This page provides donor demographic information for contributions made to major party 2024 candidates.
Our state gaps analysis is for our 10 key states: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Washington. These states, most of which are battlegrounds, represent different regions and partisan dynamics. The analysis includes congressional, statewide executive, and state legislative candidates running in the 2024 election, grouped by candidate gender and party.
The data can be viewed in two ways for each donor demographic category: the proportion of the money contributed to each candidate group, and the proportion of contributors to each candidate group. The donor demographic data are from Catalist. Campaign finance data are from OpenSecrets.
Our national gaps analysis is for contributions to all 2024 major party congressional candidates grouped by candidate gender, party, seat status, and women candidates’ race/ethnicity.
Source: CAWP, OpenSecrets, and Catalist
Campaign finance data and candidate election status updated as of July 15, 2024 unless otherwise indicated.
- 35% of the total money given to PA congressional candidates was from women
- 51% of individual contributors to PA congressional candidates were women
This statistic is the percentage of total money contributed by donor gender (or the percentage of contributors by donor gender). The statistics are displayed for candidates grouped by chamber, party, and gender. Donor gender is estimated using the Catalist voter file. Unknown or other values of gender are excluded from the analysis.
The total amount contributed by men to congressional candidates in Pennsylvania exceeds the total amount contributed by women. Sixty-five percent of the total amount contributed to congressional candidates in Pennsylvania was from men compared with 35% from women. However, women were better represented as a proportion of unique contributors: women were about half of all contributors to congressional candidates in Pennsylvania.
Party differences are evident in these donation patterns to Pennsylvania congressional candidates. For example, women’s contributions to Democratic candidates made up 40% of all money contributed whereas women’s contributions to Republican candidates was just below 30%. We also find some differences by candidate chamber, party, and gender on various donor demographic characteristics. For example, donors to Democratic U.S. House candidates in Pennsylvania were more racially diverse than donors to Republican congressional candidates.
The match rate for Pennsylvania state donors to the Catalist voter file was lower than the match rate for most of our other focus states. The data visualizations for the donor demographics of Pennsylvania state elections should be explored with this caveat in mind.
This statistic is the percentage of total money contributed by donor race/ethnicity (or the percentage of contributors by donor race/ethnicity). The statistics are displayed for candidates grouped by chamber, party, and gender. Donor race/ethnicity is estimated using the Catalist voter file. Statistics for Native Americans, other race, or unknown race are not displayed but are included in the denominator.
This statistic is the percentage of total money contributed by educational attainment (or the percentage of contributors by educational attainment). The statistics are displayed for candidates grouped by chamber, party, and gender. Donor education is estimated using the Catalist voter file. Cases in which education values were not available are excluded from the analysis.
This statistic is the percentage of total money contributed by donor marital status (or the percentage of contributors by donor marital status). The statistic is displayed for candidates grouped by chamber, party, and gender. Donor marital status is estimated using the Catalist voter file. Cases in which marital status values were not available are excluded from the analysis.
This statistic is the percentage of total money contributed by donor party (or the percentage of contributors by donor party). The statistic is displayed for candidates grouped by chamber, party, and gender. Party is from the Catalist voter file. Other donors include unknown party affiliation, nonpartisans, and third parties.
Donor demographic data are from Catalist. Overall, 93% of donations to all congressional candidates and 90% of donations to state candidates from the ten focus states were matched. Catalist was able to match 92% of the unique contributors to all 2024 congressional candidates. For seven of our ten focus states, Catalist was able to match between 89 and 92% of unique contributors to statewide executive and state legislative candidates; for the remaining three states (Georgia, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania), 81 to 85% of unique contributors were matched. No data visualizations are presented for candidate groups with fewer than 100 donors. The Catalist models for estimating voter demographics are proprietary. They are based on information from the voter file, the U.S. Census, and other sources.
Campaign finance data are from OpenSecrets. For states whose primaries have passed, we include only candidates who are still running. Donations to primary challengers are included in the analysis. The analysis of donor gaps for congressional candidates includes all itemized contributions given in calendar year 2024. The analysis of donor gaps for state candidates includes all contributions given in the cycle.
Gender information about candidates is primarily from CAWP. For the remaining candidates, we relied on the databases of KnowWho, as well as the 2022 Candidate Characteristics Cooperative Database (by Bernard Fraga, Eric Gonzalez Juenke and Paru Shah [producers and distributors], 2022, Candidate Characteristics Cooperative Database, Early Release [2022]).