Loading this committee’s profile from its FEC filings.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
Loading this committee’s profile from its FEC filings.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
PACs › PAC (qualified) › 2025–2026
Doctors & health professionalsPhysicians, dentists and other health professionals, whose PACs are usually run by a professional association.Business › Health
PAC (qualified)Lobbyist/registrant PACMembership organizationAlexandria, VirginiaActive
Connected organization: American Optometric Association
Political fund of American Optometric Association
FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C00024968 · files monthly
“To help assure the success of optometry’s public policy agenda through the establishment of an interactive forum for supporters of optometry and the AOA to evaluate and discuss the legislative and regulatory policy issues in Washington, D.C., and state capitals that stand to impact the practice and profession of optometry.”
American Optometric Association, the organization this committee is the political fund of, aoa.org
Quoted from the committee's site, or its sponsor's or funder's where its own says nothing. Any side it takes is in its own words.
7 priorities from the site of American Optometric Association, the organization this committee is the political fund of, in the order they are listed there. Every heading and the text under it is copied exactly, as one passage for each page it is from, and links to that place on the page; hover a source to see which passage it opens.
AOA-PAC fights and wins for optometry.
It is the only political action committee working to elect and reelect pro-optometry candidates to the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, allowing us to support the lawmakers who support us.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · aoa.org/advocacy/federal/aoa-pac
Learn about the AOA's multi-pronged, federal advocacy against costly, controlling and care-limiting vision benefit middlemen (VBM) abuses, and how VBMs take full advantage of their market dominance to the detriment of patients and doctors alike.
The Case for Reform: Why It Matters ↗ (opens aoa.org/advocacy/vision-benefit-middlemen-(vbm)-reform at this heading)
Highly concentrated markets: In 28 states, one VBM controls more than 75% of the market. In 42 states, a single VBM holds at least a plurality. This leaves patients and doctors virtually no alternatives.
Vertical integration: VBMs often own their own optical labs, frame manufacturers, EHR systems and even retail outlets, ensuring they alone benefit from their market dominance.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · aoa.org/advocacy/vision-benefit-middlemen-(vbm)-reform
As physicians, doctors of optometry provide the overwhelming share of primary, medical, chronic, urgent and emergency eye health care that America’s traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries need—from comprehensive eye exams and vision correction treatment to laser surgical procedures and everything in between.
Optometrists play an important role in the management of systemic diseases with ocular manifestations, including diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, autoimmune disease and neurologic disease.
Doctors of optometry provides more than two-thirds of all primary eye and vision health care in the U.S., as well as covered medical eye care physician services to nearly 7 million Medicare beneficiaries annually.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · aoa.org/advocacy/medicare-payment-reform
Heading as listed on aoa.org/advocacy/medicare-payment-reform ↗ (opens aoa.org/advocacy/medicare-payment-reform at this heading) · “Medicare Payment Reform” on aoa.org/advocacy/federal ↗ (opens aoa.org/advocacy/federal at this heading)
Learn about the AOA’s federal advocacy to ensure America’s veterans have timely access to the full range of eye and vision care that doctors of optometry are trained, licensed and ready to provide—whether inside VA facilities or through VA Community Care.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · aoa.org/advocacy/veterans-eye-care
The AOA, affiliates and doctors of optometry across the country are standing up for reimbursement and coverage fairness, supporting optometric practice success and doctors' ability to deliver quality patient care.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · aoa.org/advocacy/health-and-vision-plan-advocacy
The AOA supports the optometric community by providing information, guidance and advice in both the state legislative and political arena.
Doctors of optometry deliver an essential component of patients' overall health and provide more than two-thirds of primary eye health care in America.
More than 99% of the U.S. population lives in counties with a doctor of optometry.
Through our state legislative efforts we aim to:
- Serve as both a political and legislative resource for state associations around the country.
- Monitor state laws and regulations relating to the practice of optometry.
- Monitor the impact of federal laws and regulations on the states state laws and regulations.
- Maintain a database of state laws and regulations, as well as other comparative and analytical optometrist legislative and regulatory databases.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · aoa.org/advocacy/state
Heading as listed on aoa.org/advocacy/state ↗ (opens aoa.org/advocacy/state at this heading)
Legislation on vision plans exists on both the federal and state levels.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · aoa.org/advocacy/health-and-vision-plan-advocacy/vision-plans
Each part reads different filings, so counts and totals can differ.
Direct PAC contributions and independent expenditures explicitly reported as support, by the party of the candidate they went to.
| Party of the candidate | Candidates | Direct | Independent | Amount | Share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 146 | $772,150 | $0 | $772,150 | 52% |
| Democratic | 124 | $656,000 | $0 | $656,000 | 44% |
| Other or unresolved | 17 | $47,000 | $0 | $47,000 | 3.2% |
| Shown support | 287 | $1,475,150 | $0 | $1,475,150 | 100% |
Contributions are reported money, not endorsements; a PAC giving to both parties is common.
