Republican nominee Harriet Hageman has raised a reported $2.7 million in Wyoming's U.S. Senate race, compared with $41,000 for Democratic opponent James Byrd. That gives Hageman a nearly 66-to-1 fundraising advantage in a race rated Solid Republican. ​

As of Sept. 30, Hageman reported $594,000 in cash on hand and no debt, while Byrd reported $4,106 in cash and no debt. Hageman defeated Sam Mead in the Aug. 18 Republican primary by approximately 37 percentage points, while Byrd ran unopposed in the Democratic primary.

The candidates' reported donor profiles differ significantly. CEOs contributed $26,000 to Hageman, followed by entrepreneurs ($17,000), lawyers ($15,000) and company presidents ($13,000). These categories suggest substantial support from business executives and professionals. CEOs alone contributed more than four times the approximately $6,000 attributed to Byrd's four leading occupational categories combined.

Byrd's leading occupational categories include lawyers ($2,250), physicians ($1,560), law professors ($1,500) and engineering consultants ($1,000), reflecting support from legal, medical, academic and engineering professionals.

Donors identified as not employed or retired accounted for 48% of Hageman's itemized individual contributions ($300,000), compared with 43% of Byrd's ($10,000). Contributions from other committees accounted for a reported 28% of Hageman's receipts, compared with none of Byrd's receipts.

Outside groups have reportedly spent $1.2 million in Wyoming's Senate race, with most of that spending supporting Hageman. Those expenditures are separate from candidate fundraising totals. Although fundraising alone does not determine election outcomes, Byrd entered the final stretch with less than 1% of Hageman's available campaign cash, leaving him at a substantial financial disadvantage in an already Republican-leaning state.

---

Track the full campaign finance data at Allciv.com

AllCiv makes it easy to stay politically informed and involved.

---

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article