Crypto PACs back winning side in 28 of 30 House races, only 1 of 4 Senate races

Crypto-focused political action committees (PACs) supported the winning candidates in 28 out of 30 House races where they invested funds, based on projections available by early Wednesday afternoon. However, their influence proved less effective in Senate contests, with only one win out of four races where spending was reported. The data comes from an analysis of Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings compiled by Unchained for this election cycle.

PAC spending and race outcomes

The analysis covered independent expenditures made since September 1 by four major crypto-focused PACs. As of November 4, the disclosed filings captured a $90.22 million spending window across 36 congressional races, comprising four Senate contests and 32 for the House. Two House races—those featuring Rep. David Rouzer in North Carolina and Rep. Aisha Wahab in California—remained unprojected by NBC at the time.

Of the $89.5 million spent on races with clear projections, $21.9 million was deployed in support of winning candidates. This figure represents 24.4% of the total amount directed towards these projected contests.

Reuters provided a separate tally focused on Fairshake, one of the leading crypto PACs, on Wednesday. According to that assessment, Fairshake achieved 29 wins across 34 races where it spent funds, although several of those contests remained undecided.

Unchained’s summary includes fall spending from all four PACs, evaluating outcomes against the latest NBC race projections.

Senate races and significant spending

The special Senate election in Ohio attracted the largest single concentration of crypto PAC funding during this cycle. Approximately $64.05 million—71% of the total spent during the reporting window—was directed at this contest. Both Defend American Jobs and Digital Freedom Fund focused resources on supporting Republican Senator Jon Husted and opposing Democrat Sherrod Brown. Despite these efforts, NBC projected Brown as the winner.

Ohio alone accounted for 94.7% of the $67.66 million expended on losing campaigns. Defend American Jobs also allocated $13.48 million against independent candidate Dan Osborn in Nebraska, a race won by Republican Senator Pete Ricketts according to NBC’s calls.

Meanwhile, Digital Freedom Fund saw no success in its three targeted Senate races, also working to unseat Democrats James Talarico in Texas and Josh Turek in Iowa, both of whom NBC projected as winners.

Mini dictionary: Fairshake is a political action committee focused on supporting pro-cryptocurrency candidates in United States elections. These PACs channel contributions from the digital asset industry to affect outcomes in federal races.

Impact on legislative efforts

The effects of heavy PAC spending became a discussion point after the Clarity Act, legislation impacting digital assets, failed to advance in the Senate in September. Cody Carbone, CEO of The Digital Chamber, commented that many Democrats affected by PAC spending felt nervous about potentially negative impacts on their races if a vote were held while they were running for re-election.

Many Democrats did not want to vote on the Clarity Act at that time, citing concerns that PAC money could influence their election prospects if they faced re-election.

Fairshake directed around $1 million in October to each of six incumbents who were supportive of the Clarity Act in the upcoming 2025 cycle. However, not all of these candidates were successful: Rep. Bryan Steil from Wisconsin lost to Democrat Mitchell Berman, and Rep. Bill Huizenga of Michigan was defeated by Democrat Sean McCann. House Financial Services Chair French Hill from Arkansas narrowly maintained his seat with a 1.8-point margin.

House and Senate projections

According to the latest results, NBC projected the Democrats to retain control of the House with 238 seats to 146 for Republicans, with 51 races still undecided. In the Senate, Democrats held 54 seats to 44 for Republicans, with two races yet to be called.

Crypto industry PACs achieved significant success in House contests, but their record was much weaker in Senate races, especially in high-spending states such as Ohio and Nebraska.

The split performance raises questions about the long-term influence of crypto money in federal elections and legislative prospects for the industry moving forward.