Outside Money Flows into 4th Congressional District Primary, Again

In a recent campaign video posted on social media, a leopard print-clad Congresswoman Valerie Foushee seems almost proud of being outspent in her Triangle-area Democratic Primary election.

“An out-of-state PAC is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to unseat me,” she tells the camera, a gleam in her eyes. “And why is this PAC running ads against me funded by billionaires?”

Foushee was referring to spending by Leaders We Deserve, an organization and a political action committee (PAC) associated with Gen-Z Democratic rabble-rouser and gun control activist David Hogg that has received backing from tech investor (and gun safety advocate) Roy Conway.

By reviewing ads, mailers, and FEC reports, INDY has identified more than $1 million spent by outside groups like Hogg’s on the 4th Congressional District primary so far this cycle, nearly all in support of Durham County commissioner Nida Allam’s bid to unseat Foushee. Spending is likely to escalate as groups try to influence voters in the ultra-blue district in the two weeks remaining before the March 3 Election Day.

The deluge of PAC-funded mailers and TV ads may feel like déjà vu for 4th District voters; the 2022 matchup between Allam and Foushee was the most expensive congressional primary in state history thanks to millions in outside spending, that time in Foushee’s favor. It’s notable that PAC money is, once again, flowing into the 4th Congressional District for the simple fact that the two front-runners continue to criticize each other’s fundraising records and strategies. But there are some big differences in the sources and amounts of money this time around.

Progressive groups Leaders We Deserve and Justice Democrats have spent a combined $506,000 to support Allam. This month, a newly formed PAC with little publicly available information also spent $543,000 to support the commissioner. Rolling Sea Action Fund, a PAC associated with the Congressional Black Caucus, has spent $100,000 supporting Foushee.

During the 2022 primary, which Foushee won by nine points, pro-Israel and crypto PACs spent $3 million to support Foushee and oppose Allam, who was targeted by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) as the first Muslim elected to office in the state.

Foushee has since said she would not take AIPAC money, as the war in Gaza—and pressure from constituents—escalated. Allam, with an anti-corporate, anti-establishment platform, has frequently pointed out that Foushee has continued to receive tens of thousands in campaign contributions from weapons manufacturers, big tech, and pharmaceutical companies across her congressional runs. Foushee has also begrudgingly continued to field constituents’ questions about that AIPAC money, and seems to be hoping to shift the narrative by highlighting the recent spending by Hogg’s national PAC.

Hogg personally endorsed and canvassed for Allam in his larger bid to unseat so-called establishment Democrats in Congress (“If you are taking corporate money, your days in power are fucking numbered,” Hogg said at an Allam event in December).

With a recent $413,000 pro-Allam television ad, the mostly-anonymous American Priorities PAC has quickly become the single largest spender in the 2026 election. In addition to the television ad, the PAC has spent $130,000 on mailers that support Allam. Those mailers echo the imagery and messaging of the ad run by Leaders We Deserve.

Leaders We Deserve and Justice Democrats have pretty transparent origins and goals; American Priorities, as of this article, does not. The PAC, per its federal filings, didn’t exist until last month. Its filings do not give any more information, except that its address is a virtual office in Wilmington, Delaware, and the treasurer is one Mark Hanna. Hanna appears to be a lawyer, a Zohran Mamdani donor, and a onetime board member of Yalla Brooklyn, a social welfare group focused on the Arab American and Muslim communities. American Priorities PAC’s only other expenditure, as of reporting, was $72,000 to support a Democratic congressional candidate in Texas.

“As a federal super PAC, AP’s funders will be disclosed in the appropriate FEC filing,” a nameless spokesperson for American Priorities told INDY via email. They did not disclose any more information, and the organization’s website makes no mention of what those American priorities are. (“We engage in issue advocacy and independent communications related to federal elections,” says the PAC’s website).

Super PACs are organizations that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to support or oppose candidates. Unlike traditional PACs, super PACs aren’t allowed to coordinate with candidates, but their materials will often mimic the campaign’s messaging in a way that can be indistinguishable to voters. Super PACs do have to disclose their donors—Justice Democrats, Leaders We Deserve, and Rolling Sea all have done so in recent filings—but American Priorities is so new that it has not yet had to disclose that information. It’s all part of the obfuscatory campaign finance clusterfuck that the Supreme Court legalized in its 2010 Citizens United decision.

“I am unequivocally opposed to corporate PACs spending in our elections and that will never change,” Allam said in a written response to INDY’s questions about American Priorities. “Legally, I am not allowed to know the details about any independent expenditure supporting me because I do not coordinate with them. No corporate PAC or Republican megadonor will ever support my campaign because this campaign is entirely focused on taking on Donald Trump and corporate greed to demand a brighter future for working families in our community.”

Allam has often criticized Foushee for the backing she has received from PACs related to corporations, while Foushee has argued that contributions from corporations come with the territory of representing the Research Triangle, and that her past and present financial supporters do not influence her votes. 

“I am confident that my constituents know that I am pushing for an end to Citizens United and that no campaign contribution will ever affect my vote,” Foushee told INDY via email. “My opponent keeps attempting to make this race about my campaign contributions rather than rising costs, preserving democracy, or any votes I have taken in Congress. I have always been transparent about my campaign finances. My opponent has brought hundreds of thousands in out-of-state dark money and big-tech funded super PAC expenditures into this race.”

Rolling Sea Action Fund, the PAC that spent on a pro-Foushee television ad that is now airing across the Triangle, raised the bulk of its war chest from New York and California residents—per its reports through the end of 2025, it raised $0 from North Carolina residents.

“We aim to engage a wide spectrum of Black individuals, speaking to the strength, resilience, and mobilizing power of Black voters. We support lawmakers, candidates, and policy agendas that promote these values,” the Rolling Sea website reads.

There’s a bit of irony in the campaign finance debate these two progressive candidates are pressing each other on. Both have benefited from the current system of outside unlimited spending, and both have committed to pushing to overturn Citizens United.

At her campaign launch in December, Allam noted that since her first election to the county commission, she has “always taken a pledge to never take money from corporate PACs and dark money special interest groups, because I believe, as elected representatives, we need to be accountable to the people who we serve in our districts.”

Foushee has previously introduced campaign finance reform legislation. In a speech on the House floor last month, Foushee painted a grim picture. “Since Citizens United, we have watched a parallel political system take shape. One dominated by super PACs and dark money organizations that can raise and spend unlimited sums and operate with fewer rules, less transparency, and the ability to determine election outcomes long before voters cast a ballot,” she said.

The outside spending has also dwarfed contributions to the candidates themselves. Foushee’s reelection campaign raised about $140,000 and entered 2026 with more than $193,000 on hand. Allam, who didn’t kick off her campaign until December 11, raised more than $334,000 and ended 2025 with $305,000 in available cash.

In the aftermath of the expensive 2022 elections, INDY asked expert Bob Phillips what options candidates have in a system of unlimited PAC spending.

“Sometimes, candidates will take pledges not to take PAC money. It would be great if all candidates could adhere to that,” Phillips said at the time. “But when you’re running for office, it’s all about winning, and no one wants to unilaterally disarm. There are organizations that do this kind of ‘follow the money’ thing—in the campaign that we just got through in North Carolina, there was certainly knowledge about who was behind some of the outside money—but to what extent it matters is hard to know.”

Comment on this story at [email protected].