John R. Curtis
Republican · UT Senate · 119th Congress
Waste Management (Chair) · Environmental Justice (Chair) · and Regulatory Oversight (Chair) · Transnational Crime (Chair) · Civilian Security (Chair) · Human Rights (Chair) · and Global Women's Issues (Chair) · House Committee on Energy and Commerce · House Committee on Foreign Affairs · the Pacific · and Nonproliferation · and Trade · House Committee on Natural Resources · and Public Lands · Senate Committee on Commerce · and Transportation · and Fisheries · and Data Privacy · Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works · and Nuclear Innovation and Safety · Senate Committee on Foreign Relations · and International Cybersecurity Policy · Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship
Influence Score
68.5
Moderately 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
2.8
/ 12
Outside spendingmoney spent by groups to help elect them
6.0
/ 6
Spent to help elect them
$17,016,975
Outside groups that spent to help elect this member — this drives the outside-spending bar above
Spent to defeat this member
$208,320
Outside groups that spent to defeat this member (not counted in this score)
Lobbyinghow hard lobbyists push the committees this member sits on
5.9
/ 10
Revolving door former staff now working as lobbyists
0.0
/ 3
Vote alignmenthow often they vote the way their donors want
5.5
/ 12
Contribution timingmoney arriving near key votes
4.0
/ 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
10.4
/ 16
Cluster network breadthhow many coordinated funding networks back this member
6.2
/ 10
Committee jurisdiction powerthe legislative reach of the committees this member sits on
5.9
/ 10
Foreign interestforeign-interest money — Israel-policy PACs and FARA-registered institutional lobbying allocated by committee jurisdiction
8.1
/ 12
Israel-policy PACs behind this score
REPUBLICAN JEWISH COALITION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (RJC-PAC) $49 direct
FARA institutional lobbying
This member’s committees are targeted by $49.47M 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 — $99K.
— ◊ —
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 48.6 Moderately exposed
117th · 2021-2023 47.6 Moderately exposed
118th · 2023-2025 73.3 Highly exposed
119th · 2025-2027 68.5 Moderately exposed
— ◊ —
Biggest funding source
The single network behind the most money and influence
Network FAIRSHAKE
Total money from this network $5,215,446
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 1.2%
Amount from this network $15,000
Total from all networks $1,222,608
Networks contributing 346
— ◊ —
Who funds Curtis
Every funding network we can measure, ranked by influence
score 68.5 · Moderately exposed · votes with them 76%
$17,500,058
— ◊ —
Does the money match their power?
Whether their money comes from the industries their committees actually oversee
Money from industries they regulate 96.3%
Extra weight when money matches their committees 2.00×
Share of outside spending tied to their policy areas 37.4%
— ◊ —
Money timed to key votes
Donations arriving near key votes in the policy areas this member regulates
Times money arrived near a vote 55
Money that arrived near votes $182K
Distinct donors 74
Distinct employers 45
Share of their total fundraising 3.26%
Biggest clusters of timed money
GREYLOCK
20240605 · 2 contributions · Finance · 6d from vote (mixed)
$13K
INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT
20240402 · 3 contributions · Finance · 11d from vote (post)
$10K
KELLER INVESTMENT PROPERTIES
20240427 · 6 contributions · Finance · 7d from vote (mixed)
$10K
SECOR ASSET MANAGEMENT
20240315 · 3 contributions · Finance · 5d from vote (mixed)
$10K
CITADEL
20240229 · 2 contributions · Finance · 6d from vote (pre)
$7K
FISHER INVESTMENTS
20240523 · 2 contributions · Finance · 1d from vote (post)
$7K
JANE STREET
20240329 · 2 contributions · Finance · 7d from vote (post)
$7K
LONE PINE CAPITAL
20240214 · 2 contributions · Finance · 8d from vote (post)
$7K
1ST FINANCIAL BANK USA
20240418 · 1 contributions · Finance · 2d from vote (pre)
$3K
ANDREESSEN HOROWITZ
20240628 · 2 contributions · Finance · 1d from vote (mixed)
$3K
— ◊ —
Top Donors
Biggest sources of contributions, grouped by employer, this cycle
HOMEMAKER
71 contributions · cycle 2024
$189K
SUNRUN
58 contributions · cycle 2024
$55K
VIVINT
10 contributions · cycle 2024
$30K
CEO
13 contributions · cycle 2024
$28K
NEXTERA ENERGY
22 contributions · cycle 2024
$28K
STEEL EISNER LLP
4 contributions · cycle 2024
$27K
2FILLC
6 contributions · cycle 2024
$20K
COLMERA
6 contributions · cycle 2024
$20K
SUNDANCE BAY
6 contributions · cycle 2024
$20K
CLYDE COMPANIES
7 contributions · cycle 2024
$19K
GOOGLE
7 contributions · cycle 2024
$18K
PRESIDENT
7 contributions · cycle 2024
$18K
DELTA AIR LINES
13 contributions · cycle 2024
$17K
CONSTELLATION ENERGY
21 contributions · cycle 2024
$17K
GREYLOCK
3 contributions · cycle 2024
$16K
SAGESURE
3 contributions · cycle 2024
$16K
TEXAS CRUDE ENERGY
3 contributions · cycle 2024
$16K
CONSTELLATION
20 contributions · cycle 2024
$15K
INVARIANT
12 contributions · cycle 2024
$14K
ADVANTAGE CAPITAL
11 contributions · cycle 2026
$14K
Where the outside money comes from
How much of the outside spending for and against John R. Curtis comes from groups that disclose their donors versus groups that hide them
Total outside spending received $9.13M
Disclosed outside spending $9.12M
Dark-money outside spending $16K
Share that is dark money 0.18%
Dark money tied to their policy areas $0
Groups hiding their donors 1
By funding network
AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM PAC
for them $9.98M · against them $0 · 66 transactions
$9.98M
FAIRSHAKE
for them $5.40M · against them $0 · 16 transactions
$5.40M
SLF PAC
for them $972K · against them $0 · 16 transactions
$972K
AMERICAN CONSERVATION COALITION PAC (ACC PAC)
for them $516K · against them $0 · 20 transactions
$516K
UTAHNS FOR LIBERTY
for them $0 · against them $156K · 4 transactions
$156K
EDF ACTION VOTES
for them $101K · against them $0 · 2 transactions
$101K
ALL IN FOR UTAH
for them $49K · against them $0 · 3 transactions
$49K
GUN RIGHTS AMERICA
for them $0 · against them $31K · 3 transactions
$31K
HOMETOWN FREEDOM ACTION NETWORK
for them $0 · against them $21K · 14 transactions
$21K
HUNTER ACTION FUND (HAF)
for them $670 · against them $0 · 1 transactions
$670
Groups that hide their donors
Independent-expenditure entity · support
$16K
— ◊ —
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.

179 individuals who also gave to pro-Israel PACs contributed $768K to John R. Curtis across 250 contributions.

Total from shared contributors $768K
Shared contributors 179
Contributions 250
By cycle
Cycle Shared donors Gifts Total
2022 27 38 $287K
2024 164 211 $479K
2026 1 1 $1K
— ◊ —

John R. Curtis 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