Two ActBlue employees hold key roles in a Florida House campaign and supporting PAC that raised about $217,000 combined, raising questions about what endorsers knew before recommending the candidate to voters

ORLANDO, Fla. (FNN NEWS) — Continuing national scrutiny surrounding Democratic fundraising platform ActBlue is intersecting with a Florida House race, raising questions about candidate vetting, endorsement due diligence and what voters should know before casting their ballots.

Samuel Vilchez Santiago, a Democratic candidate for Florida House District 43, identifies himself as a PACs and nonprofits senior manager at ActBlue. His campaign treasurer, José Gamboa, also works for ActBlue as an account management specialist while simultaneously serving in leadership and financial roles with Central Floridians for Change, a political committee supporting Vilchez Santiago.

Together, Vilchez Santiago’s campaign and the supporting PAC have raised approximately $217,000 — about $155,000 by the campaign and $62,000 by Central Floridians for Change, according to campaign-finance records reviewed by Florida National News.

Central Floridians for Change contributed $50,000 to the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee in July. The House Democratic committee subsequently participated in political advertising supporting Vilchez Santiago, according to a mailer distributed to District 43 voters and reviewed by FNN. The mailer’s disclaimer states that it was approved by Vilchez Santiago.

At the same time, Vilchez Santiago’s campaign website displays an extensive endorsement network of political and advocacy organizations, labor unions and current and former elected officials.

Those relationships do not establish wrongdoing by Vilchez Santiago, Gamboa, ActBlue or either political committee.

But against the backdrop of continuing congressional and federal scrutiny involving ActBlue, they raise legitimate questions about transparency, political fundraising and the level of due diligence conducted before influential organizations and public officials recommended Vilchez Santiago to voters.

FNN News Graphic

Why Vetting and Due Diligence Matter to Voters

Political endorsements are intended to influence elections.

When members of Congress, mayors, state legislators, constitutional officers, labor unions and national advocacy organizations publicly recommend a candidate, they put their names and reputations behind that recommendation.

That makes the process preceding an endorsement relevant to voters.

A comprehensive vetting process can examine a candidate’s professional history, financial relationships, campaign-finance records, potential conflicts, public statements and other information relevant to holding public office.

But an endorsement alone does not establish that such a review occurred.

An endorsement tells voters whom an organization or political leader supports. Due diligence tells voters how carefully that recommendation was made.

That distinction takes on greater significance when a candidate’s employer is simultaneously facing federal and congressional investigations.

ActBlue Faces Continuing National Scrutiny

ActBlue has faced extensive congressional scrutiny involving its online political fundraising operations.

Republican-led investigations by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, Committee on House Administration and House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform have examined allegations involving fraud prevention, donor verification, potentially prohibited foreign contributions and internal compliance practices.

Congressional investigators have subpoenaed ActBlue records and sought testimony from current and former employees.

Federal scrutiny expanded after President Donald Trump’s April 24, 2025, presidential memorandum directed the attorney general to investigate allegations involving online fundraising platforms and potentially unlawful political contributions.

The existence of congressional or federal investigations does not establish that allegations against ActBlue have been proven.

ActBlue has disputed allegations of wrongdoing and maintained that it complies with federal campaign-finance laws.

Congressional Investigators Have Examined ActBlue Employees

The role and knowledge of ActBlue employees have become part of the congressional investigation.

House investigators have subpoenaed current and former employees for depositions based on their responsibilities and potential knowledge of ActBlue’s internal operations.

In April 2026, three House committees released a second joint interim staff report addressing ActBlue. Congressional investigators reported that five current or former ActBlue employees invoked their Fifth Amendment rights a combined 146 times during depositions.

Invoking the Fifth Amendment is a constitutional right and does not establish guilt.

There is also an important distinction involving the two ActBlue employees connected to the Florida House race.

Florida National News has identified no public evidence that Vilchez Santiago or Gamboa has been charged with wrongdoing, publicly identified as a target or subject of a federal criminal investigation, or publicly named as subjects of the congressional ActBlue investigation.

