How do pac and corporate donations to jasmine crockett compare to reps. alexandria ocasio-cortez and jamie raskin?

1. Money maps: AOC’s small‑donor profile versus Raskin’s war chest

Alexandria Ocasio‑Cortez has emphasized grassroots fundraising and “$0 from corporations and lobbyists” on her ActBlue page and OpenSecrets profile; multiple outlets reported a record $9.6 million quarter in early 2025 made up almost entirely of individual donors with an average gift around $21 (ActBlue, OpenSecrets, Politico, CNBC) ^{[4] [3] [6] [7]}. By contrast, Jamie Raskin is portrayed as a prolific fundraiser who “raised more than $2.5 million in the first six months of the year” and finished 2024 with just under $5 million on hand — figures reported using FEC filings compiled by Maryland Matters and WTOP ^{[8] [9] [10] [11]}.

2. Where PAC and corporate dollars show up in the three profiles

OpenSecrets and FEC maintain itemized federal profiles for all three members; those databases are the primary public sources to compare PAC and organizational giving ^{[12] [3] [13]}. Reporting about Crockett emphasizes she received PAC and outside support in ways that critics flagged: conservative outlets and blogs pointed to corporate PAC checks and super‑PAC activity (including crypto‑aligned spending in 2022) and singled out thousands in corporate PAC donations in earlier cycles ^{[5] [14] [15] [16]}. Ocasio‑Cortez’s campaign and reporting stress she does not accept corporate PAC money and that her recent large hauls were from individuals ^{[4] [6]}. Raskin’s fundraising writeups do not focus on a PAC‑avoidance claim; instead they document large totals and his leadership PAC activity (OpenSecrets and FEC committee pages; Maryland Matters) ^{[13] [17] [8]}.

3. Crockett’s contested PAC narrative: competing accounts

Conservative sites and some local tabloids published pieces labeling Crockett “exposed” for taking corporate PAC dollars and touring with PAC support, and they noted super‑PAC‑style outside spending tied to crypto interests in 2022 ^{[5] [14] [15] [16]}. OpenSecrets and the FEC, however, are the authoritative databases for federal receipts and PAC/individual splits; those profiles exist for Crockett but the specific dollar breakdowns and timelines are not detailed in the conservative pieces provided here ^{[1] [2]}. Available sources do not mention a definitive, reconciled dollar‑for‑dollar comparison across all three for the same cycle.

4. What the databases can and cannot tell you — and why that matters

OpenSecrets and the FEC provide itemized receipts and PAC/individual splits, but reporters often highlight different slices (e.g., super‑PAC independent spending vs. direct PAC contributions to a candidate). For Crockett, some coverage focuses on independent outside spending that benefited her (crypto super PACs), which is not the same as direct corporate PAC contributions to a campaign committee; the conservative outlets conflate and emphasize the political angle ^{[12] [16] [5]}. For AOC, outlets explicitly cite campaign statements and FEC snapshots showing her small‑donor mix ^{[4] [6]}. For Raskin, local reporting cites FEC totals and his own leadership PAC work ^{[8] [13]}.

5. Bottom line and next steps to verify

Current sources establish clear differences in fundraising models: AOC — large small‑donor base and avoidance of corporate PACs; Raskin — high gross fundraising and large cash reserves; Crockett — contested narrative with reporting of both corporate/PAC receipts and significant outside support in 2022. To produce a precise, cycle‑matched numerical comparison of “PAC and corporate donations” to each lawmaker, consult the FEC OpenSecrets PAC breakdown pages and export itemized receipts for the same election cycle and definitions (direct PAC contributions vs. independent expenditures). The public FEC/OpenSecrets records cited above are the correct primary datasets to reconcile exact dollar amounts ^{[2] [1] [3] [13]}.