Democrats used a nonprofit to engage in a partisan, multi-state campaign to flip states blue during the 2020 election, including Arizona, and plan to do so again in 2024.
Details of the effort — the Everybody Votes campaign by the Voter Registration Project (VRP) — were revealed in a new report by the Capital Research Center. According to a leaked secret draft plan, the campaign funded voter registration drives in eight swing states — Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, and Nevada — over five years beginning in 2016, seeking to register more non-white and other “underrepresented” (unmarried women, young) voters to bring registration parity to white voters.
John Podesta commissioned Everybody Votes while serving as Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign chairman. Podesta, a key player in Russiagate, formerly served as the Clinton White House Chief of Staff and counselor to President Obama; he co-founded and presided over Center for American Progress.
Everybody Votes succeeded in raising $190 million and registering 5.1 million people by 2022, which turned out around 1-2.7 million votes across the eight swing states for President Joe Biden in 2020. The Capital Research Center report estimated that the campaign generated over 198,600 votes in the 2020 election. Biden won in 2020 by over 10,400 votes.
“[T]he Everybody Votes campaign was blatantly partisan, developed by Democratic consultants and pushed by Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager,” stated the report.
Everybody Votes received its millions from progressive billionaires. Barbara Fried — mother of Sam Bankman-Fried, the corrupt cryptocurrency giant under investigation for fraud — co-wrote a 2020 memo for her super PAC led by fellow Stanford Law professors, Mind the Gap, advising donors to give 90 percent of their political cash to three nonprofits engaged in voter registration campaigns “most effective” for getting “additional Democratic votes,” naming Everybody Votes as one of them. Donors receive tax deductions for their contributions.
As AZ Free News reported last November, Bankman-Fried gave $27 million to a Phoenix-based PAC to turn out for Democratic candidates. The PAC’s treasurer, Dacey Montoya, is a key figure in many Democratic dark money network organizations, and received over $1 million from committees for Gov. Katie Hobbs and Sen. Mark Kelly.
NEW: My biggest story EVER, exposing a corrupt voter registration charity that may have decided the 2020 election by using $120+ million to target millions of Democratic voters in AZ, CO, FL, GA, OH, NC, VA, NV
Among the billionaires to donate to VRP were Warren Buffet ($5 million), George Soros ($10.4 million), Chuck Feeney ($2 million), the foundation of the deceased Wallace Coulter ($5 million), Barbara Picower ($4 million), Jeffrey Skoll ($1 million), and Pierre Omidyar ($500,000). Prominent dark money groups Proteus Fund, New Venture Fund, Hopewell Fund, Tides Foundation, ImpactAssets, and Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund accounted for around $453 million in funds to VRP.
Arizona organizations tied into the dark money network benefited over $19.16 million from VRP: $7.46 million to Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, $1.73 million for Mi Familia Vota, $5.43 million to One Arizona, $1.82 million for Central Arizonans for a Sustainable Economy (CASE), $1.73 million for Arizona Center for Empowerment, $941,000 for Arizona Coalition for Change, and $51,900 for Rural Arizona Engagement.
Everybody Votes appears to have originated in early 2015 from a plan emailed to Podesta by the Wyss Foundation, a leftist nonprofit with a history of illegal election interference. That plan originated from Bill Roberts, board member of leftist dark money group League of Conservation Voters, within Corridor Partners, a Democratic consulting firm. In November 2015, Podesta received a copy of a similar, retitled plan originating from Robert Richman, CEO of the Democratic campaign strategy group Grassroots Solutions. VRP and Grassroots Solutions shared a D.C. address from 2016 to 2018 according to tax filings, with VRP continuing to pay consulting fees to Grassroots Solutions.
VRP picked up the Everybody Votes campaign. Formerly known as “Voting For America,” VRP was an outgrowth of Obama’s Project Vote. Project Vote was an affiliate of ACORN: the bankrupted activist network guilty of violating election laws repeatedly.
Despite having an outsized impact on the 2020 election, it wasn’t until last year that VRP publicized the Everybody Votes campaign.
VRP plans to use the Everybody Votes campaign plan again for 2024, with hiring targeted in Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin in addition to Arizona.