Their employment at ActBlue does not establish wrongdoing.

But because investigators have focused on what certain ActBlue employees knew and what responsibilities they held, the professional roles of Vilchez Santiago and Gamboa become relevant to understanding the Florida connection to the national story.

ActBlue PACs and Nonprofits Senior Manager Samuel Vilchez Santiago, a former Orange County Democratic Party chair and candidate for Florida House District 43. Photo Credit: Samuel Vilchez Santiago

Vilchez Santiago Says He Helps ‘Thousands’ Through ActBlue

Vilchez Santiago openly promotes his ActBlue employment as part of his professional qualifications.

His campaign website states:

“As a Senior Nonprofit Manager at ActBlue, he helps thousands of nonprofits and grassroots movements across the country build people-powered fundraising programs that shift political influence away from corporations and toward communities.”

The statement portrays a broad professional role involving fundraising programs for organizations across the country.

It does not establish that Vilchez Santiago works in ActBlue’s fraud-prevention, donor-verification, legal or compliance operations.

But because Vilchez Santiago himself emphasizes the scale of his responsibilities, the precise nature of that work is relevant to understanding whether his duties overlap with areas receiving congressional or federal scrutiny.

José Gamboa, an ActBlue account management specialist, serves as Vilchez Santiago’s campaign treasurer. He is also Central Floridians for Change’s chairman and treasurer, while records list him as its registered agent. Photo Credit: Jose Gamboa

Second ActBlue Employee Holds Key Campaign and PAC Roles

The ActBlue connection extends beyond Vilchez Santiago.

José Gamboa, an ActBlue account management specialist, serves as Vilchez Santiago’s campaign treasurer.

Gamboa also holds multiple positions with Central Floridians for Change, the political committee supporting Vilchez Santiago.

Campaign-finance records identify Gamboa as the committee’s chairman and treasurer, while records also list him as its registered agent.

That places two ActBlue employees in significant positions surrounding the same Florida House race:

Vilchez Santiago — ActBlue senior nonprofit manager and Florida House candidate.

Gamboa — ActBlue account management specialist, Vilchez Santiago campaign treasurer and chairman, treasurer and registered agent of Central Floridians for Change.

The overlapping roles are not evidence of misconduct.

They are, however, relevant facts for organizations and elected officials conducting candidate due diligence.

Campaign and Supporting PAC Raised About $217,000

Campaign-finance records reviewed by FNN show:

Vilchez Santiago campaign: approximately $155,000

Central Floridians for Change: approximately $62,000

Combined: approximately $217,000

The campaign and political committee are legally separate entities. The combined figure is used to illustrate the financial scale surrounding the candidate campaign and PAC supporting him.

Gamboa holds key financial positions involving both entities.

PAC Sent $50,000 to Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee

Central Floridians for Change contributed $50,000 to the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee in July 2026, according to campaign-finance records reviewed by FNN.

The money was reported through three contributions:

$25,000

$15,000

$10,000

The contributions totaled $50,000.

Compared with the approximately $62,000 raised by Central Floridians for Change, the transfer represents roughly 81% of the PAC’s fundraising.

The contribution does not establish an improper transaction.

It does establish a substantial financial relationship between the Vilchez Santiago-supporting political committee and the Democratic political committee responsible for helping elect candidates to the Florida House.

House Democratic Committee Subsequently Supported Vilchez Santiago

The financial relationship was followed by political activity in House District 43.

A mailer distributed to District 43 voters and reviewed by FNN identifies the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee in its political-advertisement disclaimer and communicates support for Vilchez Santiago and other Democratic candidates.

The disclaimer states that the advertisement was approved by Samuel Vilchez Santiago, Democrat, for state representative.

The documented sequence is significant:

Central Floridians for Change raised approximately $62,000 → transferred $50,000 to the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee → the House Democratic committee subsequently participated in political advertising supporting Vilchez Santiago → the mailer states it was approved by Vilchez Santiago.

