Kirsten E. Gillibrand
Democrat · NY Senate · 119th Congress
Senate Committee on Agriculture (Chair) · Local Food Systems (Chair) · and Food Safety and Security (Chair) · and Agriculture Security (Chair) · Housing and Urban Development (Chair) · and Related Agencies (Chair) · Senate Special Committee on Aging (Chair) · and Forestry · Risk Management · and Trade · Specialty Crops · and Research · Agricultural Research · and Specialty Crops · Senate Committee on Appropriations · Rural Development · Food and Drug Administration · Veterans Affairs · Senate Committee on Armed Services · Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works · Waste Management · and Regulatory Oversight · Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Influence Score
72.2
Highly exposed
— ◊ —

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
3.8
/ 12
Outside spendingmoney spent by groups to help elect them
0.6
/ 6
Spent to help elect them
$88,823
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
6.0
/ 10
Revolving door former staff now working as lobbyists
0.0
/ 3
Vote alignmenthow often they vote the way their donors want
10.0
/ 12
Contribution timingmoney arriving near key votes
1.7
/ 6
Stock tradesbuying stocks in industries they regulate
0.0
/ 1
Dark moneyfunding from groups that hide their donors
1.9
/ 2
Outbound money distributionmoney this member sends out to the party and to colleagues
8.8
/ 16
Cluster network breadthhow many coordinated funding networks back this member
4.1
/ 10
Committee jurisdiction powerthe legislative reach of the committees this member sits on
10.0
/ 10
Foreign interestforeign-interest money — Israel-policy PACs and FARA-registered institutional lobbying allocated by committee jurisdiction
10.9
/ 12
Israel-policy PACs behind this score
AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE $73,772 direct
NORPAC $29,000 direct
CITYPAC $1,000 direct
DMFI PAC $1,000 direct
FARA institutional lobbying
This member’s committees are targeted by $189.28M 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 — $379K.
— ◊ —
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 86.0 Most exposed
117th · 2021-2023 44.0 Least exposed
118th · 2023-2025 51.0 Moderately exposed
119th · 2025-2027 72.2 Highly exposed
— ◊ —
Biggest funding source
The single network behind the most money and influence
Total money from this network $30,000
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 6.9%
Amount from this network $73,772
Total from all networks $1,073,412
Networks contributing 178
— ◊ —
Who funds Gillibrand
Every funding network we can measure, ranked by influence
score 72.2 · Highly exposed · votes with them 93%
$751,981
— ◊ —
Does the money match their power?
Whether their money comes from the industries their committees actually oversee
Money from industries they regulate 97.7%
Extra weight when money matches their committees 2.00×
Share of outside spending tied to their policy areas 100.0%
— ◊ —
Money timed to key votes
Donations arriving near key votes in the policy areas this member regulates
Times money arrived near a vote 68
Money that arrived near votes $173K
Distinct donors 95
Distinct employers 54
Share of their total fundraising 1.43%
Biggest clusters of timed money
CADWALADER WICKERSHAM TAFT LLP
20230522 · 3 contributions · Judiciary · 5d from vote (post)
$7K
A16Z
20230521 · 2 contributions · Finance · 11d from vote (pre)
$7K
AH CAPITAL MANAGEMENT
20230521 · 2 contributions · Finance · 11d from vote (pre)
$7K
ARIEL INVESTMENTS
20231212 · 2 contributions · Finance · 6d from vote (post)
$7K
BLOOMBERG
20240529 · 2 contributions · Finance · 13d from vote (post)
$7K
FRESHFIELDS BRUCKHAUS DERINGER LLP
20240512 · 2 contributions · Judiciary · 11d from vote (pre)
$7K
GOLDMAN SACHS
20240103 · 2 contributions · Finance · 7d from vote (pre)
$7K
JP MORGAN
20231016 · 3 contributions · Finance · 2d from vote (pre)
$7K
SKADDEN ARPS
20230508 · 2 contributions · Judiciary · 9d from vote (pre)
$6K
AMERICAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT
20240321 · 2 contributions · Finance · 1d from vote (mixed)
$5K
— ◊ —
Top Donors
Biggest sources of contributions, grouped by employer, this cycle
CORNING
88 contributions · cycle 2024
$123K
COINBASE
23 contributions · cycle 2024
$49K
DAVIS POLK WARDWELL LLP
21 contributions · cycle 2024
$33K
BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
19 contributions · cycle 2022
$32K
LATHAM WATKINS LLP
20 contributions · cycle 2024
$30K
APOLLO GLOBAL MANAGEMENT
11 contributions · cycle 2024
$24K
UNISWAP LABS
8 contributions · cycle 2024
$23K
PARADIGM
7 contributions · cycle 2026
$23K
DAVIS POLK WARDWELL
14 contributions · cycle 2024
$23K
LATHAM WATKINS
9 contributions · cycle 2022
$20K
PARADIGM
7 contributions · cycle 2022
$20K
WILLKIE FARR GALLAGHER LLP
8 contributions · cycle 2026
$20K
NEW YORK LIFE
10 contributions · cycle 2024
$20K
MULTICOIN CAPITAL
7 contributions · cycle 2022
$19K
APOLLO GLOBAL MANAGEMENT
7 contributions · cycle 2022
$19K
ANDREESSEN HOROWITZ
7 contributions · cycle 2022
$18K
PAUL WEISS
7 contributions · cycle 2022
$18K
DYDX TRADING
6 contributions · cycle 2024
$18K
DAVIS POLK
9 contributions · cycle 2024
$18K
DAVIS POLK WARDWELL
6 contributions · cycle 2022
$17K
Where the outside money comes from
How much of the outside spending for and against Kirsten E. Gillibrand comes from groups that disclose their donors versus groups that hide them
Total outside spending received $30K
Disclosed outside spending $776
Dark-money outside spending $29K
Share that is dark money 97.43%
Dark money tied to their policy areas $29K
Groups hiding their donors 2
By funding network
NATIONAL HORIZON
for them $0 · against them $714K · 7 transactions
$714K
PROGRESSIVE TURNOUT PROJECT
for them $92K · against them $0 · 2 transactions
$92K
WE ACT 4 CHANGE
for them $88K · against them $0 · 3 transactions
$88K
JEWISH DEMOCRATIC COUNCIL OF AMERICA
for them $2K · against them $0 · 6 transactions
$2K
MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION
for them $769 · against them $0 · 6 transactions
$769
DEMOCRACY PAC
for them $72 · against them $0 · 2 transactions
$72
LCV VICTORY FUND
for them $40 · against them $0 · 4 transactions
$40
SIERRA CLUB INDEPENDENT ACTION
for them $20 · against them $0 · 2 transactions
$20
Groups that hide their donors
Independent-expenditure entity · support
$29K
1 smaller group under $500
tiny cost-allocation expenditures, not listed individually
$39
— ◊ —
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.

365 individuals who also gave to pro-Israel PACs contributed $1.59M to Kirsten E. Gillibrand across 432 contributions.

Total from shared contributors $1.59M
Shared contributors 365
Contributions 432
By cycle
Cycle Shared donors Gifts Total
2022 9 16 $18K
2024 352 401 $1.54M
2026 11 15 $32K
— ◊ —

Kirsten E. Gillibrand's file shows clear influence markers across multiple categories for the top funding network, placing them in the upper range of this Congress. The pattern runs above what coincidence would produce, and the methodology page documents what each category requires.

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