Every contribution on line 23 of the committee’s own Schedule B, which is the filing its summary totals are built from. That line covers federal candidates, party committees and other political committees alike, so a super PAC funding other super PACs appears here rather than under candidate giving.
| Recipient | Count | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| Democratic candidates | 125 | $658.5K · 34% |
| Republican candidates | 145 | $768.2K · 40% |
| Other or unresolved candidates | 18 | $51K · 2.6% |
| Republican party committees | 2 | $30K · 1.6% |
| Other party committees | 3 | $45K · 2.3% |
| Other PACs and committees | 72 | $375.5K · 19% |
| All recipients | 365 | $1.9M |
| State | Candidates | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| Texas | 41 | $182K |
| California | 22 | $115K |
| Florida | 13 | $81.5K |
| Illinois | 18 | $78.5K |
| Ohio | 12 | $71K |
| New Jersey | 11 | $66.5K |
| New York | 12 | $55.5K |
| Michigan |
Tap a row with to see who gave.
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 12 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 8,107 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $1.6M. FEC contributor lists are public records and cannot be used for commercial solicitation.
The 2 largest sources are listed. Each as the committee named it on this line, $4.3K from 2 sources in all.
Total reported receipts $2,031,399
Every dollar the committee reported receiving this cycle, split by the source the FEC filing attributes it to. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
11% to named individuals, 88% not itemized.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 88% | $1,795,159 |
52 smaller sources, $236.2K in all (12%), are not listed.
Each committee that gave is followed to where its own money came from, in proportion to what it received: a committee that got half its money from one person is counted as passing half of what it gave on to that person. Each channel shows the committee the money came through and its place in the money tree. It shows who stood behind the money, not what that money was for, and an organization that need not name its donors ends the trail. It stops at a person, an organization, a committee with nothing on file here, or 3committees deep. A person who gave by more than one route appears under each, a name filed two ways may appear twice, and a person's job and city are as they filed them. "Also behind" counts the other groups, among those that moved $100,000 or more into races, in which $100,000 or more traces to the same person, other than those this money came through or went on to.
Loading the map
Tap or hover over a state, or focus the map and use the arrow keys, to read its total. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 552 contributions · 4.8% | $77,787 |
| 271 contributions · 4.6% | $73,065 |
Tap a row with to see who was paid.
Total reported disbursements $2,054,903
Every dollar this committee reported spending this cycle, split by the lines it reports against. Open a line to see who was actually paid on it. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
Tap a row with to see what was paid for.
$2.1M spent from Jan 2025 to Oct 2026. Most in one report: $343.5K, March 2026.
The running total of what the committee’s FEC reports say it spent, independent expenditures included, with a point at the end of each report. The line is straight between reports because a report gives one total for its whole period.
Transfers, refunds, and everything else the committee itemized outside candidate giving. 6 payments totaling $27.1K.
Besides giving through its PAC, American Optometric Association pays lobbyists to press Congress and federal agencies. Each quarter it, or a firm it hires, files a public report under the Lobbying Disclosure Act saying which topics it worked on, what it spent, and whom it contacted. This is what those reports say.
Each report files its work under official topics. The bar shows how often each topic came up across the reports; open one to read what was filed under it. Naming a bill says the organization lobbied on it, not which side it took.
The organization’s own reports give its total lobbying costs, including any firms it hired; each firm reports what this client paid it.
Reported twice a year by the lobbying filer. $1.6M is political giving that also appears in FEC filings.
Matched by name: these reports are filed for “AMERICAN OPTOMETRIC ASSOCIATION”, found by searching “AMERICAN OPTOMETRIC ASSOCIATION”. Lobbying and FEC records share no ID, so an organization that lobbies under another name is missed. Source: LDA.gov, accessed Nov 9, 2026. Senate Office of Public Records cannot vouch for the data or analyses derived from these data after the data have been retrieved from LDA.gov.
American Optometric Association PAC is registered with the Federal Election Commission as a PAC (qualified). It is a lobbyist/registrant PAC. Its FEC record names American Optometric Association as an affiliate. Official FEC summary: Federal Election Commission committee record.
Statements are quoted from these pages exactly. Headings, order and wording are the committee’s or its sponsor’s; the record marking is ours.
American Optometric Association PAC is matched to organization records using the FEC committee identity, structured identifiers, and corroborated organization data.
| 7 |
| $52.5K |
The largest 8 of 48 states.
Bars drawn to $15K, the largest gift total here. 2025–2026 filings.
