Texas Ethics Commission data
Release v1.4
Source snapshot September 17, 2026
Latest eligible reported transaction September 15, 2026
Canonical Vendor
WICHITA COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Resolved vendor identity assembled from reviewed Texas Ethics Commission payee records.
Canonical vendor · Vendor ID 353778 · Resolution: Indexed Canonical Identity
Total Payments
$36,982.43
Client Filers
7
Payments
174
Activity Range
10/12/2009–06/30/2026
Largest Payment
$5,000.00
Graph: 7 connected filers · 174 payments · $36,982.43 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.
- Wichita County Democratic Party
Top Client Filers
Canonical client relationships from vendor_clients_canonical.
| # | Filer | Paid | Payments | Last Payment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ActBlue Texas | $21,109.68 | 141 | 06/30/2026 |
| 2 | Wichita County Democratic Association | $12,688.75 | 20 | 01/29/2026 |
| 3 | Texas Democratic Women of the Wichita Area | $1,934.00 | 4 | 01/27/2020 |
| 4 | Coppage, Walter J. (Mr.) | $500.00 | 5 | 05/13/2025 |
| 5 | Texas County Democratic Campaign Committee | $300.00 | 1 | 10/25/2014 |
| 6 | Committee to Elect David L. Farabee | $250.00 | 1 | 10/12/2009 |
| 7 | Cheng, Kathy (Ms.) | $200.00 | 2 | 08/28/2020 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Vendor ID 310744
|
5 | 71.4% | 1,669 | 0.3% |
|
LUBY'S CAFETERIA
Vendor ID 197257
|
4 | 57.1% | 81 | 4.8% |
|
OFFICE DEPOT
Vendor ID 230284
|
4 | 57.1% | 3,017 | 0.1% |
|
WAL-MART
Vendor ID 347528
|
3 | 42.9% | 714 | 0.4% |
|
SAM'S CLUB
Vendor ID 273581
|
3 | 42.9% | 1,360 | 0.2% |
|
USPS
Vendor ID 340732
|
3 | 42.9% | 1,958 | 0.2% |
|
BARNETT FOR TEXAS HD69
Vendor ID 28127
|
2 | 28.6% | 2 | 28.6% |
|
LIVE OAK COUNTY DEMOCRATS
Vendor ID 193028
|
2 | 28.6% | 2 | 28.6% |
|
MSU Democrats
Vendor ID 219299
|
2 | 28.6% | 2 | 28.6% |
|
The Donnie Dippel Campaign
Vendor ID 318323
|
2 | 28.6% | 2 | 28.6% |
|
WALTER COPPAGE CAMPAIGN
Vendor ID 348898
|
2 | 28.6% | 2 | 28.6% |
|
Sawyer Printing & Promo
Vendor ID 276746
|
2 | 28.6% | 3 | 25.0% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/30/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $9.60 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 06/28/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $199.74 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 06/21/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $225.69 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 06/14/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $206.48 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 06/07/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $96.05 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 05/31/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $228.55 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 05/24/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $129.64 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 05/17/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $115.23 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 05/10/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $115.26 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 05/03/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $206.49 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 04/26/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $194.94 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 04/19/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $369.75 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 04/12/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $144.07 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 04/05/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $96.05 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 03/31/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $57.62 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 03/29/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $247.76 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 03/22/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $129.64 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 03/15/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $196.88 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 03/08/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $96.05 | POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION |
| 03/01/2026 | ActBlue Texas | $353.41 | 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.