That sequence does not establish a quid pro quo, illegal coordination or campaign-finance violation.

It does establish a financial and political relationship that is relevant to understanding the network surrounding the District 43 campaign.

FNN Fact-Check Rated Mailer Claim ‘Mostly False’

Florida National News separately fact-checked a specific claim contained in the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee mailer and rated that claim “Mostly False.”

The rating applies only to the specific statement examined by FNN and should not be interpreted as a finding that every statement contained in the mailer was false.

Because the advertisement’s disclaimer states that it was approved by Vilchez Santiago, the accuracy of its claims is relevant to voters evaluating both the advertisement and the candidate.

FNN’s separate fact-check details the evidence supporting the rating.

Photo Credit: Samuel Vilchez Santiago

Extensive Endorsements Put Due Diligence in Focus

Vilchez Santiago’s campaign website displays dozens of endorsements from political and advocacy organizations, labor unions and current and former elected officials.

The campaign lists support from organizations including Equality Florida Action PAC, Latino Victory Fund, SEIU Florida, Orange County Fire Fighters Association, Florida NOW, Giffords PAC, Run for Something, LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, Florida Rising, Florida AFL-CIO, Central Florida AFL-CIO, Florida Education Association and United Auto Workers, among others.

Federal political figures listed by the campaign include U.S. Reps. Darren Soto and Maxwell Frost and former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

Florida political figures listed include Democratic legislative leaders, state senators and representatives, along with Central Florida officials including Orange County Mayor Jerry Demings and Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer.

The number and prominence of those endorsements demonstrate substantial institutional political support.

They do not, by themselves, reveal the extent of the vetting conducted before those endorsements were issued.

What Did Endorsers Know?

The national ActBlue scrutiny and the Florida campaign-finance relationships create several basic due-diligence questions.

Were endorsers aware that Vilchez Santiago worked as a senior manager for ActBlue?

Did they examine the scope of his responsibilities?

Did they know his campaign treasurer also worked for ActBlue and simultaneously controlled key financial functions for Central Floridians for Change?

Did they review the approximately $217,000 raised by the campaign and supporting PAC?

Were they aware of the $50,000 transfer to the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee and the subsequent political advertising supporting Vilchez Santiago?

And were they aware of the congressional and federal scrutiny involving ActBlue before lending their names to his candidacy?

Those questions do not presume that an endorsement was improper.

They address something voters cannot determine simply by looking at a campaign endorsement page:

What due diligence occurred before the endorsement?

Why It Matters to Florida Voters

The national ActBlue controversy may appear removed from a Florida House primary.

In District 43, the connections are direct.

An ActBlue senior manager is seeking election to the Florida Legislature.

Another ActBlue employee manages his campaign finances while simultaneously holding leadership and financial positions with a PAC supporting him.

The campaign and PAC raised approximately $217,000 combined.

The PAC transferred $50,000 to the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee.

That committee subsequently participated in political advertising supporting the ActBlue-employed candidate.

Meanwhile, dozens of organizations and current and former elected officials are asking voters to support Vilchez Santiago.

None of those facts establishes wrongdoing.

But voters are entitled to understand not only who endorsed a candidate, but what those endorsers knew before they made that recommendation.

Vetting matters. Due diligence matters. And when influential political figures and organizations use their credibility to influence voters, the process behind their endorsements matters, too.

Florida House District 43 Democratic Race Plagued by Controversies Ahead of 2026 Primary Election

What Comes Next: FNN Will Seek Answers

Florida National News will continue examining the intersection between ActBlue, its employees, the Vilchez Santiago campaign, Central Floridians for Change and the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee.

As part of a follow-up report, FNN plans to seek responses from ActBlue, Samuel Vilchez Santiago, José Gamboa and the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee, as well as political organizations and current and former elected officials who endorsed Vilchez Santiago.

