Which super PACs did Marlene Ricketts fund in 2022?

Esafund ($2.2M), Senate Leadership Fund ($500K), Congressional Leadership Fund ($500K), Ohio Leads ($500K), NRSC ($73K).

Which candidates did Marlene Ricketts's money end up backing or attacking in 2022?

against Patty Murray (Washington Senate, about $781K, lost); for Tiffany Smiley (Washington Senate, about $563K, lost); against Hillary Scholten (Michigan 3rd District, about $468K, lost). Amounts are the donor's share of each group's spending.

← All donors

Donor

Marlene Ricketts

Individual

Retired, Ricketts family (TD Ameritrade) · Nebraska

7 reported gifts; 5 recipient groups listed, as reported to the FEC by the groups that received them.

Backed losers

Marlene Ricketts gave $3.8M to super PACs and other outside groups in the 2022 federal elections, and 100% of it helped Republicans (FEC filings with varying coverage dates; the most common larger-campaign cutoff is Dec 31, 2022). Among dollars with a matched election-stage result, 12% were on the winning side ($339K won, $2.6M lost). $264K had no matched result and is excluded.

Gave to outside spenders

$3.8M

100% of it helped Republicans

Winning share of scored dollars

12%

$2.9M scored (77% of gifts)

Spent on the losing side

$2.6M

Not allocated or result unknown

$874K

$609K not allocated to tracked outside spending; $264K has no matched result. Neither is cash on hand.

Where the checks went

A person writing checks from their own fortune. Each gift is split the way the group that received it split its spending between winners and losers, so a $10M check to a group that spent 80% on losers counts as $8M on the losing side.

✓ Backed the winner or attacked the loser ✗ Backed the loser or attacked the winner Result not matched

Group	Gave	Won / lost
Esafund $344K not allocated to tracked outside spending	$2.2M	$0 / $1.8M
Senate Leadership Fund $83K not allocated to tracked outside spending	$500K	$174K / $242K
Congressional Leadership Fund $65K not allocated to tracked outside spending	$500K	$162K / $263K
Ohio Leads $53K not allocated to tracked outside spending	$500K	$0 / $228K
NRSC $64K not allocated to tracked outside spending	$73K	$3K / $7K

The trail

What the money bought

The candidates Marlene Ricketts's money was spent for or against, pro-rated by Marlene Ricketts's share of each group's funding.

Candidate	Race	Spending	Their share	Paid off?
Patty Murray	Washington Senate	Attacking	$781K	✗ No
Tiffany Smiley	Washington Senate	Supporting	$563K	✗ No
Hillary Scholten	Michigan 3rd District	Attacking	$468K	✗ No
JD Vance	Ohio Senate (primary)	Attacking	$228K	✗ No
Jane Timken	Ohio Senate (primary)	Supporting	$145K	Unknown
Raphael Warnock	Georgia Senate	Attacking	$90K	✗ No
John K. Fetterman	Pennsylvania Senate	Attacking	$81K	✗ No
Mike Gibbons	Ohio Senate (primary)	Attacking	$67K	Unknown
Cheri Beasley	North Carolina Senate	Attacking	$66K	✓ Yes
Tim Ryan	Ohio Senate	Attacking	$55K	✓ Yes
Mandela Barnes	Wisconsin Senate	Attacking	$45K	✓ Yes
Catherine Cortez Masto	Nevada Senate	Attacking	$44K	✗ No

Individual as classified from the FEC entity type and public reporting.

Questions people ask

How much did Marlene Ricketts spend on the 2022 elections, and did it win?: Marlene Ricketts gave $3.8M to super PACs and other outside groups in the 2022 federal elections, and 100% of it helped Republicans (FEC filings with varying coverage dates; the most common larger-campaign cutoff is Dec 31, 2022). Among dollars with a matched election-stage result, 12% were on the winning side ($339K won, $2.6M lost). $264K had no matched result and is excluded.
Which super PACs did Marlene Ricketts fund in 2022?: Esafund ($2.2M), Senate Leadership Fund ($500K), Congressional Leadership Fund ($500K), Ohio Leads ($500K), NRSC ($73K).
Which candidates did Marlene Ricketts's money end up backing or attacking in 2022?: against Patty Murray (Washington Senate, about $781K, lost); for Tiffany Smiley (Washington Senate, about $563K, lost); against Hillary Scholten (Michigan 3rd District, about $468K, lost). Amounts are the donor's share of each group's spending.