Skip to content
Project Curia

← Financing

U.S. Senator · MI

Gary C. Peters

DemocratSenate Class 2Term through January 2027

Funding profile · 2015–2020 term

35% of the money Peters raised came from small donors.

More grassroots-funded than 81% of the Senate.

Peters raised $52.5M across the full six-year Senate term (2015–2020), and ended the period with $1.8M cash on hand. Here is where the money came from.

35%from small donors
Small donors
35%$18.2M
Large donors
54%$28.5M
Bundled
0%$0.0M
PACs
8%$4.1M
Other
3%$1.7M

Against the senate

How Peters compares to the typical member.

Small-donor share
35%vs 19% senate median
PAC share
8%vs 14% senate median

Who has a stake in Peters

The organizations behind the money.

Peters's largest organized backing comes from League Of Conservation Voters Action Fund. That counts the group's own PAC check plus the individual donations it bundled, not just the direct check.

› $4.1M in PAC money not itemized by group

Peters collected $4.1M of PAC money through a joint fundraising committee, which pools contributions and transfers them as a lump sum. It is counted in the organized total above, but FEC filings do not itemize which PACs it came from at the campaign level, so it is not attributed to a named organization here.

Money organized for Peters

League Of Conservation Voters Action Fund›

$4K

Who it funds, across Congress

99% Democrats · 0% Republicans · $939K to 148 members

National Association Of Broadcasters PAC›$3K

The National Association of Broadcasters' PAC, representing TV and radio station owners.

Who it funds, across Congress

47% Democrats · 53% Republicans · $1.5M to 255 members

Democratic Women Of The South Orange County›$3K

Who it funds, across Congress

100% Democrats · 0% Republicans · $3K to 1 members

Motorcycle Industry Council Rider Action Fund›$2K

Who it funds, across Congress

41% Democrats · 59% Republicans · $11K to 5 members

American Council Of Engineering Companies›$2K

The American Council of Engineering Companies' PAC, representing engineering firms.

Who it funds, across Congress

53% Democrats · 47% Republicans · $2.1M to 316 members

› What is organized money?

An organization reaches a member two ways. Its own PAC writes a direct check. And it bundles: it gathers individual donations from its supporters and routes them through its conduit. Both count here as one “organized” total. The bundled part is already inside the individual giving shown in the funding mix above. Here it is regrouped by the organization that gathered it, so you can see who did the organizing. Petersreceived so many small earmarked donations that these figures count only the largest ones. Read every total as “at least.”

The same money, by industry

Which industries have a stake.

The same organized money, grouped by the industry of the organization that moved it. It shows the interests behind Peters's backing, not just the individual groups.

$3KTech
$2KFinance
$1KAg & Food

Plus $11K from organizations whose FEC name did not sort into an industry.

The money spent about Peters

Spent for or against.

Outside groups also spend on their own to elect or defeat Peters, running ads for or against the race. This money never passes through the campaign, so it is counted apart from the money organized for Peters.

All outside groups22% to help, 78% to hurt$50.8M
  1. Senate Leadership Fund›$17.5M
    To help Peters
    —
    To hurt Peters
    $17.5M

    The super PAC aligned with Senate Republican leadership.

  2. Better Future Mi Fund$11.2M
    To help Peters
    —
    To hurt Peters
    $11.2M
  3. NRSC›$8.2M
    To help Peters
    $1.2M
    To hurt Peters
    $7.0M

    The National Republican Senatorial Committee, the party committee for electing Senate Republicans.

  4. Blackpac$3.7M
    To help Peters
    $3.7M
    To hurt Peters
    —
  5. Restoration PAC$2.4M
    To help Peters
    —
    To hurt Peters
    $2.4M

FEC filings, 2015–2020 term · as of August 2026 · showing the top 5 funders of 65 organizations with a stake

About this data

FEC-disclosed receipts for the 2015–2020 term. This is the disclosed money only. Spending by outside groups that do not reveal their donors, the dark money that set a record in 2024, never appears in these figures.

Every percentage here is a share of all receipts, not of individual contributions only. So the small-donor share counts transfers, loans, and other money in its base, and can read higher than figures that divide only by individual money.

84%want dark money disclosed

Support for requiring the groups that spend on elections to name their donors, across both parties. Congress has not passed the DISCLOSE Act.

Where Peters stands