The IRS prohibits 501(c)(3) nonprofits from engaging in partisan activity, especially that which influences election outcomes. AZ Free News documented in February how leftist nonprofits in Arizona manipulate the tax code to do just that.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Benjamin Franklin once famously said, “[I]n this world, nothing is certain except death and taxes” — true, unless you’re a leftist political nonprofit. For many of them, taxation isn’t certain, even if they run afoul of tax-exempt status requirements.
Funding sources, expenditure recipients, and even those operating these nonprofits may remain secretive under the current state of lax federal enforcement. These tax-free and opacity perks are possible through two interrelated federal tax classifications: 501(c)(3), or “C3,” and 501(c)(4), or “C4.” There are over 27,000 C3s and just over 1,200C4s registered in Arizona. The big difference between the two classifications is that donations to IRS-recognized C3 organizations are deductible under our income tax code. And the Left has learned how to exploit this tax status for their political benefit.
In Arizona, many liberal C3 and C4 nonprofits work in tandem, each executing symbiotic duties while coordinating their activities and sharing data and resources. Sometimes, these C3 and C4 duos are “sister” organizations — meaning, they’re affiliated rather than independent entities allied over common goals.
These arrangements are legal so long as clear distinctions are made between charitable and non-charitable activities. Over the last several months, AZ Free News has conducted an extensive review of over a dozen different liberal nonprofits in the state, examining their websites, tax documents, and social media accounts. Our research has found that many of these organizations have blurred the lines on their political activities via various C3 and C4 groups. In some cases, there appeared to be no distinction at all, with some C3 organizations providing completely different accounts of their tax-deductible program activities to the IRS compared to what they shared publicly.
How the IRS Intended for C3 and C4 Organizations to Operate
C3s have two major qualifiers: they’re supposed to be nonpartisan and apolitical—meaning, they can’t expend funds or use resources to coordinate with political activity being conducted by C4s.
C3s must organize and operate exclusively for purposes that are one or more of the following: charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals.
The IRS defines “charitable” as relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.
The IRS expressly prohibits C3s from being an “action organization”: those engaging in political or legislative activities. Political activities include the direct or indirect participation or intervention in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any political candidate. The IRS also prohibits political campaign fund contributions or public statements of positions, either verbal or written, on behalf of the organization in favor of or opposing any candidate.
The IRS does condone voter education activities, such as get-out-the-vote (GOTV) efforts like voter registration. However, any evidence of political bias is forbidden: favoritism of a candidate, opposing a candidate in any way, or “hav[ing] the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates.” Lobbying is also largely forbidden.
Comparatively, the IRS classifies C4 organizations into one of two categories: social welfare organizations or local association of employees. The former concerns civic leagues or organizations organized exclusively for social welfare promotion, not profit. The IRS clarifies that social welfare promotion doesn’t include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate. Those that do must not render that activity as their primary activity, and risk being subjected to taxation. The latter concerns membership-based organizations with net earnings devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.
How Leftist C3 and C4s Operate in Arizona
Our review of leftist C3s in Arizona appears to indicate that their activities are overtly partisan and political. They coordinate with politically active C4s to achieve shared, partisan goals, and receive political action committee (PAC) funding while doing so. Often, these leftist C4s have either direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to one or more candidates.
Progressive activists leading these C3s have effectively mastered the art of exploiting the IRS code for partisan advantage, helping to maximize liberal donor partisan impact with their dollars while still hiding their identity. The C3s will claim that their allowable vote (GOTV) efforts, such as voter registration, are nonpartisan. They will claim they’re reaching out to certain, “marginalized” demographic groups; however, these groups turn out to be known Democratic voter bases.
One example of this is Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, the C3 sister organization of Mi Familia Vota, the C4. The former admitted on their 2020 tax filing to coordinating political activity with the latter. The executive director of Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, Hector Sanchez Barba, has publicly advocated for the losses of Republican candidates.
“We will keep working to keep extremism, Trump and MAGA out of our democracy,” wrote Sanchez Barba. “@MiFamiliaVota.”
In response to a Politico article documenting the GOP’s underperformance in last year’s midterm elections, Sanchez Barba thanked Latino voters for having Democrats win.
Meanwhile, their partner C4s pay for media and partisan activities like ad campaigns for candidates. It’s uncertain whether the funding for these activities comes from their C3 partners since those grant or cost-sharing agreements aren’t public. The IRS requires that C3 funds given to C4s be restricted to charitable uses — not electioneering activity.
