Democrats often like to talk about getting corporate money out of politics. Several candidates have even made it part of their campaign platform.
Why then, is there such an uproar from the Left regarding state-level election integrity efforts that ban outsider money in local election administration? In a confusing shift, progressives cheer as corporations criticize or leave states like Georgia for cracking down on attempts to manipulate voters.
Honestly, of all the headaches, disruptions, and inquiries after Election Day (more like Election Week 2020), the discovery of the Facebook CEO’s funding of local elections is one of the most alarming.
As all eyes were on Joe Biden and Donald Trump, behind the scenes, Zuckerberg and his wife were funneling more than $350 million from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative through the progressive-leaning Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) to thousands of local election jurisdictions.
The money was supposed to help counties and cities address the unique COVID-19 challenges of the previous year. The expectation was the money would largely be spent on personal protective equipment (PPE) and other safety measures to help Americans vote safely. As CTCL said, Americans shouldn’t have to choose between democracy and their own health. In reality, little to none of it went to anything vaguely related to the pandemic.
Across the country, public records requests reveal these “Zuckerbucks” were used for get-out-of-the-vote efforts, advertisements, mailers, salaries, registering teenagers to vote, and even vehicles.
Public records also reveal that the funding was not distributed equitably—not even by population size. It appears that the money went mostly to states, counties, and cities most likely to swing for the Democrat candidates, influencing not only the way elections were conducted, but also how they turned out.
It should be no surprise then, that despite making up only three percent of the nation’s electoral votes and only 3.2 percent of the U.S. population, Georgia was one of the largest recipients of Zuckerbucks, receiving a whopping $45 million—$31 million for the general election and $14.5 million for the Senate elections.
In Georgia, counties that went for Biden received significantly more funds, and were generally more likely to receive Zuckerbucks in the first place—a concerning fact when considering these grants were supposed to be used for PPE. In a new report by the Foundation for Government Accountability, it was found that on average, most Georgia counties moved to the left by less than 1 percentage point between 2016 and 2020. Counties that didn’t receive any Zuckerbucks barely moved at all, but Zuckerbucks counties swung by, on average, 2.3 percentage points towards Biden. Seventy-five percent of Zuckerbucks-receiving counties saw a serious uptick in Democrat votes that offset any upward change in Republican votes.
It was the same story during the Senate runoff elections in January 2021. Of the $14.5 million in Zuckerbucks funneled into Georgia, 60 percent were allocated to Fulton and Dekalb counties alone, both Democrat strongholds. Again, this funding wasn’t used on anything related to the pandemic and Democrat turnout was boosted compared to elsewhere in the state.
It’s no coincidence and it’s not the result of nationwide party alliance shifts—it’s the result of significant outsider funding going into select jurisdictions with a partisan aim.
Georgia was right to ban ‘Zuckerbucks’ and any private funding like it from local election administration.
Money for local elections should come from the local government, not a billionaire corporate figurehead from California. It is more difficult for Georgia voters to trust in the democratic process when there is undue influence by outsiders. At a time with so much friction and disagreement between political parties, adding in tens of millions of dollars from a controversial source and so many conflicts of interest into the mix is a good way to sow seeds of discord.
Tarren Bragdon is the chief executive officer at the Foundation For Government Accountability.