Candidate contribution rows come from candidate committee Schedule A filings, the same rows the party chart above counts.
Money moving between this committee and other committees, matched on FEC committee ID rather than the name each filing was typed under. Both sides exclude memo entries. The figures here count each committee once, from the itemized transfers read for this section, so they will not match the payment counts under Who this PAC gave to.
Committees that reported giving to this one on their own Schedule A filings, grouped by the giver’s committee ID.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| PAC (qualified) · Connected to PALLONE · 2 payments | $3.5K |
$3.5K from 1 committee, counting every itemized receipt this cycle.
Disbursements this committee itemized to another committee: candidate contributions, party transfers and payments alike, not contributions only.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to YOUNG VICTORY COMMITTEE · 1 payment | $15K |
| Party committee (qualified) · 1 payment | $15K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to DEFEND OUR MAJORITY · 1 payment | $15K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to COLORADO SENATE VICTORY 2016 · 1 payment | $15K |
| Party committee (qualified) · Connected to COLE COMBINED COMMITTEE · 3 payments | $15K |
| 1 payment | $15K |
| PAC (qualified) · 2 payments | $10K |
| PAC (qualified) · 2 payments | $10K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · Connected to DIANA VICTORY FUND · 3 payments | $10K |
| PAC (qualified) · 2 payments | $10K |
| PAC (nonqualified) · Connected to FITZGERALD · 3 payments | $10K |
| PAC (qualified) · 2 payments | $10K |
$1.9M across 369 recipient committees, or 93% of everything this committee reports spending. The largest 12 are shown. A further $2K was filed as memo entries, which FEC reports separately to avoid counting it twice.
Built from FEC Schedule A and Schedule B filings for the selected cycle. A committee only appears here if the money was itemized under its FEC committee ID.
| 198 contributions · 3.8% |
| $60,556 |
| 226 contributions · 3.5% | $56,683 |
| 318 contributions · 3.5% | $55,899 |
| 323 contributions · 3.4% | $53,799 |
| 254 contributions · 3.3% | $53,389 |
| 284 contributions · 3.3% | $53,382 |
By the state each contributor wrote on the filing. The FEC aggregates every Schedule A line together, so one committee or organization transfer can account for a whole state. Contributors who have given $200 or less this cycle are not itemized and cannot be placed on a map. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total.
| Employer as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an employer · 7,888 contributions · 99% of ranked | $1,580,664 |
| 160 contributions · 0.9% of ranked | $15,013 |
| 2 contributions · <0.1% of ranked | $1,000 |
| 1 contribution · <0.1% of ranked | $1,000 |
| 13 contributions · <0.1% of ranked | $650 |
| 5 contributions · <0.1% of ranked | $625 |
| 14 contributions · <0.1% of ranked | $588 |
| 2 contributions · <0.1% of ranked | $500 |
A further $4,050 came from donors whose answer names no employer (blank), so it is not ranked. Itemized receipts grouped by the words contributors filed. The FEC aggregates every Schedule A line here, so committee and organization money sits alongside individuals; this is not an industry classification. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($394,679) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 7,887 contributions · 99% of ranked | $1,579,864 |
| 68 contributions · 0.5% of ranked | $8,051 |
| 40 contributions · 0.2% of ranked | $3,200 |
| 19 contributions · 0.2% of ranked | $3,173 |
| 40 contributions · 0.1% of ranked | $2,030 |
| 1 contribution · 0.1% of ranked | $2,000 |
| 18 contributions · <0.1% of ranked | $1,512 |
| 13 contributions · <0.1% of ranked | $650 |
A further $4,050 came from donors whose answer names no occupation (blank), so it is not ranked. Itemized receipts grouped by the words contributors filed. The FEC aggregates every Schedule A line here, so committee and organization money sits alongside individuals; this is not an industry classification. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($394,679) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Total itemized disbursements $2,022,560
Every itemized payment the committee reported this cycle, sorted by what it said each one was for. The categories are ours; the wording they are matched against is the committee’s own. Open a category to read the filed descriptions and who was paid. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
All 903 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 20 payments · 1.6% of all spending | $32,483 |
| 35 payments · 1.3% of all spending | $25,899 |
| 1 payment · 0.7% of all spending | $15,000 |
| 1 payment · 0.7% of all spending | $15,000 |
| 1 payment · 0.7% of all spending | $15,000 |
| 1 payment · 0.7% of all spending | $15,000 |
| 3 payments · 0.7% of all spending | $15,000 |
| 1 payment · 0.7% of all spending | $15,000 |
The people, firms and committees paid the most, across every kind of payment. Each share is of everything the committee reported spending this cycle, not only the itemized payments above. A payee that is itself a committee links to its own profile.