Cindy Hyde-Smith
Republican
· MS Senate · 116th Congress
Senate Committee on Agriculture (Chair) · Risk Management (Chair) · and Trade (Chair) · Local Food Systems (Chair) · and Food Safety and Security (Chair) · and Agriculture Security (Chair) · Housing and Urban Development (Chair) · and Related Agencies (Chair) · Joint Committee of Congress on the Library · and Forestry · and Natural Resources · Natural Resources · and Biotechnology · and Food Safety · Senate Committee on Appropriations · Rural Development · Food and Drug Administration · Health and Human Services · and Education · Veterans Affairs · Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources · and Mining · Senate Committee on Rules and Administration
Influence Score
80.2
Most exposed
↑ +16.1
vs 118th (43.5)
— ◊ —
This score measures financial influence across twelve categories. Each bar shows how this member compares to all others in Congress. Longer bars mean more exposure.
Score breakdown — twelve categories
Contributionsmoney from PACs (political action committees) and individual donors
12.0
/ 12
Outside spendingmoney spent by groups to help elect them
4.4
/ 6
Spent to help elect them
$3,872,613
Outside groups that spent to help elect this member — this drives the outside-spending bar above
Spent to defeat this member
$2,214,333
Outside groups that spent to defeat this member (not counted in this score)
Lobbyinghow hard lobbyists push the committees this member sits on
9.6
/ 10
Vote alignmenthow often they vote the way their donors want
12.0
/ 12
Contribution timingmoney arriving near key votes
2.3
/ 6
Stock tradesbuying stocks in industries they regulate
0.0
/ 1
Dark moneyfunding from groups that hide their donors
< 0.1
/ 2
Outbound money distributionmoney this member sends out to the party and to colleagues
8.7
/ 16
Cluster network breadthhow many coordinated funding networks back this member
0.9
/ 10
Committee jurisdiction powerthe legislative reach of the committees this member sits on
6.6
/ 10
Foreign interestforeign-interest money — Israel-policy PACs and FARA-registered institutional lobbying allocated by committee jurisdiction
5.8
/ 12
Israel-policy PACs behind this score
CITIZENS ORGANIZED POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
$5,000 direct
FARA institutional lobbying
This member’s committees are targeted by $206.87M in lobbying from FARA-registered firms representing South Korea, Japan, Saudi Arabia. This exposure is weighted at 0.2% of face value in the score — $414K.
— ◊ —
Score across four congresses
Score and tier for each Congress. Members are ranked against others in the same Congress, so tiers are comparable across rows. Raw scores reflect different data availability per Congress.
| Congress | Score | Tier |
|---|---|---|
| 116th · 2019-2021 | 80.2 | Most exposed |
| 117th · 2021-2023 | 71.1 | Highly exposed |
| 118th · 2023-2025 | 43.5 | Least exposed |
| 119th · 2025-2027 | 59.6 | Moderately exposed |
— ◊ —
Biggest funding source
The single network behind the most money and influence
Network
COMMON SENSE FOR AMERICA PAC
Total money from this network
$43,000
Number of funding networks contributing
1
— ◊ —
Where most of the money comes from
What share of their combined contributions and outside spending comes from a single network. Party committees are excluded.
Network
CONSERVATIVE LEADERS OF AMERICA
Share from this one network
14.7%
Amount from this network
$232,594
Total from all networks
$1,585,808
Networks contributing
280
— ◊ —
Who funds Hyde-Smith
Every funding network we can measure, ranked by influence
$13,441,037
— ◊ —
Does the money match their power?
