Funding profile
Nydia M. Velázquez
Democrat · Representative for New York’s 7th district
Career totals · 18 elections · 1992–2026
$11.4 million
raised by Velázquez’s campaigns, everything from 1992 to 2026 added together.
57%
of it came from organized groups rather than from people giving on their own: at least $6.5 million from PACs, plus donations that organizations collected and directed.
$41,000
was spent about Velázquez by outside groups. These are ads for or against them that their campaign cannot control, and none of it is part of the money above.
Every number on this page comes from Federal Election Commission filings, read on August 24, 2026. An election still under way keeps raising money, so its figure will have grown since. Check Velázquez on FEC.gov
Where the money came from
Everything Velázquez’s campaigns have reported raising, split by who gave it.
- Individual donorsMoney given by people, in their own name.41%$4.7 million
- Political action committeesOrganized groups: company-run committees, unions, trade associations.57%$6.5 million
- Other sourcesParty transfers, the candidate's own money, loans and smaller categories.2%$284,000
Money bundled through organizations
Not every “individual” donation arrives on its own. An organization can collect checks from its members, already earmarked for Velázquez, and deliver them in a bundle. The law counts that as individual money, but the organization still chose where it went.
$78,000
reached Velázquez this way, 2% of everything they raised from individuals. Each donation came from a real person. The organization picked who got it.
- JStreetPAC$73,000
- EMILY's ListA group that works to elect Democratic women who support abortion rights, and one of the oldest donation bundlers in politics.$4,950
We can only count the organizations we have measured, so the real figure could be higher than this, never lower. Bundling is legal and widely used, and appearing here is not evidence of wrongdoing.
Who gave the most
Committee contributions from the 2024 and 2026 election periods, grouped by how the FEC classifies each giver. This covers a slice of the career total, and giving to a campaign is legal and ordinary.
- Corporation7%$20,000
- Trade association49%$140,000
- Labor union26%$75,000
- Membership organization13%$36,000
- Corporation without capital stock<1%$1,000
- Unclassified4%$13,000
Which industries
- Banking & finance45% · $35,000
- Real estate & construction30% · $23,000
- Other26% · $20,000
The FEC records that a committee is a corporation; it does not record its industry. Those labels are ours, kept in a published list anyone can check. Where we have not labeled a giver we say “Other” rather than guessing.
Largest committee givers
- 1Small Business Investor Alliance PAC$21,000
- 2International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers$15,000
- 3American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Afl-Cio$13,000
- 4National Association of Realtors$12,000
- 5National Association of Development Companies$10,000
Show all 10 giversShow fewer
- 6National Multifamily Housing Council$10,000
- 7National Association of Government Guaranteed Lenders Inc PAC$10,000
- 8Service Employees International Union$10,000
- 9National Education Association$8,000
- 10American Federation of Teachers, Afl-Cio Committee on Political Education$7,500
“Unclassified” means the FEC records no organization type for that committee, which usually means a leadership PAC. We show it as unclassified rather than guessing which industry it belongs to.
Their money and their votes, side by side
For each industry that gave to Velázquez: the money, then the bills they voted on in that industry’s area of law. The Library of Congress assigns each bill’s subject, not us, so nothing here is picked to make a point.
This is not evidence that money bought a vote. People often donate to politicians who already agree with them. We show what was given and how Velázquez voted; the judgment is yours.
Banking & finance—$35,000 given
Velázquez voted on 26 bills in this area. The 3 most substantive are listed first.
- H R 33On PassageTo amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide special rules for the taxation of certain residents of Taiwan with income from sources within the United States.Yes
- H R 736On Motion to Suspend the Rules and PassProtect Small Businesses from Excessive Paperwork Act of 2025 This bill extends the deadline for certain companies that are required to file beneficial ownership information with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).Yes
- H J RES 25On PassageThis joint resolution nullifies requirements for persons effectuating decentralized financial (DeFi) transactions to report certain information regarding digital asset sales to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).No
Show 5 more bills with full summariesShow fewer
- H R 517On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as AmendedFiling Relief for Natural Disasters Act This act authorizes the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to postpone federal tax deadlines for taxpayers affected by a qualified state declared disaster, upon written request by the state governor.No vote
- H R 997On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as AmendedNational Taxpayer Advocate Enhancement Act of 2025 This bill authorizes the National Taxpayer Advocate to appoint legal counsel within the Taxpayer Advocate Service (TAS) to report directly to the National Taxpayer Advocate.No vote
- H R 1491On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as AmendedDisaster Related Extension of Deadlines Act This act requires the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to treat the postponement of the federal tax return deadline due to a federally declared disaster or certain other events as an extension of such deadline for purposes of calculating the limit on a tax refund.Yes
- S J RES 28On PassageThis joint resolution nullifies the final rule issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) titled Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications and published on December 10, 2024.No
- S J RES 18On PassageThis joint resolution nullifies the final rule issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau titled Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions and published on December 30, 2024.No
Labor—$8,000 given
Velázquez voted on 7 bills in this area. The 3 most substantive are listed first.
