See who's spending money to influence Snohomish County...
and what it means for the environment.
Washington Voter’s passed the Public Disclosure Act in 1972, creating one of the nation’s strongest campaign finance transparency systems. This tracker uses that PDC data to show PAC spending.
This tool shines a light on PAC influence by tracking only candidates who have received PAC contributions or independent expenditures. We put a particular emphasis on Super PACs, adding background and commentary to show who they are and what interests they represent.
What's a PAC?
Political Action Committees are not companies and are not registered with the Secretary of State. PACs are created by filing a registration with the PDC, a requirement for groups that want to raise and spend money to support or oppose candidates and ballot measures. This registration lets them open a bank account and obligates them to file regular public reports of donors, expenditures, and political activity — basically, a PAC exists just to track political dollars in and out.
...and a Super PAC?
PACs can spend money in two ways: direct contributions to candidates, which are limited by law to set dollar amounts per donor, per candidate, per election; and independent expenditures, which are unlimited. A PAC that only makes independent expenditures is commonly known as a Super PAC (officially called an Independent Expenditure Committee by the PDC).
Independent Expenditures
PACs can spend unlimited amounts of money supporting or opposing a candidate through independent expenditures, as long as they do not coordinate that spending with the candidate’s campaign. This separation is required by law, but it effectively creates a major loophole that allows massive sums of money to influence elections outside normal contribution limits.
Big Issues with ‘Super PACs’
We built this tracker because an informed public is the only real check on private money in local politics — and because Nature doesn’t have her own PAC (we’re working on that!)
1. No spending limits means potential for massive influence
Super PACs (ie Independent Expenditure Committees) can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money.
That means wealthy donors, trade associations and corporations can inject large sums into local races that otherwise have relatively small budgets, potentially overwhelming candidate spending.
2. Big money can dominate local elections
Because candidate campaigns are often limited in resources, outside groups can:
- outspend candidates
- flood local media markets with ads
- shape voter perception disproportionately
3. SuperPACS often use names that totally obscure who they really are
PACs tend to use names that sound neutral, civic, or community-oriented—but sometimes don’t reflect at all their actual funding sources, or priorities.
Examples of the pattern:
- “Affordable Housing Council” (sounds like a public housing advocacy group)
- but is actually tied to a homebuilder and development industry business association
This creates a huge perception gap and can make it really hard for voters to understand who is behind the spending.
4. Campaign Finance data although reported which is great, is complex
So even though all SuperPAC spending is disclosed through the PDC system, for the average voters, it’s just too much.
5. Coordination is legally prohibited—but hard to fully verify
Independent expenditure committees are not allowed to coordinate with candidates, but:
- they may share public messaging environments
- use overlapping vendors
- operate in the same political ecosystems
This creates persistent debate about how “independent” independent expenditures truly are in practice.
6. End Game Shenanigans with Campaign Spending
Because IE spending can be deployed quickly:
- large ad buys often hit in the final weeks of a campaign
- candidates may not have time or resources to respond effectively
This can shift momentum very late in the election cycle.
7. Donor influence is indirect but powerful
Even though money doesn’t go directly to candidates:
- donors can still strongly influence outcomes through SuperPACs
- a single large donor can fund messaging that effectively defines a race
This creates a system where influence is indirect but still highly concentrated