist Daniel Hopkins said candidates now have two groups to please: a local voter base and a donor base that is often nationwide. When Ossoff competes for votes, Hopkins said, he faces Georgia Republicans. When he competes for dollars, he competes with prominent Democrats across the country.

Researchers warn the shift has a cost. Oxford researcher Michael Heseltine said members of Congress are spending more time on national talking points, and risk presenting themselves less as representatives of their own constituencies. The amount of out-of-state money has risen in each election cycle, according to OpenSecrets.

It does not always buy victory. Public Agenda's Sarah Bryner pointed to Amy McGrath, who lost to Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell in Kentucky despite heavy outside support, and Beto O'Rourke, who lost to Republican Sen. Ted Cruz in Texas. "Voters are still ultimately who makes the final decision," Bryner said, noting that out-of-state donors cannot vote in the race they fund.

The stakes are high: a [recent poll found Democrats ahead in the midterms but with warning signs about how large their gains will be](/article/new-poll-democrats-hold-midterm-edge-warning-signs), and our [guide to the 2026 midterms explains what is on the ballot on November 3](/article/us-midterm-elections-2026-explained).

What it means for the US

Control of the Senate is on the line. Republicans hold the chamber now, but several toss-up races give Democrats a path to take it back, which is why national donors are pouring money into a handful of states.

For American voters, the effect is direct even outside those states. A donor in California, where the outcome is not in doubt, can help decide who represents Georgia or Texas, Bryner noted, because people in safe states often send money where the fight is closest. That nationalizes races that used to be fought mainly on local issues, from farm policy in Iowa to manufacturing in Ohio.

It also shapes what voters hear. National ads reward sharp, polarizing messages, while local concerns get less airtime. If the trend continues, Hopkins warned, the path to political success will run less through local party organizations and more through what he called "ATM districts" around the country that give heavily to both parties.

What happens next

Spending will only intensify in the final days before the November 3 vote, with the National Republican Senatorial Committee already spending three times as much on advertising at this point as it did in the previous midterms.

After the election, watch two things: whether the candidates who raised the most outside money actually won, and whether reform ideas gain traction. Hawaii will cap out-of-state donations starting in 2027, Alaska requires ads to list their top three donors, and researchers have proposed matching local donations with public funds, using New York City as a model.

The dispute climate matters too. President Trump has already said he will accept the midterm results only if the elections are "honest," a claim covered in [our earlier report on his remarks](/article/trump-accept-midterm-results-only-honest-elections). How the results are received may matter as much as who wins.