Elaine Luria
Reported office: U.S. House · Virginia · District 2
FEC filing · Reported office: U.S. House · Virginia · District 2
Reported spending supporting Elaine Luria
CASA in Action PAC reported $595.60 in independent expenditures supporting Elaine Luria.
Reported amount$595.60
Airfare - Estimate
Reported support
One filing row · 2026 cycle
One filing row · 2026 cycle
Source snapshot: October 16, 2026. Later filings or amendments may change the record.
Follow the reported spending
Who, what, and why this record exists.
Reported byNamed candidate
CASA in Action PAC
Explore the committee’s finances and other reported activity.
Committee record →- What was reported?
- Airfare - EstimateOriginal purpose text supplied by the filer.
- Who was the payee?
- Delta Air Lines, Inc.The named payee, not necessarily the publisher or platform.
- Which election?
- General2026 reporting cycle. The filing’s election designation is not proof of ballot qualification.
- Candidate party in this filing
- DEMOCRATIC PARTYFiler-supplied affiliation, not an independent check of current status.
Reported dates
When was it reported?
DisseminationSeptember 25, 2026
Reported date the communication was distributed.
ExpenditureSeptember 10, 2026
Expenditure date supplied by the filer.
Received by the FECOctober 3, 2026
Receipt date for the report, not the ad’s publication date.
These fields describe different events and are shown as reported—not combined into a single “ad date.” FEC field definitions ↗
Read the record correctly
Outside spending, not a donation to the candidate.
The FEC defines an independent expenditure as spending on a communication advocating a candidate’s election or defeat, made independently of the candidate or party. That is the category reported here—not proof that the FEC has verified every claim in this filing.
How the FEC defines independent expenditures ↗A finance row is not the ad itself.
This connected record does not include the ad’s text, video, impressions, audience, or verified platform. Purpose and payee names alone cannot establish those details, effectiveness, coordination, or wrongdoing.
Support or opposition is the filer’s reported designation, not Electionpedia’s position.
Keep following the source trail
More filing rows for this spender and candidate
From the October 16, 2026 snapshot; this is not a complete or live spending total. Dates below use dissemination, then expenditure, then receipt when earlier fields are absent.
Follow the candidate34 filing rows in this snapshotAll reported activity naming Elaine Luria →Follow the spender40 filing rows in this snapshotAll reported activity from CASA in Action PAC →
Source details & filing identifiers
Identifiers let you match this row to the original source. They are not additional spending amounts.
- Spender FEC ID
- C00685693
- Candidate FEC ID
- H8VA02111
- FEC file number
- 2016693
- Transaction ID
- 500013955
- Filing image
- 202610039908516820
- Amendment code
- A1
- Previous file number
- 2016112
- Election code
- G
- Reported district code
- 02
- Office code
- H
- Electionpedia ID
- eop-ad-0i0r6i0
Source snapshot checked October 16, 2026. The filing links lead to the FEC; access and availability are controlled by that agency. Original and amended reports can overlap, so these rows should not be summed as a verified total without reconciliation.
Reading guideResearching public records
How to interpret this record
CASA in Action PAC: reported spending supporting Elaine Luria
A useful public record has an identity, a scope and a source. Research becomes more reliable when those elements travel with the number or statement being discussed.
Write down the claim first
Identify exactly what you want to know: who holds an office, whether someone appears on a ballot, what a committee reported spending, or how a member voted on a question. Each claim calls for a different source. A biography, a campaign website and a financial report can all be useful without answering the same question.
Keep identity, scope and date together
Record the entity identifier, jurisdiction, election or reporting period and source publication. These details prevent a correct fact from being attached to the wrong person, place or time. A name-only match can be misleading, especially when campaigns or institutions have changed names or when a person has sought several offices.
Read the full researching public records guide →