REBECCA BAUER-KAHAN
State Assembly · ASM-16 · 2026 cycle
| Interest | Amount | Share | Gifts | Donors |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Candidate / party transfers | $737K | 73% | 5 | 3 |
| Individuals (no industry data disclosed)unattributable | $74K | 7% | 33 | 32 |
| Other organizations (unclassified)unattributable | $35K | 4% | 20 | 16 |
| Healthcare / pharma / medical | $32K | 3% | 14 | 9 |
| Other named interests 8 categories below 1%: Entertainment & media, Teachers & education, Legal / trial lawyers, Energy & utilities, Other labor unions, Engineers & scientists (public), Construction & contractors, Nurses & healthcare workers | $26K | 3% | 15 | 12 |
| Finance & banking | $19K | 2% | 20 | 1 |
| Tribal governments / gaming | $18K | 2% | 6 | 5 |
| Building trades / construction labor | $17K | 2% | 5 | 5 |
| Business & trade groups | $17K | 2% | 5 | 4 |
| Real estate & development | $16K | 2% | 5 | 5 |
| Public safety (police/fire) | $12K | 1% | 9 | 5 |
Headline excludes self-funding and the unattributable individuals bucket — gifts from people for whom employer/occupation either isn't disclosed (Cal-Access leaves it blank on roughly 85% of individual contributions) or doesn't fit any sector category. Named interests below 1% of total raised collapse into a single "Other named interests" row to keep the long tail legible; the rolled-up category names are listed inline beneath that row. See the methodology for the classifier rules and the two distinct reasons a gift becomes unattributable.
Pipeline: scripts/pull_calaccess_filings.py · Dedup: latest AMEND_ID
/methodology
What you're seeing. The Raised for this race total counts only money that flowed into committees clearly named for State Assembly in this cycle (e.g. "REBECCA BAUER-KAHAN for Assembly 2026"). The wider footprint shows every committee REBECCA BAUER-KAHAN controls during the same window — ballot-measure leadership PACs, future-office exploratory committees, officeholder accounts. A candidate raising large sums into non-electoral vehicles still shows where the institutional attention is. Both surfaces are honest; they answer different questions.