- H R 2262On PassageThis bill modifies the definition of hours worked under the Fair Labor Standards Act to exclude certain voluntary training that occurs outside an employee's regular working hours.No
- H R 2988On PassageProtecting Prudent Investment of Retirement Savings Act This bill modifies the requirements for fiduciaries of employer-sponsored retirement plans.No
- H R 1156On PassagePandemic Unemployment Fraud Enforcement Act This bill extends from 5 to 10 years the statute of limitations for federal criminal charges or civil enforcement actions for fraud related to several unemployment insurance programs that were established during the COVID-19 pandemic.No
Show 4 more bills with full summariesShow fewer
- H R 5408On PassageThis bill establishes mandatory deadlines for parties negotiating an initial collective bargaining agreement (CBA) and provides for mediation and arbitration to finalize CBAs. Under the bill, CBA negotiations must begin within 10 days after an employer receives a written request from a newly recognized or certified bargaining representative.Yes
- H R 2550On PassageThis bill nullifies the Executive Order titled Exclusions from Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs (issued on March 27, 2025), which excludes specified executive agencies and subdivisions from the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.Yes
- H R 2270On Motion to RecommitThis bill excludes the value of employer-funded child or dependent care from being used in calculating an eligible employee's overtime pay.Yes
- H R 2312On Motion to RecommitThis bill modifies the definition of a tipped employee under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) to exclude consideration of an employee's duties when determining if the employee is a tipped employee.Yes
We do not score these or say which way a vote favored an industry, because that would be our opinion dressed up as a finding. Each bill links to the chamber’s own roll-call record. Industries where fewer than three bills came to a vote are left out, because a handful of votes cannot show a pattern.
Money spent about this member
Outside groups, usually super PACs, may spend without limit on ads for or against a candidate, as long as they do not coordinate with the campaign. Velázquez has no legal control over any of it.
This is not a donation. Nobody gave this money to Velázquez. It was spent on advertising about Velázquez, and money spent against a candidate is plainly not funding them. So it never gets added to the figures above.
$41,000
has been spent for or against Velázquez by outside groups. $13,000 supported Velázquez; $28,000 opposed Velázquez.
Largest outside spenders
Summed across 8 elections, using the Commission's aggregated totals so amended filings and 24-hour notices are not double-counted.
Spent supporting
$13,000Ads urging people to vote for this member. Still not their money, and they cannot direct how it is spent.
- NEW YORK STATE IMMIGRANT ACTION FUND$13,000
- ENVIRONMENT AMERICA INC$420
- SIERRA CLUB POLITICAL COMMITTEE$210
- UNITED WE DREAM ACTION$140
Show all 6 groupsShow fewer
- PLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTES$69
- UNITED WE DREAM ACTION PAC$66
Spent opposing
$28,000Ads urging people to vote against this member. This money was spent to defeat them.
- COMMUNITY ACTION NOW$28,000
- INNOVATION PAC$100
Election by election
The career figures above are the sum of these elections. Each row links to the Commission’s page for that election, where the numbers match line for line.
| Election | Raised | From PACs | Outside spending | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026in progress | $180,000 | $65,000 36% | none | FEC |
| 2024 | $473,000 | $208,000 44% | $10 | FEC |
| 2022 | $603,000 | $262,000 43% | $19 | FEC |
| 2020 | $821,000 | $373,000 45% | $276 | FEC |
| 2018 | $1 million | $642,000 64% | $10 | FEC |
| 2016 | $772,000 | $455,000 59% | $40,000 | FEC |
| 2014 | $739,000 | $349,000 47% | $430 | FEC |
| 2012 | $675,000 | $494,000 73% | $260 | FEC |
| 2010 | $839,000 | $612,000 73% | $10 | FEC |
| 2008 | $1.1 million | $858,000 76% | none | FEC |
| 2006 | $767,000 | $432,000 56% | none | FEC |
| 2004 | $709,000 | $394,000 56% | none | FEC |
| 2002 | $438,000 | $328,000 75% | none | FEC |
| 2000 | $474,000 | $282,000 59% | none | FEC |
| 1998 | $383,000 | $226,000 59% | none | FEC |
| 1996 | $295,000 | $108,000 37% | none | FEC |
| 1994 | $624,000 | $217,000 35% | none | FEC |
| 1992 | $482,000 | $154,000 32% | none | FEC |
Raised is everything the campaign took in for that election. From PACs is the slice of it given by political action committees. Outside spending is what other groups spent on ads about the race, for and against—it is not part of “Raised”. An election marked in progress is still raising money, so its figures are not final.
We never publish the names of individual donors, and anything we cannot source stays off the page. The methodology explains every such choice.