Electoral receipt · State Senate
GINSU 'GENE' YOON
State Senate · SEN-2 · 2022 cycle
Funding Receipt
GINSU 'GENE' YOON · 2022 cycle
★ · campaign finance, itemized · ★
Funding mix · 65 unique donors ·
primary committee
S Small donors (Under $500) $8,156 · 38%
M Medium donors ($500–$999) $3,638 · 17%
L Large donors ($1,000+) $9,900 · 46%
Top donors to primary committee
(25 shown)
01 Kim, Peter · Mighty Hive $4,900
02 Underhill, Giti · None $2,000
03 Howard, Matthew · Norwest Venture Partners $1,500
04 Collins, Chris · RoboReruiter $1,000
05 Sobota, David · Instacart $1,000
06 Reed, Thomas C. · Retired $1,000
07 Jordan, John · Jordan Vineyard & Winery $618
08 Kreigsman, Sandy · Sandbar Dressage $520
09 Nahm, Tae · Storm Ventures $500
10 Brownstein, Graham · GWF $500
11 Grove, Mary · Retired $400
12 Taylor, Anne · Healdsburg Hospital $400
13 Qualset, Rebecca R. · Retired $300
14 Oshinsky, Matthew · Perkins Coie $250
15 Layton, Adele · Retired $250
16 Wilkinson, John R. · John R. Wilkinson $250
17 Sowers, Madaliene · Law Office of Madaliene Sowers $250
18 Amaturo, Lawrence V. · Lawrence V. Amaturo $250
19 Bulach, Rosalie A. · Retired $250
20 Humboldt County Republican Central Committee $250
21 Endler, Joshua · OnPoint HR Solutions $250
22 Hewitt, Jennifer · None $208
23 Armistead, Liz · Dropbox $200
24 Lee, Alice · LAUSD $200
25 Holly, Ruth · Retired $200
Primary committee total $21,694
Source: California Secretary of State Cal-Access bulk export
Pipeline: scripts/pull_calaccess_filings.py · Dedup: latest AMEND_ID
/methodology
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 Senate in this cycle (e.g. "GINSU 'GENE' YOON for Assembly 2022"). The wider footprint shows every committee GINSU 'GENE' YOON 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.