Sylvia R. Garcia
Democrat
· TX-29 · 119th Congress
House Committee on Ethics · House Committee on Financial Services · Financial Technology · and Artificial Intelligence · House Committee on the Judiciary · Civil Rights · and Civil Liberties
Influence Score
56.4
Moderately exposed
↓ -1.8
vs 118th (58.2)
— ◊ —
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
4.9
/ 12
Outside spendingmoney spent by groups to help elect them
1.9
/ 6
Spent to help elect them
$1,085,382
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
3.3
/ 10
Revolving door
former staff now working as lobbyists
0.0
/ 3
Vote alignmenthow often they vote the way their donors want
8.3
/ 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
< 0.1
/ 2
Outbound money distributionmoney this member sends out to the party and to colleagues
11.7
/ 16
Cluster network breadthhow many coordinated funding networks back this member
6.1
/ 10
Committee jurisdiction powerthe legislative reach of the committees this member sits on
2.7
/ 10
Foreign interestforeign-interest money — Israel-policy PACs and FARA-registered institutional lobbying allocated by committee jurisdiction
6.2
/ 12
Israel-policy PACs behind this score
JSTREETPAC
$8,300 direct
AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
$7,001 direct
FARA institutional lobbying
This member’s committees are targeted by $9.27M in lobbying from FARA-registered firms representing Japan, China, South Korea. This exposure is weighted at 0.2% of face value in the score — $19K.
— ◊ —
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 | 55.0 | Moderately exposed |
| 117th · 2021-2023 | 50.3 | Moderately exposed |
| 118th · 2023-2025 | 58.2 | Moderately exposed |
| 119th · 2025-2027 | 56.4 | Moderately exposed |
— ◊ —
Biggest funding source
The single network behind the most money and influence
Network
BOLD AMERICA
Total money from this network
$303,750
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.
Network
BOLD AMERICA
Share from this one network
18.1%
Amount from this network
$540,000
Total from all networks
$2,978,881
Networks contributing
307
— ◊ —
Who funds Garcia
Every funding network we can measure, ranked by influence
$1,939,642
— ◊ —
Does the money match their power?
Whether their money comes from the industries their committees actually oversee
Money from industries they regulate
82.9%
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
AMEGY BANK
$500
NAVARRO INSURANCE
$500
AGILITY BANK
$250
— ◊ —
Top Donors
Biggest sources of contributions, grouped by employer, this cycle
HILLCO
$12K
HILLCO
$10K
THE GOODMAN
$7K
LANIER LAW FIRM
$7K
ARNOLD ITKIN LLP
$7K
BAKER WOTRING LLP
$7K
GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP
$7K
MEM ASSOCIATES
$7K
GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP
$6K
LANIER LAW FIRM
$6K
THE GOODMAN
$5K
FAROUK SYSTEMS
$5K
GONZALEZ ASSOCIATES
$5K
QUANTUM ENVIRONMENTAL
$5K
KATIES SEAFOOD
$4K
D P CREATIVE STRATEGIES
$4K
BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE
$4K
BAKER WOTRING LLP
$4K
CAMDEN
$4K
CBL ENERGY LAW PLLC
$4K
Where the outside money comes from
How much of the outside spending for and against Sylvia R. Garcia comes from groups that disclose their donors versus groups that hide them
Total outside spending received
$540K
Disclosed outside spending
$540K
Dark-money outside spending
$8
Share that is dark money
0.00%
Dark money tied to their policy areas
$0
Groups hiding their donors
1
By funding network
BOLD AMERICA
$540K
THE 1861 INITIATIVE
$448K
WOMEN VOTE
$120K
TAKING TEXAS TO THE TOP
$102K
LATINO VICTORY FUND
$100K
TEXAS ORGANIZING PROJECT POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
$57K
UNIDOSUS ACTION FUND, INC.
$8K
UNITED WE DREAM ACTION PAC
$6K
TOGETHER WE THRIVE
$750
DEMOCRACY PAC
$318
SEIU COPE (SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL EDUCATION)
$110
NEA ADVOCACY FUND
$68
ENVIRONMENT AMERICA ACTION FUND
$48
USW WORKS
$44
HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN EQUALITY VOTES PAC
$36
Groups that hide their donors
1 smaller group under $500
$8
Likely donors behind the dark money supporting this member
Inferred
Donors who fund the disclosed PACs in the same network as the hidden groups above. "Coverage" is how many of that network's disclosed groups a donor funds — the more they fund, the more likely they also back the hidden group.
NEVADANS FOR STEVEN HORSFORD
$80K
TITUS FOR CONGRESS
$80K
SUSIE LEE FOR CONGRESS
$79K
GEORGE SOROS
$525.74M
SMP
$81.00M
BLACKPAC
$47.25M
AB PAC
$25.50M
HMP
$15.00M
HOUSE MAJORITY PAC
$15.00M
CARE IN ACTION PAC
$6.60M
— ◊ —
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.
44 individuals who also gave to pro-Israel PACs contributed $551K to Sylvia R. Garcia across 69 contributions.
Total from shared contributors
$551K
Shared contributors
44
Contributions
69
By cycle
| Cycle | Shared donors | Gifts | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 23 | 25 | $77K |
| 2024 | 17 | 24 | $304K |
| 2026 | 13 | 20 | $170K |
— ◊ —
Sylvia R. Garcia 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
All findings derived programmatically from public records · No prior knowledge required