Texas Ethics Commission data Release v1.4 Source snapshot September 17, 2026 Latest eligible reported transaction September 15, 2026
Canonical Vendor

LIVE OAK COUNTY DEMOCRATS

Resolved vendor identity assembled from reviewed Texas Ethics Commission payee records.
Canonical vendor · Vendor ID 193028 · Resolution: Canonical Vendor Id
Total Payments
$5,148.18
Client Filers
2
Payments
98
Activity Range
09/12/2020–06/28/2026
Largest Payment
$600.30
Graph: 2 connected filers · 98 payments · $5,148.18 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.

Top Client Filers

Canonical client relationships from vendor_clients_canonical.
#FilerPaidPaymentsLast Payment
1ActBlue Texas$4,648.189606/28/2026
2Cheng, Kathy (Ms.)$500.00209/12/2020

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
WICHITA COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Vendor ID 353778
2 100.0% 7 28.6%
COLLIN COUNTY YOUNG DEMOCRATS
Vendor ID 69452
2 100.0% 11 18.2%
FORT BEND YOUNG DEMOCRATS
Vendor ID 116377
2 100.0% 11 18.2%
WEST HOUSTON DEMOCRATIC CLUB
Vendor ID 351581
2 100.0% 14 14.3%
TEXAS DEMOCRATIC WOMEN OF GALVESTON COUNTY
Vendor ID 310858
2 100.0% 21 9.5%
LUBBOCK COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Vendor ID 197065
2 100.0% 28 7.1%
RIVER OAKS AREA DEMOCRATIC WOMEN
Vendor ID 265246
2 100.0% 29 6.9%
HOUSTON BLACK AMERICAN DEMOCRATS PAC
Vendor ID 151368
2 100.0% 33 6.1%
BAY AREA DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT
Vendor ID 29045
2 100.0% 37 5.4%
KINGWOOD AREA DEMOCRATS
Vendor ID 179086
2 100.0% 42 4.8%
HARRIS COUNTY YOUNG DEMOCRATS
Vendor ID 140614
2 100.0% 56 3.6%
FORT BEND COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Vendor ID 116131
2 100.0% 59 3.4%
Method: Focal Coverage = shared clients ÷ this vendor's client count. Network Overlap = Jaccard similarity: shared clients ÷ union of both client sets.

Recent Reported Payments

DateClient FilerAmountDescription
06/28/2026ActBlue Texas$48.02POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
06/14/2026ActBlue Texas$24.00POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
05/17/2026ActBlue Texas$24.00POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
04/19/2026ActBlue Texas$9.60POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
04/12/2026ActBlue Texas$14.40POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
03/15/2026ActBlue Texas$24.00POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
02/15/2026ActBlue Texas$24.00POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
01/18/2026ActBlue Texas$24.00POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
12/14/2025ActBlue Texas$24.00POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
11/16/2025ActBlue Texas$24.00POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
10/19/2025ActBlue Texas$9.60POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
10/12/2025ActBlue Texas$14.40POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
09/21/2025ActBlue Texas$9.60POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
09/14/2025ActBlue Texas$14.40POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
08/17/2025ActBlue Texas$24.00POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
07/20/2025ActBlue Texas$9.60POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
07/13/2025ActBlue Texas$14.40POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
06/15/2025ActBlue Texas$9.60POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
05/18/2025ActBlue Texas$9.60POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
04/13/2025ActBlue Texas$9.60POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
Evidence basis: The canonical vendor was opened by stable vendor ID. 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.