UPDATE: Outside Spending On Brian Poindexter Just Hit $606,291. The Primary Is Just A Few Days Away.
New FEC filings reveal the true scale of corporate PAC spending in Ohio's 7th District Democratic primary — nearly three times larger than we previously reported.
When we started pulling public records two weeks ago we found $158,100 in corporate television advertising running on four Cleveland stations for Brian Poindexter. We reported it. We documented it. We published it.
Today we pulled the FEC independent expenditure database. The number is significantly larger.
What The FEC Records Show
As of May 1st, 2026, four days before the primary — here is the complete documented picture of outside spending supporting Brian Poindexter in Ohio’s 7th Congressional District Democratic primary:
Jobs and Democracy PAC — TV Buy — $424,280.63 Paid to Bryson Gillette LLC on April 22, 2026. Jobs and Democracy PAC is funded primarily by Public First and Public First Action — an advocacy network that has received at least $20 million from Anthropic, the $60 billion AI corporation behind the AI assistant Claude.
Jobs and Democracy PAC — Ad Production — $18,000.00 Paid to Bryson Gillette LLC on April 22, 2026.
BDA PAC — Direct Mail — $161,611.35 Paid to Bottled Lightning Collective on April 17, 2026. BDA PAC is funded by an oil company fined $5.5 million for pollution violations, a billionaire who backed a right-to-work governor, and the man who served as national finance co-chair for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaigns.
Working Families Party PAC — Texting — $2,400.00 Paid to Community Labor Administrative Services on April 23, 2026.
Total Confirmed Outside Spending: $606,291.98
On The Question Of What Brian Poindexter Can Do About It
We have heard the argument — and it is a fair one. Brian Poindexter cannot legally stop outside PACs from spending money on his behalf. The independent expenditure system was specifically designed to give candidates deniability. He did not ask for this money. He cannot return it. He cannot legally coordinate with these PACs to tell them to stop.
That is true. And it is also exactly how the system was designed to work.
But PACs do not operate blindly. They choose candidates for a reason. Whether that reason involves a nod or a wink from a campaign, from a consultant, from the DCCC, or from the broader political infrastructure around a candidate — we may never know. The independent expenditure system was specifically architected so that we cannot know. The deniability is a feature, not a flaw.
What we do know is history. Candidates who have been supported by corporate super PACs and gone on to win elections have voting records. Those records tell us what the corporations that spent money to elect them got in return. Pharmaceutical PACs funded members who voted against drug price negotiation. Oil and gas PACs funded members who voted against environmental protection. The pattern holds across decades and across parties.
Everything in politics is nuanced — and it is designed to be. The complexity is not accidental. It is the product of a system built over 50 years to make accountability as difficult as possible for ordinary voters to trace.
Ohio Democracy Watch exists to trace it anyway.
We are not here to tell you who to vote for. We are here because as voters in this democracy we want the best possible candidate in the fight that matters most — taking back this seat in November and sending a representative to Washington who answers to the people of Parma, Brook Park, Medina, Ashland, and Wayne County. Not to a $60 billion AI corporation in San Francisco. Not to an oil company fined for polluting. Not to a Romney fundraiser.
The system that produced this $606,291 in outside spending is broken. Most importantly — it needs to end. Citizens United needs to be overturned. The independent expenditure loophole needs to be closed. And the voters of Ohio’s 7th District deserve a representative who will fight to make that happen — not one who benefited from the system and then stayed silent about it.
What Has Not Changed
Brian Poindexter has said nothing about any of this spending. He posted on April 25th that corporate PAC money is “a stain on our politics” and that he would “never take a dime of it.” He is endorsed by End Citizens United — an organization whose entire purpose is getting corporate money out of politics.
Over $600,000 in outside corporate PAC money has been spent to elect him in this primary. He cannot legally stop it. But he can speak. He can acknowledge it. He can tell voters what he thinks about a $60 billion AI corporation spending nearly half a million dollars on Cleveland television to elect him.
He has not said a word.
The Primary Is May 5th
Ohio’s 7th Congressional District Democratic primary is four days away. Polls open at 6:30am on Tuesday May 5th.
The FCC public files are available at publicfiles.fcc.gov. The FEC independent expenditure records are available at fec.gov. Every dollar documented in this post comes from government public records.
The records are public. The money is documented. The choice is yours.
Good morning, Angry Patriots
I want to set explain my position in this
Just because I’m posting this does not mean I’m for or against any candidate in the Ohio 7th. That’s not what this is. This is about transparency. It’s about putting information in front of people so they can actually understand what’s happening in this race.
We can’t sit here and claim we care about transparency, rail against corporate money, and say we oppose Citizens United, and then turn around and get uncomfortable the second that money, messaging, and strategy get exposed for the candidate you support or the one running against the person you’re voting for.
That position doesn’t hold up.
You either want sunlight or you don’t.
The reality is, most people in this area aren’t used to a primary like this. It’s been a long time since the 7th/16th district has seen this level of competition. There’s outside spending, corporate influence, recognizable names, and multiple serious candidates. That changes how people engage, and frankly, a lot of voters are still adjusting to it.
I’m not here trying to push you toward one candidate or another. That’s not the objective. What I’m doing is creating another channel for transparency. If the information moves you one way or the other, that’s your decision. If you want to know where I personally stand, you can ask me directly.
Democracy Watch has been digging into this race in a way that deserves attention.
Their reporting is already shaping broader coverage and inspiring even local news outlets to cover this, even if they won’t acknowledge where it started.
Matt