United States Senate seal

US Senate 2024Pennsylvania

Election held ·

Notable candidates

Democratic Party

Money Trails · Pennsylvania · U.S. Senate · 2024

Where do the groups spending for or against Bob Casey stand on health care?

82 groups reported independent expenditures for or against Bob Casey. 7 of them state a position on health care on their own sites: 6 toward "Larger federal role in health coverage and drug-price regulation", 1 toward "Smaller federal role; market-based coverage". 75 state none we could find.

Start with @graph to draw the answer as a flow diagram.

Larger federal role in health coverage and drug-price regulation (6)

  • CFFE PACHybrid PACspending for Bob Casey$2.9MFEC Sched. E ↗

    strongly toward: Larger federal role in health coverage and drug-price regulation

    “We should all be able to afford the health care and prescription drugs we need to live healthy, fulfilling lives.”
    position source ↗model-read · unverified
  • WINSENATESuper PACspending for Bob Casey$2.8MFEC Sched. E ↗

    strongly toward: Larger federal role in health coverage and drug-price regulation

    “we fight to hold Republicans accountable for their radical proposals to sabotage the health care of millions of Americans and to give more tax breaks to the top 1% while cutting Medicare and education”
    position source ↗model-read · unverified
  • BLACKPACSuper PACspending for Bob Casey$2.7MFEC Sched. E ↗

    leans toward: Larger federal role in health coverage and drug-price regulation

    “an equitable healthcare system”
    position source ↗model-read · unverified
  • FOR OUR FUTURESuper PACspending for Bob Casey$1.8MFEC Sched. E ↗

    strongly toward: Larger federal role in health coverage and drug-price regulation

    “Americans strongly support universal, affordable healthcare. They believe billionaires should pay their fair share in taxes—and that those dollars should be invested in what working families need most: affordable healthcare, childcare, housing, and strong public schools.”
    position source ↗model-read · unverified
  • strongly toward: Larger federal role in health coverage and drug-price regulation

    “fighting for expanding and updating Medicare to cover all people in the United States, for negotiating many of the best collective bargaining contracts for RNs in the nation”
    position source ↗model-read · unverified
  • strongly toward: Larger federal role in health coverage and drug-price regulation

    “Ensure essential health care services are available in all communities by safeguarding federal funding for Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program and the Health Insurance Marketplaces.”
    position source ↗model-read · unverified

Smaller federal role; market-based coverage (1)

No stated position found on its own site (75)

Assumptions and limits

  • A stated position is what the group says on its own site, read by a language model and kept only where the quote appears verbatim on the fetched page; it is marked unverified until a person checks it. It is not what the group's ads or notices said, and not a claim about which dollars went where.
  • Positions were looked up for 17 of 98 outside spenders in this race; a group with none found may simply have no site text on this issue.
  • Spending for or against a candidate is the filed Schedule E total; a group's position and its spending stance are shown side by side, never combined.

How the question is read. Questions are answered by a language model that writes one read-only query over the filings graph; the site validates and runs it and shows every returned row with its filing source, and the model's summary is withheld unless every number in it is in those rows. When a precomputed page matches the question it is linked as a related page. Where the graph is not connected, the browser matcher picks a page instead.

On issue pages the groups' stated positions were read from their own sites by a model offline and kept only where the quote appears verbatim on the page; each is labelled verified or unverified.

How the answers were built. Answers are precomputed from this race's ledger, ads, chain and entity files by pipeline/campaign_commons/trails.py; no language model or graph database is involved in building them. Three questions are supported: who is spending for/against a candidate (Schedule E), who paid for the ads about a candidate (ad sponsors, their Schedule E about the candidate, and each sponsor's own funders), and who funds a committee (its receipts hop by hop). Every figure links to the FEC or Google record it was read from. Money edges and targeting edges are separate; an independent expenditure moves no money to a candidate, and a funder is never joined to a particular ad because pooled dollars cannot be allocated that way.