Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which House districts are targeted by Democratic PACs against Republicans?
Executive summary
Democratic House committees and allied PACs are actively targeting Republican-held seats for 2026, with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) listing 35 “Districts in Play” it says will determine the House majority [1]. Other Democratic-aligned PACs — including House Majority PAC and smaller identity-focused groups like CHC BOLD PAC — publicly name specific battleground districts and individual endorsements or spending priorities, though comprehensive, single-source lists of every targeted district across all Democratic PACs are not available in the provided reporting [2] [3].
1. DCCC’s public “35 districts” roadmap — the institutional baseline
The DCCC, the House Democrats’ campaign arm, published a list and map of 35 competitive Republican-held districts it considers central to flipping the House in 2026; the DCCC frames that expansion as a response to “eroding public support for House Republicans” and positions these 35 seats as determinative of the majority [1]. That DCCC announcement is the clearest, most authoritative single-publication snapshot in the available reporting of where party leadership wants to concentrate resources [1].
2. Super PACs and outside groups: overlapping targets, different tactics
Super PACs and independent groups operate alongside the DCCC but use different strategies — media buys, independent expenditures, transfers, and targeted endorsements. House Majority PAC is a long-standing super PAC “focused exclusively on electing Democrats” and has historically concentrated large ad buys and spending in key districts — its past filings and public reporting show targeted spends in specific seats and large overall expenditures, illustrating how outside groups amplify party strategy [2]. OpenSecrets and FEC summaries document that PACs collectively raised and spent large sums in the cycle, underscoring the financial scale backing targeted efforts, though they do not list a consolidated district-by-district target list in the provided extracts [4] [5].
3. Identity and issue-based PACs name individual districts and candidates
Smaller Democratic-oriented PACs sometimes publish specific endorsements that point to districts they view as winnable. For example, CHC BOLD PAC (the Congressional Hispanic Caucus’ campaign arm) announced endorsements and is publicly backing challengers in seats such as California’s 22nd, Colorado’s 8th, and Florida’s 27th, signaling those districts as part of a flip strategy [3]. These endorsements are granular signals of where niche or constituency-driven groups plan to spend and recruit voters, but they represent just one slice of the larger targeting map [3].
4. Data providers and watchdogs show money flows, not a single target list
OpenSecrets and related databases catalogue PAC expenditures, transfers, and recipients — useful for tracking who funds what and where dollars flow — but the excerpts provided show aggregated spending, PAC profiles, and past targeted expenditures rather than a unified, current list of every House district Democrats are attacking [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. The Federal Election Commission’s six-month summary quantifies PAC contributions and the scale of financial activity ($2.1 billion raised by PACs, $1.6 billion spent through mid-2025), which contextualizes why multiple organizations can mount concurrent, overlapping campaigns in battleground districts [4].
5. Where reporting is specific — examples, not an exhaustive map
Ballotpedia and House Majority PAC histories show concrete past targeting and dollar allocations in named districts, and the DCCC’s 35-seat list is the most explicit current map in the available material [2] [1]. Beyond those, contemporary press pieces and PAC press releases supply isolated examples — endorsements or the first targets of new super PACs — but the current reporting provided does not assemble every targeted district across all Democratic PACs into one master list [10] [3].
6. Competing perspectives and limitations in the reporting
Democratic campaign organs (DCCC, allied PACs) present their targeting as strategic and responsive to political opportunity; their public lists serve both operational planning and fundraising narratives [1] [2]. Watchdogs and opposition groups scrutinize donors and spending patterns — influence-watch and right-leaning posts trace big-money donors and raise concerns about motives, though the provided InfluenceWatch excerpt focuses more on donor histories than a district map [11]. Importantly, the sources provided do not contain a single, reconciled roster compiling every district targeted by every Democratic PAC; available sources do not mention such a consolidated list.
7. Practical takeaway for readers
If you want the clearest, actionable snapshot from these sources, start with the DCCC’s “35 districts in play” release for the party’s official battleground map, then consult House Majority PAC and OpenSecrets transaction records to see where outside dollars are being spent and which districts receive ad buys or endorsements [1] [2] [4]. For district-level specifics beyond those citations — a unified list combining all Democratic PACs’ targets — available sources do not mention one in the provided reporting.