One of the companies alleged to have influenced the 2020 national election using money contributed by Mark Zuckerberg (aka “Zuck Bucks”) has announced another round of grants for 2024. The Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) claims its mission is to “increase civic participation,” yet critics claim the organization is partisan and should not be permitted to insert its operatives into election offices.
Zuck Bucks Redux?
In 2020, CTCL routed tens of millions of dollars of Mark Zuckerberg’s money to geographical areas with left-leaning voting blocs, boosting voter turnout in an already tight presidential election. Many at the time cried foul, charging that this practice unfairly benefited some voters while disadvantaging others and threatening the integrity of the US election system. Former Federal Election Commission member Hans von Spakovsky claimed:
“My reaction is that this was a carefully orchestrated attempt to convert official government election offices into get-out-the-vote operations for one political party and to insert political operatives into election offices to influence and manipulate the outcome of the election … All states should ban private funding of government election offices no matter the source.”
As the 2024 elections approach, twenty-eight states have banned private funding of public elections, such as was conducted by CTCL in 2020. Capital Research Center, a nonpartisan think tank, claims this effort by CTCL improperly influenced the 2020 election outcome:
“Private financing of government election offices under the guise of COVID-19 relief skewed voter turnout in the 2020 election and may have tipped the presidential election to Joe Biden.
…
Despite its claims that the grants were strictly for COVID-19 relief, not partisan advantage, the data show otherwise. CRC research into grants distributed in key states – Arizona and Nevada, Texas, Michigan and Wisconsin, Virginia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Georgia – has documented their partisan effects.”
Favoring Democrats
Though Democrats dismiss such charges, post-election coverage by NPR included the headline “How Private Money From Facebook's CEO Saved The 2020 Election” and gushed approvingly of CTCL:
“The coronavirus pandemic – and Congress' neglect – necessitated an unprecedented bailout of election offices with private money funneled through the little-known nonprofit. And the money proved indispensable.”
…
“The nonprofit gave Chester County $2.5 million for the election, which is more than the county's 2020 budget for voting services.”
…
“Chester County is one of several large suburban counties that ring Philadelphia – once-Republican strongholds that have shifted in Democrats' favor in recent years. Pennsylvania was pivotal to Joe Biden's victory over President Trump, and his win in the state was fueled in part by his success in Chester County. He won it by 17 percentage points – nearly double Hillary Clinton's margin four years earlier.”
CTCL is routing funds to only 20 states for 2024, but concerns about private money being used to set up voting ballot drop boxes (monitored by observers who are also paid by those same monied interests) have only increased. The documentary 2,000 Mules shared video footage of remote ballot boxes being stuffed with piles of ballots in the late-night hours by a network of masked, gloved messengers who were well organized and unaccountable. This image of potential election abuse hovers above the 2024 election battlefield.
Election Controversy for 2024
CTCL’s controversial activities during the 2020 election were justified by the pandemic’s shock to the voting system and a sudden logistical shift to mail-in ballots. CTCL has not invoked an international emergency to justify its government election handholding for 2024. As voter confidence in election integrity deteriorates, it may not be MAGA “election deniers” who are to blame so much as pushy Big Tech election meddlers.
In that NPR interview from 2020, an elections expert was consulted as to the potential long-term threats to US voting integrity by organizations such as CTCL:
"It's really important that it's a one-time thing," said Rachael Cobb, associate professor of political science and legal studies at Suffolk University in Boston. Cobb said the private money was critical for election administration this year, "but over time, it in and of itself is corrosive." She said continuing to use private money for such purposes "sullies [the election] in a way that we don't need it to be sullied at all."
As Democrats push to grant illegal immigrants driver’s licenses and the power to vote in US national elections, private money from high-profile Democrats earmarked to erect drop boxes in liberal voting districts will not heal growing public distrust of election integrity.
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
