Funding profile
Sara Jacobs
Democrat · Representative for California’s 51st district
Career totals · 5 elections · 2018–2026
$15.7 million
raised by Jacobs’s campaigns, everything from 2018 to 2026 added together.
5%
of it came from organized groups rather than from people giving on their own: at least $812,000 from PACs, plus donations that organizations collected and directed.
$4.9 million
was spent about Jacobs 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 Jacobs on FEC.gov
Where the money came from
Everything Jacobs’s campaigns have reported raising, split by who gave it.
- Individual donorsMoney given by people, in their own name.19%$3 million
- Political action committeesOrganized groups: company-run committees, unions, trade associations.5%$744,000
- Other sourcesParty transfers, the candidate's own money, loans and smaller categories.76%$11.9 million
Money bundled through organizations
Not every “individual” donation arrives on its own. An organization can collect checks from its members, already earmarked for Jacobs, and deliver them in a bundle. The law counts that as individual money, but the organization still chose where it went.
$68,000
reached Jacobs this way, 2% of everything they raised from individuals. Each donation came from a real person. The organization picked who got it.
- JStreetPAC$59,000
- EMILY's ListA group that works to elect Democratic women who support abortion rights, and one of the oldest donation bundlers in politics.$9,150
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.
- Corporation1%$5,500
- Trade association10%$41,000
- Labor union60%$245,000
- Membership organization14%$58,000
- Co-operative2%$9,500
- Unclassified12%$49,000
Largest committee givers
- 1American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Afl-Cio$20,000
- 2International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers$20,000
- 3National Air Traffic Controllers Association$18,000
- 4Pro-Choice Women$16,000
- 5International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers$15,000
Show all 10 giversShow fewer
- 6Branch 193 National Association of Letter Carriers Political Action Committee$15,000
- 7United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Active Ballot Club$13,000
- 8Air Line Pilots Association$13,000
- 9Service Employees International Union$13,000
- 10International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers$13,000
“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 Jacobs: 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 Jacobs voted; the judgment is yours.
Labor—$8,000 given
Jacobs 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. Jacobs has no legal control over any of it.
This is not a donation. Nobody gave this money to Jacobs. It was spent on advertising about Jacobs, and money spent against a candidate is plainly not funding them. So it never gets added to the figures above.
$4.9 million
has been spent for or against Jacobs by outside groups. $4.4 million supported Jacobs; $477,000 opposed Jacobs.
Largest outside spenders
Summed across 5 elections, using the Commission's aggregated totals so amended filings and 24-hour notices are not double-counted.
Spent supporting
$4.4 millionAds urging people to vote for this member. Still not their money, and they cannot direct how it is spent.
- WOMEN VOTE!EMILY's List's super PAC, spending independently to support Democratic women who back abortion rights.$2.4 million
- FORWARD CALIFORNIA$2 million
- NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$61,000
- FLIP THE 49TH! NEIGHBORS IN ACTION$6,534
Show all 5 groupsShow fewer
- COURAGE CALIFORNIA SUPER PAC$1,029
Spent opposing
$476,000Ads urging people to vote against this member. This money was spent to defeat them.
- DMFI PAC$425,000
- NEIGHBORS FOR A BETTER CONGRESS$26,000
- L PAC$25,000
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 | $1.6 million | $207,000 13% | $8 | FEC |
| 2024 | $1.7 million | $252,000 15% | $226 | FEC |
| 2022 | $1.7 million | $205,000 12% | $855 | FEC |
| 2020 | $7.7 million | $66,000 1% | $2.5 million | FEC |
| 2018 | $2.9 million | $14,000 <1% | $2.4 million | 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.