Campaign texting vendors have a reputation problem. Consultants sign up, hand over a client list, and then watch the vendor's sales team quietly pitch that same client directly next cycle. For a firm juggling several campaigns at once, that's not a small risk. It's the reason many agencies keep texting in-house, even when it slows them down.
FullPAC (gotv.com) builds its texting product around that exact worry. It's a campaign management platform built for campaigns and consultants, and texting is one piece of a larger get-out-the-vote suite that also covers AI opposition research and outreach tools like voice, mail, and digital ads. The pitch is that a consulting firm can run peer-to-peer texting for a dozen clients through one account without those clients ever becoming FullPAC's direct customers.
What Is FullPAC (gotv.com)?
FullPAC describes itself as the platform campaigns run on and consultants build on. That distinction matters. A lot of GOTV tools are built for a single campaign, then abandoned. FullPAC is built for consultants and firms who need to run the same infrastructure across multiple clients, cycle after cycle.
The platform is nonpartisan by design, meaning it isn't built to serve one side of the aisle over another. It's also worth noting the company has Nasdaq reserved under the ticker GOTV, a detail that signals a degree of corporate formality you don't always see in campaign tech vendors.
How the Texting Product Works
Peer-to-peer texting lets a live sender have a real, two-way conversation with a voter rather than blasting an automated message. The mechanics are simple:
- A campaign or consultant uploads or connects a voter file.
- Messages go out from individual numbers so replies come back to a real person, not a bot.
- Sub-accounts split the work by client, so a consulting firm managing several races keeps each one separate.
- Reports roll up under the firm's own name instead of FullPAC's.
That fourth step is the one most competitors skip. FullPAC contractually guarantees it won't go around a consulting firm to reach that firm's clients directly and it backs that with white-label reporting so the work shows up under the consultant's own brand, not FullPAC's. For a firm whose whole business model depends on client relationships, that's a meaningfully different arrangement than handing a client list to a vendor and hoping for the best.
Pricing That's Actually Published
FullPAC's texting rates are public: 3.5 cents per message, with a discounted rate of 2.5 cents for partners, plus volume discounts on top of that. That published wholesale pricing is unusual in a category where quotes are usually negotiated on a deal-by-deal basis, and it makes budgeting for a multi-client texting program much more straightforward.
Other services on the platform, like AI oppo research, voice, mail, and digital ads, are priced by format and volume on a call, which is normal for work that varies as much as ad buys and research scopes do.
The Feature That Sets It Apart
Sub-accounts are the single biggest differentiator here. A consulting firm running texting for six different campaigns doesn't want those campaigns' data, budgets, or reporting mixed together, and it definitely doesn't want a vendor using one client's account to court another. FullPAC's per-client sub-accounts keep each campaign's texting siloed while still allowing the consultant to manage everything from a single login, with white-label reporting that keeps the consultant's name on the work rather than FullPAC's.
That structure is what makes the rest of the platform useful for an agency rather than just a single-campaign shop. If you're evaluating other tools built for teams managing multiple accounts at once, it's worth comparing how they handle client separation and reporting, just as you'd compare enterprise marketing platforms for agencies juggling several brands.
One Voter File, One Invoice
The part of FullPAC that goes beyond texting is the full outreach suite: AI opposition research sits alongside voice, mail, and digital ads, and all of it draws from the same voter file and the same opt-out state. In practice, that means a voter who texts “STOP” won't keep receiving a mail piece or a robocall from another part of the same platform, because the suppression list is shared across channels.
Running texting, oppo research, and outreach through one invoice instead of three separate vendor contracts reduces the reconciliation work that eats into a campaign's timeline, especially in the final weeks before an election. A firm can run the whole thing self-serve, or hand it to FullPAC's team to execute under the firm's own brand.
Consultants weighing texting against other channels might also want to look at how WhatsApp marketing tools compare in terms of price and features, since messaging platforms outside the U.S. Political context face a similar trade-off between reach and per-message cost. Peer-to-peer texting itself has become a mainstay of American campaigns, partly because open rates for text messages far exceed those for email, which is a big part of why GOTV budgets keep shifting toward it.
Who FullPAC Is Actually Built For
FullPAC's structure points pretty clearly at two kinds of users.
Political consulting firms managing multiple clients. The sub-account structure, white-label reporting, and no-poaching guarantee only matter if you're running texting for more than one campaign at a time. A single first-time candidate running their own campaign probably won't need that separation.
Campaigns that want more than a text blast. Because oppo research, voice, mail and ads share the same voter file, a campaign that plans to run several channels at once avoids re-uploading lists and reconciling suppression data across tools.
Smaller, single-race campaigns with a tight, simple outreach plan may find the full suite more than they need. In that case, the texting product on its own, priced at those same published rates, still works as a standalone tool.
Where It Falls Short
No platform fits every campaign, and FullPAC has real tradeoffs worth naming.
It's built for volume, not for a one-off campaign. The consultant-focused features like sub-accounts and white-label reporting add the most value when you're managing several clients. A single campaign running one text program won't see much benefit from that layer.
Non-texting services require a call. AI oppo research, voice, mail and digital ads are priced by format and volume, so you won't get an instant number the way you do with texting. That's standard for the category, but it does mean more upfront conversation before you can budget the full suite.
Nonpartisan design isn't for everyone. Some consultants and campaigns prefer vendors that are openly aligned with one side. FullPAC's nonpartisan-by-design approach is a selling point for firms that want a neutral platform, but it may not appeal to shops that specifically look for partisan tooling.
The Verdict
FullPAC earns its place for one reason above the others: it solves the client-poaching problem that quietly pushes a lot of consulting firms toward building texting in-house. Published pricing, per-client sub-accounts, white-label reporting, and a contractual guarantee against going around the consultant add up to a platform built for agencies rather than one-off campaigns.
For a firm running texting, research and outreach for several clients each cycle, consolidating that work onto one voter file and one invoice is a real operational win, not just a marketing line. For a solo candidate running a single, simple race, the extra structure may be more than what's needed, and the standalone texting rates are the more relevant number to look at.