FNN will ask ActBlue to clarify the professional responsibilities of Vilchez Santiago and Gamboa, including whether their positions involve nonprofit organizations, PACs, political committees or accounts connected with Florida political activity.

Vilchez Santiago and Gamboa will be asked about their overlapping ActBlue, campaign and political committee roles and whether ActBlue maintains policies governing employees who simultaneously participate in campaigns or political committees.

The Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee will be asked about the $50,000 received from Central Floridians for Change, its subsequent political advertising supporting Vilchez Santiago and the process surrounding the mailer approved by the candidate.

FNN will also ask major endorsers what vetting and due diligence they conducted before recommending Vilchez Santiago to District 43 voters and whether they reviewed his ActBlue employment and the campaign-finance relationships documented in this report.

The responses — including which organizations and officials respond, what they say they reviewed and how they explain their decisions — will be examined in a subsequent Florida National News report.

For voters, that follow-up could help answer the central question raised by the extensive endorsement network:

What did endorsers know, what did they review and how much due diligence occurred before they asked District 43 voters to trust their recommendation?

ORLANDO, Fla. (FNN NEWS) — Former Florida State Rep. Daisy Morales is criticizing a $40,000 contribution from a political committee supporting Democratic rival Samuel Vilchez Santiago to the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee, arguing the expenditure raises questions about priorities as voters in Florida House District 43 contend with rising living costs.

Morales, who is seeking to return to the Florida House, made the criticism in a campaign press release as the Aug. 18 Democratic primary enters its final stretch.

The race is a rematch of the 2020 Democratic primary for the former House District 48, when Morales defeated Vilchez Santiago and three other candidates before winning the general election.

Following legislative redistricting, many neighborhoods and communities previously included in District 48 are now within District 43.

MORALES TARGETS $40,000 PAC CONTRIBUTION

At the center of Morales’ criticism is a $40,000 contribution by Central Floridians for Change to the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee.

The political committee has supported Vilchez Santiago’s candidacy.

Morales said the expenditure contrasts with the financial pressures facing families across East Orlando and other District 43 communities, where residents are dealing with the costs of housing, groceries, insurance, health care, transportation and other necessities.

“District 43 families are facing an affordability crisis, and they deserve leadership focused on their everyday challenges,” Morales said. “Sending $40,000 to a Tallahassee political committee tells voters something about priorities, judgment and leadership. I believe District 43 families should come first.”

Morales also questioned what the money could have accomplished if directed toward community organizations.

“Imagine what $40,000 could mean to organizations serving District 43 — food-assistance programs, veterans organizations, senior programs, youth initiatives, neighborhood groups and other nonprofits helping families every day,” Morales said. “Those are the kinds of investments that can strengthen neighborhoods and improve lives.”

Political committees, however, are separate from nonprofit organizations and can legally spend money for political purposes subject to applicable campaign finance laws. Morales’ criticism centers on the political priorities represented by the contribution rather than an allegation that the contribution itself was unlawful.

‘VOTERS NEED MORE THAN TALKING POINTS’

Morales used the contribution to challenge Vilchez Santiago’s campaign message and question whether his political support aligns with the priorities of District 43 residents.

“Voters deserve more than talking points about putting people first,” Morales said. “Actions matter. When $40,000 goes to a Tallahassee political committee while families here are struggling to make ends meet, voters have every right to ask whether their community is truly the first priority.”

Morales said she believes financial decisions provide voters with information about how candidates and their supporters establish priorities.

“A state representative helps make decisions involving billions of taxpayer dollars,” Morales said. “How someone approaches money, priorities and accountability matters. Voters should look beyond campaign slogans and examine the decisions being made right now.”

Morales characterized the contribution as a “sneak peek” at the judgment and leadership voters should evaluate before casting their ballots.

“I believe this $40,000 contribution gives voters a preview of the judgment and priorities they should evaluate when deciding who they want representing them in Tallahassee,” Morales said.