The C3-C4 duo targets certain voter demographics to achieve a partisan outcome. They contact Democrat-leaning voters to get their vote cast, convince newly registered voters to vote Democratic through mailers and ads supportive of Democratic candidates and causes, and publicly support certain partisan ballot initiatives.
The C3-C4 sister organizations thinly veil their efforts that a division exists between them. For example, Mi Familia Vota spent tens of thousands on TV advertising that advocated for the election of Reginald Bolding ahead of last year’s primary. However, they listed a staffer for their C3 sister organization, Mi Familia Vota Education, as the point-of-contact on that campaign filing.
As AZ Free News reported in Part One of this series, Mi Familia Vota receives funding from One Arizona, a C3, which in turn receives its funding from the Tides Foundation, George Soros’ Open Societies Foundation, and several different organizations under Arabella Advisors.
.@RealMarkFinchem, a MAGAmigo, lies, & says that the 2020 election was fraudulent. If elected, he would use his position to help Trump. We are fighting for free and clear elections this cycle. Our democracy is at stake in Arizona, we must fight back. We say #BastaFinchempic.twitter.com/WPVSjflt2L
Ahead of the midterm election last June, One Arizona advertised a job opening for an independent expenditure (IE) campaign manager. The position appears to be one for a political staffer, which would constitute prohibited electioneering.
While not a complete pitcure, the above graphic illustrates some of the connections in the left’s secretive infrastructure and how they relate to Arizona elections.
Leftist C3s also hire for both the C3 and C4, resulting in shared jobs and salaries. One Arizona (C3) and Arizona Wins (C4) co-hired staff including a field director, field program coordinator, and finance and compliance director. That shared salary should not be used for political work. One recent example of this was a job listing by Arizona Coalition for Change (C3) and Our Voice Our Vote (C4) for a data manager that would work within the duo’s political and grassroots lobbying arms.
These blurred lines surrounding co-hires don’t just apply to staff. Arizona Center for Empowerment (ACE, a C3) and LUCHA (C4) share an executive director, Alejandra (Alex) Gomez, as well as staffers. This relationship is further complicated by the fact that ACE listed LUCHA as its “Employer of Record” on their latest tax return. Under Gomez, both organizations have expressed their partisanship.
Last year, LUCHA launched an initiative to get Democratic candidates elected: “LUCHA Blue.” The nonprofit pledged to prioritize certain races and voter bases in its GOTV efforts. On its hiring page for the initiative, LUCHA disclosed that it would staff between 70 and 105 people.
“We believe that not all candidates align with the mission of LUCHA, and this is why we created a campaign not only to flip Arizona Blue — but LUCHA Blue!” stated LUCHA. “Overall, the goal of the campaign is to win these targeted races, increase Latin/Hispanic voter turnout, and educate voters on the voting process.” (emphasis added)
In one post following Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) winning re-election last November, LUCHA appeared to affirm that both it and ACE assisted in organizational efforts to assure Kelly’s victory.
Wealthy dark money donors have a greater financial incentive to back C3s. 75 percent of their donations can go to politics and qualify as tax deductible — effectively maximizing their gift-giving while affording them a tax break. C4 donations aren’t tax deductible.
The IRS has long been aware of the disparity between the lawful intent for C3 and C4 entities, and the current reality of C3-C4 relationships. As ProPublica revealed in 2019, the IRS essentially gave up on holding nonprofits accountable.
The following are some of Arizona’s liberal C3-C4 nonprofit duos: One Arizona and Arizona Wins, Arizona Center for Empowerment and Living United for Change in Arizona, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund and Mi Familia Vota Victory, Chispa AZ/League of Conservation Voters Education Fund and League of Conservation Voters, Arizona Coalition for Change and Our Voice Our Vote, Instituto Lab and Instituto Power, Rural Arizona Engagement and Rural Arizona Action, and Voto Latino Foundation and Voto Latino.
The relationships between these nonprofits and the awareness of their straining tax law will be further explained in the next installment of this series.
This is Part Two in a series on the Left’s secret infrastructure to turn Arizona blue. Be sure to sign up for our newsletter to be notified of Part Three in the series.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
