H. Morgan Griffith
Republican · VA-9 · 119th Congress
House Committee on Energy and Commerce · House Committee on House Administration · House Committee on Rules · House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis · House Select Subcommittee to Investigate the Remaining Questions Surrounding January 6
Influence Score
50.9
Moderately exposed
↓ -2.0 vs 118th (52.9)
— ◊ —

This score measures financial influence across twelve categories. Each bar shows how this member compares to all others in Congress. Longer bars mean more exposure.

Score breakdown — twelve categories
Contributionsmoney from PACs (political action committees) and individual donors
4.5
/ 12
Outside spendingmoney spent by groups to help elect them
0.1
/ 6
Spent to help elect them
$1,527
Outside groups that spent to help elect this member — this drives the outside-spending bar above
Lobbyinghow hard lobbyists push the committees this member sits on
5.6
/ 10
Revolving door (1 lobbyist) former staff now working as lobbyists
0.6
/ 3
Vote alignmenthow often they vote the way their donors want
5.6
/ 12
Contribution timingmoney arriving near key votes
0.0
/ 6
Stock tradesbuying stocks in industries they regulate
0.0
/ 1
Dark moneyfunding from groups that hide their donors
0.0
/ 2
Outbound money distributionmoney this member sends out to the party and to colleagues
12.6
/ 16
Cluster network breadthhow many coordinated funding networks back this member
4.6
/ 10
Committee jurisdiction powerthe legislative reach of the committees this member sits on
6.0
/ 10
Foreign interestforeign-interest money — Israel-policy PACs and FARA-registered institutional lobbying allocated by committee jurisdiction
1.1
/ 12
Israel-policy PACs behind this score
AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE $10,004 direct
FARA institutional lobbying
This member’s committees are targeted by $34.44M in lobbying from FARA-registered firms representing South Korea, Japan, Saudi Arabia. This exposure is weighted at 0.2% of face value in the score — $69K.
— ◊ —
Score across four congresses
Score and tier for each Congress. Members are ranked against others in the same Congress, so tiers are comparable across rows. Raw scores reflect different data availability per Congress.
Congress Score Tier
116th · 2019-2021 33.6 Least exposed
117th · 2021-2023 32.0 Least exposed
118th · 2023-2025 52.9 Moderately exposed
119th · 2025-2027 50.9 Moderately exposed
— ◊ —
Biggest funding source
The single network behind the most money and influence
Total money from this network $45,000
Number of funding networks contributing 1
— ◊ —
Where most of the money comes from
What share of their combined contributions and outside spending comes from a single network. Party committees are excluded.
Share from this one network 1.5%
Amount from this network $32,500
Total from all networks $2,157,624
Networks contributing 340
— ◊ —
Who funds Griffith
Every funding network we can measure, ranked by influence
score 50.9 · Moderately exposed · votes with them 76%
$795,784
— ◊ —
Does the money match their power?
Whether their money comes from the industries their committees actually oversee
Money from industries they regulate 2.3%
Extra weight when money matches their committees 1.50×
Share of outside spending tied to their policy areas 0.0%
— ◊ —
Money timed to key votes
Donations arriving near key votes in the policy areas this member regulates
Biggest clusters of timed money
ABBVIE
20231128 · 1 contributions · Health · 13d from vote (pre)
$500
VERTEX PHARMACEUTICALS
20240514 · 1 contributions · Health · 1d from vote (pre)
$500
— ◊ —
Top Donors
Biggest sources of contributions, grouped by employer, this cycle
TL MANAGEMENT
6 contributions · cycle 2026
$21K
HOMEMAKER
8 contributions · cycle 2022
$14K
CAPITOL COUNSEL
4 contributions · cycle 2024
$10K
THE UROLOGY
17 contributions · cycle 2024
$8K
PCCA
4 contributions · cycle 2022
$8K
ALSTON BIRD LLP
7 contributions · cycle 2026
$8K
HS DESIGN
2 contributions · cycle 2026
$7K
MEADOW PARK
2 contributions · cycle 2026
$7K
HOMEMAKER
7 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
PCCA
3 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
BOSE PUBLIC AFFAIRS
2 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
COMMONWEALTH CARE
2 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
ENIREP
2 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
RICHIE S SPECIALTY PHARMACY
2 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
RYAN PHILLIPS UTRECHT MACKINNO
5 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
THIRD SECURITY
2 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
ULINE
3 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
W STRATEGIES
2 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
ENIREP
2 contributions · cycle 2022
$6K
INNOVATIONS
2 contributions · cycle 2022
$6K
Where the outside money comes from
How much of the outside spending for and against H. Morgan Griffith comes from groups that disclose their donors versus groups that hide them
By funding network
HOUSE FREEDOM ACTION
for them $7K · against them $0 · 91 transactions
$7K
EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY VICTORY FUND (EVERYTOWN VICTORY FUND)
for them $0 · against them $862 · 2 transactions
$862
TOGETHER WE THRIVE
for them $0 · against them $750 · 1 transactions
$750
— ◊ —
Pro-Israel network donors
This counts contributions to this member from individuals whose FEC filings also show contributions to one of the 16 pro-Israel political action committees tracked by the Index. It is a measure of donor overlap — not a claim about why any individual gave, and not part of the influence score.

22 individuals who also gave to pro-Israel PACs contributed $41K to H. Morgan Griffith across 29 contributions.

Total from shared contributors $41K
Shared contributors 22
Contributions 29
By cycle
Cycle Shared donors Gifts Total
2022 3 3 $4K
2024 17 17 $28K
2026 9 9 $8K
— ◊ —
Revolving Door
1 former staff member who worked for H. Morgan Griffith or the committees they serve are now registered lobbyists.
Lobbyist Former position Firm Clients Filings Years
EMILY MACE Intern, Rep. Bruce Westerman (AR-4); Legislative Assistant & Counsel, Rep. Bruce… ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP 1 1 2025–2025
— ◊ —

H. Morgan Griffith sits in the middle of this Congress on the index. There is a measured sponsor relationship, but the vote-alignment signal is weaker — money flows; the votes do not follow in lockstep.

Data: FEC (Federal Election Commission) filings · 118th–119th Congress · lobbying disclosures · VoteView recorded votes
All findings derived programmatically from public records · No prior knowledge required