Texas Ethics Commission data
Release v1.4
Source snapshot September 17, 2026
Latest eligible reported transaction September 15, 2026
Canonical Vendor
MIKE LASTER CAMPAIGN
Resolved vendor identity assembled from reviewed Texas Ethics Commission payee records.
Canonical vendor · Vendor ID 213685 · Resolution: Indexed Canonical Identity
Total Payments
$104,950.00
Client Filers
43
Payments
125
Activity Range
06/02/2009–04/04/2019
Largest Payment
$5,000.00
Graph: 43 connected filers · 125 payments · $104,950.00 represented
Canonical vendor assembled from reviewed Texas Ethics Commission reported payee identities. Source records remain unchanged.
Reported Names
Payee names preserved from the reported/curated source layer and resolved to this canonical vendor.
- Mike Laster Campaign
Top Client Filers
Canonical client relationships from vendor_clients_canonical.
Shared Client Network
Other canonical vendors paid by the same filer clients. Ranked by shared-client count.
This is a structural overlap measure, not evidence of affiliation or coordination.
| Vendor | Shared Clients | Focal Coverage | Peer Clients | Network Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
SYLVESTER TURNER CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 302244
|
32 | 74.4% | 209 | 14.5% |
|
ANNISE PARKER CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 18044
|
28 | 65.1% | 103 | 23.7% |
|
JERRY DAVIS CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 164363
|
27 | 62.8% | 45 | 44.3% |
|
SYLVIA GARCIA CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 302277
|
27 | 62.8% | 104 | 22.5% |
|
ELLEN COHEN CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 103511
|
26 | 60.5% | 104 | 21.5% |
|
LaRRY GREEN CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 186968
|
25 | 58.1% | 37 | 45.5% |
|
CAROL ALVARADO CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 52699
|
25 | 58.1% | 252 | 9.3% |
|
Jack CHRISTIE CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 160572
|
24 | 55.8% | 41 | 40.0% |
|
DWIGHT BOYKINS CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 96855
|
24 | 55.8% | 48 | 35.8% |
|
RODNEY ELLIS CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 267559
|
24 | 55.8% | 187 | 11.7% |
|
AMANDA EDWARDS CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 13317
|
23 | 53.5% | 38 | 39.7% |
|
Dave Martin Campaign
Vendor ID 84785
|
23 | 53.5% | 40 | 38.3% |
Method: Focal Coverage = shared clients ÷ this vendor's client count.
Network Overlap = Jaccard similarity: shared clients ÷ union of both client sets.
Recent Reported Payments
| Date | Client Filer | Amount | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/04/2019 | Houston Police Retired Officers Association - P.A.C. | $250.00 | Campaign contribution |
| 04/01/2019 | Cobb Fendley PAC | $500.00 | Campaign Contribution |
| 03/20/2018 | Cobb Fendley PAC | $250.00 | Campaign Contribution |
| 03/14/2018 | Huitt-Zollars, Inc. Texas PAC | $500.00 | Campaign Contribution |
| 12/13/2017 | Houston Police Officers Union PAC | $2,500.00 | Campaign contribution |
| 05/05/2017 | Houston Police Officers Union PAC | $2,500.00 | Candidate contribution |
| 04/11/2017 | Houston Professional Fire Fighters Assn. Local #341 PAC | $5,000.00 | Campaign contribution |
| 03/30/2017 | Texas Taxi Political Action Committee | $500.00 | Contribution |
| 03/24/2017 | Cobb Fendley PAC | $500.00 | Campaign Contribution |
| 03/23/2017 | Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, Inc. PAC | $250.00 | City of Houston |
| 02/24/2017 | Klotz Associates Inc. PAC | $250.00 | Political Contribution |
| 10/27/2016 | Houston Police Officers Union PAC | $2,500.00 | Campaign contribution |
| 02/26/2016 | ANDREWS & KURTH TEXAS PAC | $1,000.00 | In support of the campaign fund. |
| 12/09/2015 | KEY PAC | $250.00 | Mike Laster Campaign |
| 11/27/2015 | Texas Taxi Political Action Committee | $2,000.00 | contributions |
| 11/20/2015 | Sheet Metal Workers Local Union No. 54 PAC | $250.00 | Campaign Contribution |
| 11/20/2015 | Sheet Metal Workers Local Union No. 54 PAC | $250.00 | Campaign Contribution |
| 11/19/2015 | Houston Professional Fire Fighters Assn. Local #341 PAC | $5,000.00 | Campaign contribution |
| 11/17/2015 | Cobb Fendley PAC | $750.00 | Campaign Contribution |
| 11/16/2015 | RPS Klotz Associates Inc. PAC | $250.00 | political contribution |
Evidence basis: A canonical vendor identity was resolved using the curated vendor layer. Raw reported-payee statistics remain separate from canonical vendor statistics so the source record and analytical identity are distinguishable.