WASHINGTON — Tens of millions of dollars will likely be spent on Alaska’s U.S. Senate race, and Democratic challenger Mary Peltola took in the lion’s share of it during the first three months of the year.
Her campaign listed nearly $9 million in receipts for the quarter. Incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan raised $1.7 million over the same period.
That’s part of a national pattern: Democrats are pouring money into campaigns in hopes of checking President Trump’s power by winning control of at least one chamber of Congress.
Many details lurk in the voluminous campaign finance reports. We went through them to answer seven important questions.
1. Who raised more money from Alaskans?
Both candidates received most of their money from outside the state.
In dollars and in number of individual donors, Peltola got more from Alaskans. Her itemized in-state contributions come to more than $500,000. Alaskans contributed $135,000 to Sullivan for the quarter.
But Alaska contributions make up a greater share of Sullivan’s quarterly total. About 17% of his total came from in-state, while 13% of hers did. (Those figures don’t include unitemized contributions.)
2. What about money from Political Action Committees?
Peltola got substantially more PAC money for the quarter ($450,000) than Sullivan did ($277,000). But PAC money is 24% of his total. For Peltola it's just 6%, because her enormous haul from individuals dwarfs her PAC contributions.
The types of PACs are very different, too. Many of Sullivan’s Political Action Committees represent industry groups and trade associations, legal and lobbying firms and government contractors.
Most of Peltola’s PAC money comes from Democratic leadership PACs. Those are fundraising committees members of Congress use to help their friends and colleagues, and to increase the likelihood that their party will win control of the chamber.
3. What about all the tiny donations?
Until a donor reaches the $200 mark, the campaigns don’t have to disclose anything about the source. Peltola gets a lot of money through the ActBlue giving platform, which allows a donor to make recurring small contributions that may never add up to $200. She reported nearly $3.5 million in contributions too small to itemize.
Sullivan got hundreds of contributions through Winred, the Republican platform that’s equivalent to ActBlue. His unitemized total is $90,000.
4. How did they get so much money from Lower 48 contributors?
Both candidates got help from some political heavyweights.
AIPAC, the American Israel Political Action Committee, conveyed about $250,000 in individual contributions to Sullivan. Technically, these are pass-through contributions from donors around the country, not PAC contributions. AIPAC acted as a conduit.
Similarly, Emily’s List acted as a conduit to Peltola, although to a lesser extent. The PAC, dedicated to electing Democratic women who support abortion rights, steered $44,000 in individual contributions to her.
5. How much money do they have on hand?
Sullivan has been campaigning much longer and has more in the bank: $7 million. Peltola has less than $6 million.
6. Wait, she raised more but has less? Where did her money go?
It cost her campaign money to raise that much money in just three months. She reported spending about $1.4 million on “digital fundraising.” That means, for every dollar she raised by any means, her campaign spent about 17 cents on online appeals and other types of digital fundraising.
7. Don’t incumbents have fundraising advantages? Why don’t we see that here?
Looking at just the first-quarter of 2026 doesn't tell the whole story. If you include last year, before Peltola got in the race, Sullivan has raised a total of $6.5 million. And if you add all of his fundraising since his last election, he has slightly outraised Peltola’s first quarter.