Whether their money comes from the industries their committees actually oversee
Money from industries they regulate
1.3%
Extra weight when money matches their committees
2.00×
Share of outside spending tied to their policy areas
0.0%
— ◊ —
Money timed to key votes
Donations arriving near key votes in the policy areas this member regulates
Biggest clusters of timed money
WASHINGTON INSURANCE
$500
WOODS FINANCIAL
$50
WOODS FINANCIAL
$50
WOODS FINANCIAL
$50
WOODS FINANCIAL
$50
WOODS FINANCIAL
$50
WOODS FINANCIAL
$50
WOODS FINANCIAL
$50
WOODS FINANCIAL
$50
WOODS FINANCIAL
$50
— ◊ —
Top Donors
Biggest sources of contributions, grouped by employer, this cycle
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
$6.43M
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
$6.33M
BOEING
$4.38M
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL
$3.79M
LOCKHEED MARTIN
$3.12M
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
$3.02M
RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES
$2.06M
BOEING
$2.05M
LOCKHEED MARTIN
$1.92M
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
$1.68M
HOMEMAKER
$1.57M
NORTHROP GRUMMAN
$1.49M
ERNST YOUNG U S LLP
$1.36M
CSX
$1.17M
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE
$1.16M
RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES
$1.07M
ENTERGY SERVICES
$1.03M
T-MOBILE
$1.02M
ASSET MANAGEMENT LLP
$1.00M
BLOOMBERG
$1.00M
Where the outside money comes from
How much of the outside spending for and against Cindy Hyde-Smith comes from groups that disclose their donors versus groups that hide them
Total outside spending received
$69K
Disclosed outside spending
$69K
Dark-money outside spending
$8
Share that is dark money
0.01%
Dark money tied to their policy areas
$0
Groups hiding their donors
1
By funding network
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS CONGRESSIONAL FUND
$923K
SMP
$874K
US CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
$675K
FRONT ROW PAC
$391K
AMERICA FIRST ACTION, INC.
$271K
REMEMBER MISSISSIPPI
$208K
SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY AMERICA
$200K
CONSERVATIVE LEADERS OF AMERICA
$134K
NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE VICTORY FUND
$80K
NEW SOUTHERN MAJORITY IE PAC
$76K
MISSISSIPPI VICTORY FUND
$69K
PROTECTING OUR VALUES
$65K
REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP FUND INC.
$50K
PAC FOR A CHANGE
$35K
STARS AND STRIPES FOREVER PAC
$28K
Groups that hide their donors
1 smaller group under $500
$8
Likely donors behind the dark money supporting this member
Inferred
Donors who fund the disclosed PACs in the same network as the hidden groups above. "Coverage" is how many of that network's disclosed groups a donor funds — the more they fund, the more likely they also back the hidden group.
NEVADANS FOR STEVEN HORSFORD
$80K
TITUS FOR CONGRESS
$80K
SUSIE LEE FOR CONGRESS
$79K
GEORGE SOROS
$525.74M
SMP
$81.00M
BLACKPAC
$47.25M
AB PAC
$25.50M
HMP
$15.00M
HOUSE MAJORITY PAC
$15.00M
CARE IN ACTION PAC
$6.60M
— ◊ —
Pro-Israel network donors
This counts contributions to this member from individuals whose FEC filings also show contributions to one of the 16 pro-Israel political action committees tracked by the Index. It is a measure of donor overlap — not a claim about why any individual gave, and not part of the influence score.
149 individuals who also gave to pro-Israel PACs contributed $206K to Cindy Hyde-Smith across 178 contributions.
Total from shared contributors
$206K
Shared contributors
149
Contributions
178
By cycle
| Cycle | Shared donors | Gifts | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 4 | 17 | $2K |
| 2024 | 4 | 5 | $14K |
| 2026 | 144 | 156 | $190K |
— ◊ —
Revolving Door
4 former staff members
who worked for Cindy Hyde-Smith or the committees they serve are now registered lobbyists.
| Lobbyist | Former position | Firm | Clients | Filings | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JOSH PEASTER | LA to Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith, Staff of Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Staff … | CAPITOL RESOURCES, LLC | 15 | 64 | 2023–2025 |
| HAYES HEREDIA | Legislative Assistant to Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith | CONTINENTAL STRATEGY, LLC | 11 | 11 | 2025–2025 |
| TIMOTHY WOLVERTON | Legislative Director for Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith - (April 2018-December 2024); … | GENERAL ATOMICS | 1 | 5 | 2024–2025 |
| CHRISTOPHER MILLER | Former Deputy Legislative Director for Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith. | CLEARWATER GROUP, LLC | 1 | 1 | 2025–2025 |
— ◊ —
Cindy Hyde-Smith ranks among the most exposed members of this Congress — the top tier on the index. The markers run across several of the twelve categories for the same funding network: contributions, outside spending, lobbying inside the policy areas this member regulates, vote alignment, and contribution timing among them. The score measures financial exposure in the public record; it is not a finding of intent or wrongdoing.
Data: FEC (Federal Election Commission) filings · 118th–119th Congress · lobbying disclosures · VoteView recorded votes
All findings derived programmatically from public records · No prior knowledge required
All findings derived programmatically from public records · No prior knowledge required