Third-party ballot access group raised no funds in first half of 2023.

IRS filings cast doubt on group’s ability to ⁤fund⁤ presidential bid

The arm⁢ of No Labels devoted to gaining ballot access raised⁢ zero dollars in ⁤the first six months of the year, according to tax ‍filings, casting doubt on the third-party group’s ability⁣ to fund a presidential bid in 2024.

From January to June, Insurance Policy for America,⁣ Inc., brought in no cash, according to its latest tax filings.⁤ No Labels launched the group in 2021 as an “insurance policy” that​ would help it obtain ballot access should voters show they ⁤want a third presidential choice come 2024.

No Labels has in recent ⁢weeks signaled ​ it ⁤will nominate⁢ a third-party⁣ presidential candidate next year, prompting fear from Democrats who say‌ the endeavor would hand former president Donald Trump another term. But the group’s latest filings raise questions about whether⁢ that ⁤panic is warranted. The ballot access group during the first six months of 2023 spent less than ‌$1⁣ million, money that ⁤mostly went to a single firm for consulting fees. The filings did not include the group’s cash on hand.

Much of the‌ Left’s fears surrounding No Labels hinges⁤ on a single, unvetted claim: that the group is prepared to ‌spend $70 million in 2024‍ on a third-party candidate. ⁢But the source of that number is a⁣ single September 2022 New York Times column, and ⁣No Labels has repeatedly ⁤refused to answer whether it has anything even close to that amount of money. As of the end of 2021, the group controlled just $10 million.

Senior advisers to President ⁤Joe Biden nonetheless met with No Labels in June‌ to demand the group shut down its political operation. No⁤ Labels has provided its own polling ⁤to argue⁣ that a third-party bid may ⁤not help Trump.

The group’s‍ political ⁣action committee, No Labels 2024, does not appear to be in healthy fiscal shape either. ⁤Its latest Federal Election Commission filings show⁢ it raised just under $1.5 million from‌ the start of the year to⁤ the end of June and spent only ⁢$100,000 of that in six months—hardly the potential nine-figure war chest necessary to invest in a serious presidential campaign.

No Labels’ lack of both funds and a presidential candidate has not stopped a deluge of reports on the group’s activities as ⁢an existential threat⁢ to Biden. Politico reported last month on ⁣the “third-party nightmare for Democrats” and the “major threat to Biden” that groups such ‌as No Labels pose. NPR echoed that framing in its ⁢own ⁤report about the “consternation‌ in some quarters about ⁣the impact [No Labels] could have in a close election.”

Neither No Labels ⁢nor ⁤the leader of Insurance Policy for America responded to requests for comment.

As of July, No Labels has ‌gained ballot access in just four states.⁣ The group has not⁤ named⁤ who would lead its third-party​ bid, although Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) has⁣ flirted with​ the possibility on multiple ⁢occasions.