Banning Zuckbucks 2.0: Why States Must Protect Election Administration From Private Money
Across America, a new threat is growing: private money flowing directly into government election offices. Zuckbucks 2.0 Missouri is not a theory; it is already changing how elections are run in our state and across the country.
What began as pandemic-era “Zuckbucks” has now evolved into the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence, otherwise known as Zuckbucks 2.0.
What Is Zuckbucks 2.0
The Alliance launched in 2022 and describes itself as a nonpartisan collaborative that brings together election officials, designers, technologists, and other experts to help local election departments improve operations and access “best in class” resources.
The Alliance was funded as a five-year, 80-million-dollar program sponsored by The Audacious Project, a philanthropic initiative operated by TED that pools large-scale private donations from Left-wing donors. By their own admission, this structure gives the Alliance a deep pool of private money and long-term financial backing from major donors.
This model is not neutral. The Alliance and its partners have built a structure that functions as Zuckbucks 2.0, built specifically to evade red-state bans on private funding of election offices and to keep Zuckbucks 2.0 Missouri style operations alive under a new name.
Why Private Money in Elections Is Dangerous
Private Influence Over Public Election Operations
Campaign finance laws focus on donations to candidates and political committees, not money and services that flow into election offices themselves. That gap allows the Alliance to offer training, consulting, and operational support in ways that tie participating offices to its preferred nonprofits and consultants.
These partner organizations hire only Left-wing activists and former campaign staffers.
While the Alliance no longer lists its partners on its website, they include The Elections Group, The Center for Technology and Civic Life, and foreign-backed investment funds managed by Arabella Advisors.
Through the Alliance, they gain access to local election offices, presenting themselves as experts on election administration. It just so happens that the best practices they bring with them benefit the Left-wing campaigns that they support.
Unequal Distribution of Resources
During the original Zuckbucks wave in 2020, grants from the Center for Tech and Civic Life created large disparities between jurisdictions. Some counties received major infusions of cash while similar communities received nothing, which critics say gave certain regions an unfair operational advantage.
This spending was carefully orchestrated to benefit Left-wing candidates.
The Alliance model risks repeating that pattern in a more permanent way, because membership tiers and selective scholarships give some jurisdictions ongoing access to design, staffing, and workflow support that others never receive.
Lack of Transparency and Dark Money Influence
Many of the nonprofits behind the Alliance operate inside a larger dark money framework where donors and pass-through funding vehicles are not fully disclosed.
The Alliance and its main member groups are part of a network funded through large philanthropic conduits and pass-through entities, meaning that the public often cannot see who is paying for this activity. The Alliance is backed by a coalition of nonprofits and funding networks that include the foreign-backed groups interfering in Missouri’s ballot measure elections.
The public has a right to know if their election office is accepting money from private individuals and what strings were attached.
| Organization | Role in the Alliance |
|---|---|
| Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) | CTCL administers much of the Alliance program and provides key infrastructure for grants, training, and management. InfluenceWatch notes that CTCL played a central role in distributing the original 2020 Zuckbucks grants, which is why critics see the Alliance as a continuation of that effort under a new label. |
| Center for Civic Design | This group specializes in ballot design, voter instruction materials, and so called human centered design guidance for election departments. InfluenceWatch describes how the Alliance uses the Center for Civic Design to shape voter facing materials and workflows inside election offices. |
| Center for Secure and Modern Elections (CSME) | CSME works on policy campaigns related to voter registration and election administration. InfluenceWatch reports that CSME is a project of the New Venture Fund, a large dark money nonprofit managed by Arabella Advisors. |
| The Elections Group | The Elections Group provides hands on consulting and operational services. InfluenceWatch states that this group offers staffing models, mail ballot processing systems, and workflow guidance that Alliance jurisdictions often adopt. |
Missouri Spotlight: Zuckbucks 2.0 in Missouri
Missouri has been targeted by the Alliance.
Zuckbucks 2.0 in Missouri is a real and growing problem, not a hypothetical threat.
Scotland County withdrew from the Alliance entirely. The Democrat clerk resigned and did not want to create an issue before the next election, so the county stepped away from the program.
Boone County went the opposite direction and remains an Alliance member.
Public records show the county used taxpayer funds to join and maintain its membership, giving the Alliance and its partners a foothold inside a major Missouri election office.
This is why statewide standards are essential. Without uniform rules, some Missouri voters will be protected from private interference while others will not.
Missouri needs one set of rules for all of its election offices to end Zuckbucks 2.0 operations for good.
What Do We Do About It?
To safeguard election integrity, states should ban private funding, vendor credits, embedded consulting, and service agreements in election administration.
This bill was passed out of the House last year and has already been prefiled for 2026.
Legislators interested in protecting Missouri’s elections should cosponsor Senator Brown’s SB 896.
Missourians who want to protect their elections should call their representatives and ask them to do the same. Stopping Zuckbucks 2.0 in Missouri starts with citizen pressure and clear legislation.
Conclusion
Zuckbucks 2.0 represents a long-term shift toward private control over public election infrastructure. The Alliance’s structure and funding model tie local election offices into a coordinated network of nonprofits and donors in ways that threaten transparency, neutrality, and voter confidence.
If states care about free, fair, and publicly accountable elections, the solution is straightforward. Eliminate private influence in election administration and make sure control remains where it belongs, with the public. That starts by ending Zuckbucks 2.0 in Missouri and passing strong protections like SB 896.
Support SB 896.
Andy Bakker
Executive Director
Liberty Alliance USA