2026 CONTEST IS A REMATCH OF 2020 PRIMARY

The Democratic primary brings Morales and Vilchez Santiago together for the second time in six years.

In 2020, both sought the Democratic nomination for the former Florida House District 48.

Morales finished first in the five-candidate Democratic primary with 4,897 votes, or 39.89%, while Vilchez Santiago received 3,676 votes, or 29.94%, according to official Orange County election results.

The difference was 1,221 votes and nearly 10 percentage points.

Morales went on to win the 2020 general election and represented House District 48 from 2020 to 2022.

“We have seen this race before,” Morales said. “In 2020, voters looked beyond endorsements, political organizations and campaign spending. They examined the candidates and elected me as their Democratic nominee. Six years later, I trust District 43 voters to make their own decision again.”

The political landscape has changed since their first matchup because of redistricting, but the current District 43 includes many neighborhoods and communities that were previously represented within District 48.

That gives the contest an unusual rematch dynamic, with some voters being asked to choose again between the same two Democratic candidates for a Florida House seat.

FUNDRAISING AND ENDORSEMENTS VS. ELECTED EXPERIENCE

Vilchez Santiago has entered the closing weeks of the campaign with substantial fundraising and organizational support, including endorsements from Democratic elected officials, labor organizations and other political groups.

Morales has sought to turn those advantages into a political contrast.

She describes Vilchez Santiago as the “political-establishment candidate” while presenting herself as the “people-first candidate” with previous legislative and elected experience.

The descriptions are characterizations by Morales and her campaign.

“My opponent can have the political establishment. I want the trust of the people,” Morales said. “Endorsements do not cast ballots — voters do. District 43 voters will decide who represents them, and their endorsement is the one that matters most to me.”

Morales has also pointed to the similarities between 2020 and 2026, arguing that Vilchez Santiago held advantages in fundraising and endorsements during their first contest but nevertheless lost the Democratic nomination.

“In 2020, voters had a choice, and they elected me as their Democratic nominee,” Morales said. “Now many of those same communities have another opportunity to compare our experience, our priorities and our judgment.”

MORALES CAMPAIGNS ON EIGHT YEARS IN ELECTED OFFICE

Morales is emphasizing her eight years of elected public service as one of the central distinctions between the candidates.

She was elected to the Orange Soil and Water Conservation District in 2014 and served six years before winning election to the Florida House in 2020.

Morales served two years in the Legislature, giving her eight consecutive years in elected office.

She has made that experience a centerpiece of her campaign to return to Tallahassee.

“I am not asking voters to imagine what I might do in elected office,” Morales said. “I have served them before. They can examine my votes, my legislation, my constituent service and the state resources I fought to bring back to our communities.”

During her House tenure, Morales voted on state budgets exceeding $100 billion, sponsored and supported legislation that became law and advocated for state appropriations benefiting Central Florida and other communities.

“I have done the job, and I am ready to do it again,” Morales said. “If District 43 voters send me back to the Florida House, I will be ready on Day One to work on affordability, responsible state spending, stronger public safety, quality education and greater opportunities for working families, seniors, veterans, first responders, homeowners and small businesses.”

MORALES: ‘DISTRICT 43 COMES FIRST’

Morales said the PAC contribution illustrates what she wants voters to consider when comparing the candidates: who will come first when political and community priorities compete.

“District 43 families should never feel like they are taking a back seat to political organizations,” Morales said. “They deserve a state representative who wakes up every day thinking about their families, their neighborhoods and their future.”

She argued that the election should ultimately be decided on experience, priorities and the candidates’ records rather than fundraising totals or endorsements.

“The question is bigger than one contribution,” Morales said. “The question is who comes first when important decisions have to be made. For me, the answer will always be the people of District 43.”

Morales added: “Public service is about serving people — not political organizations. District 43 comes first because the people we are elected to serve must always come before politics.”

The Democratic primary is Aug. 18, 2026, with early voting continuing through Aug. 16.