3 of 10 Counties Chosen as Beneficiaries for Mark Zuckerburg’s Money Are Refusing to Accept It Leading up to 2024 Cycle

Three of the 10 countries chosen as beneficiaries A program funded by a nonprofit is refusing to accept the funds that were used to fund the private takeover government election offices in 2020.

Officials from Brunswick and Forsyth Countys in North Carolina, and Ottawa County in Michigan chose to vote Not to accept Funds from the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence Program The Center for Tech and Civic Life plans to channel $80 million in election grants across the country in the next five-years. The Center for Tech and Civic Life is the organization behind this alliance. It was one of two groups that funneled more than $328 million in private money from Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook CEO. “Zuckbucks,” to the government election offices mainly in the blue counties swing states. This mobilizes Democratic get-out–the-vote efforts. swinging the race in Joe Biden’s favor.

Many of the recipients for the 2024 election cycle are heavily Democrat. They also happen to be in swing states. This suggests that CTCL wants to continue its successful scheme in the next Presidential election in purple states. CTCL might try to hide its efforts and claim that the alliance also gives money to red counties. However, the likelihood is that more than twice as many or even triple the funds will be spent on Democratic-leaning county in comparison to Republican ones. Just like 2020.

Justin Roebuck is Ottawa County Clerk Telled RealClearInvestigations he will refuse the grant money offered to his county because of transparency concerns. Roebuck asked the alliance for details on its criteria for distributing money to each county. The program’s administrators refused to provide a clear answer.

RealClear spoke with Tim Tsujii who is the director of elections at the Forsyth County Board of Elections. He said that Forsyth won’t accept grant money as the county has sufficient funds to run its elections. Tsujii expressed concern about the possibility of members being required to pay a fee in order to be included in the alliance.

“There is all this talk about the money going to elections offices and the counties, but what about the money going from the counties to the alliance?” Tsujii said.

An annual fee must be paid by election offices to become members of the alliance. It is $1,600 for basic membership and $4,800 premium. The CTCL-created program grants officials access to the alliance. “coaching,” Tutorials, consulting and any other assistance as needed, such as redesigning voter forms or websites. The alliance also provides consulting and tutorials. Obligatory Members “to make non-monetary (but highly significant) contributions to the broader activities of the Alliance,” You can also participate in its events and share election data, documents and forms.

Although the program emphasizes its effectiveness, it goes to great lengths. “commitment to nonpartisanship” — “We will never attempt to influence the outcome of any election. Period” — its own founding organization, the Center for Tech and Civic Life, has demonstrated the catastrophic and deeply partisan consequences of welcoming outside groups to infiltrate government election offices.

These three jurisdictions are just a few of the beneficiaries that raise concerns about the integrity, and the risks associated with accepting the funds. Connecticut’s Greenwich is the only town that narrowly missed this award. Approved After concerned residents and town representatives wrote, a $500,000 grant was awarded by the program. Letter To their local newspaper, they protested against the grant. The letter cited outside influence by the partisan groups in Greenwich’s election process as one reason to reject the funds.

As RealClearInvestigations noted:

When [Greenwich] residents heard that its elections office was tapped to receive $500,000 in grant money from the CTCL, a member of the town’s legislative council sent an email to the center seeking more information, including audits of the group’s books, a copy of the group’s annual report, and its conflict-of-interest policy.   

The CTCL refused to provide these documents and insisted that it had audited its financials as well as conflict policies. “are not publicly filed documents.” 

The alliance also has not disclosed how grant money will be used. Instead, it kept things vague and said It will be different. Depending on the office. But if CTCL’s past is prologue, that could Working with left-wing third party groups to create absentee voter forms. This includes targeting likely-Democratic voters through harvesting and curing their votes and creating automatic voter registration systems. The Center for Tech and Civic Life already hopes to achieve this goal on a greater scale than it did in 2020. As The Federalist has previously reported reportedCTCL has a plan to penetrate more than 8,000 local elections departments in the country by 2026.

Alarm bells should sound for all jurisdictions that are committed to fair and free elections. Unless more localities reject these private funds and memberships, CTCL — under the guise of its new U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence program — will once again undermine election integrity in 2024 and beyond.

Victoria Marshall is a staff writer for The Federalist. Her writings have been published in the New York Post and National Review. Hillsdale College graduated her in May 2021, with a double major in journalism and politics. Follow her Twitter @vemrshll.

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases