Momentum is finally building on a critical plank in the move to get foreign money out of US elections. It seems so sensible on its face that the real scandal is that it ever became an issue in the first place.
“As many as two dozen states could enact legislation this year to ban foreign funding of ballot measures, a trend that gained bipartisan support last year. This follows nine states that have already enacted bans in the last 18 months,” The Daily Signal’s Fred Lucas wrote. “While it’s already illegal for foreign nationals or foreign entities to contribute to candidates, ballot initiatives have been a longstanding loophole.”
The problem is easy to identify. Ballot initiatives have become increasingly powerful political instruments in recent years, as many voters do not pay sufficient attention to them, allowing those with a keen interest in whatever issue is involved in a measure to more easily steer their side through with less support than would otherwise be expected.
“A 2023 Federal Election Commission ruling dismissed the complaint that Australian mining company Sandfire Resources contributed more than $280,000 to defeat a Montana ballot initiative that would have increased the power of state mining regulators. The FEC determined it lacked jurisdiction, but recommended Congress act to close the loophole,” Lucas cites as one example.
Lowering Quality Control for Really Big Elections
Negating foreign sway over the US electoral process appears to be an issue on which Democrats and Republicans agree. “Support for and opposition to bans on foreign contributions in elections does not fall along party lines. Of the 29 states with a ban on foreign contributions to candidates, 14 have Republican trifectas, eight have Democratic trifectas, and seven have divided governments,” Ballotpedia states.
That being the case, perhaps it’s time that Democrats who claim to be on board with the effort to get foreign dollars out of US elections support a thorough investigation into one of their biggest cash cows.
“ActBlue approved ‘more lenient’ standards during the last presidential campaign cycle, according to internal records obtained by The New York Post, which revealed hundreds of dubious contributions — including ones from ‘foreign IP’ addresses,” the paper reported in 2025.
“Altogether, ActBlue’s internal documents and communications paint a damning picture:
despite repeated instances of fraudulent donations to Democrat campaigns and causes from
domestic and foreign sources, ActBlue is not demonstrating a serious effort to deter fraud on its platform,” an April 2025 interim joint report from the Republican-led House Committees on House Administration, Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform concluded.
The emphasis on the word “foreign” appears in the original report. And with good reason:
“With little more than a token fraud-prevention program, ActBlue has detected at least 22 wide-ranging domestic and foreign fraud campaigns pushing donations to candidates, campaign committees, and advocacy groups at every level of American politics. Most alarmingly, ActBlue has detected foreign fraud attempts emanating from Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, India, Iraq, Jordan, Myanmar, the Philippines, and Saudi Arabia.”
In addition to elections, ActBlue also bankrolls Democrat-aligned state ballot initiatives across the nation. Along with the palpable concerns over unvetted foreign dollars, this presents a whole other can of worms in the stacking-the-deck game.
Concentrated Outside Money at the State Level
The Fairness Project “is a labor union-backed advocacy organization that finances and supports state ballot initiative campaigns to promote left-of-center policies such as government-mandated comprehensive paid family and medical leave, Medicaid expansion, and minimum wage increases,” watchdog website Influence Watch details in its dossier on the group.
“Fairness Project has won 40 ballot measure campaigns since 2016, and we’re just getting started,” the organization boasts on its website. “We’ve won dozens of ballot measures to raise wages, expand health care access, protect reproductive rights, secure more paid time off, and other life-changing policies for more than 20 million people.”
In 2026, the stakes are getting higher. Current ballot initiatives being promoted by the Fairness Project include a measure enabling Democrat-controlled Colorado to redraw its congressional maps. And that is only one state.
“The organization is supporting multiple ballot measures across the country that aim to give voters the power to vote directly on their own congressional districts,” FP reveals.
The Donate button prominently displayed on The Fairness Project’s home page goes straight to ActBlue.
In other words, concentrated outsider money is being utilized to pass progressive ballot measures in individual states. Sketchy ActBlue backing and numerous other dark money donor sources have given rise to suspicions that – you guessed it – foreign cash is directly backing this progressive state ballot initiative machine.
“In November 2025, the state of Nebraska sued several nonprofit organizations over allegations they illegally spent over $10 million in foreign contributions whilst supporting state ballot initiatives between 2022 and 2024,” Influence Watch reports. “The nonprofit groups in question included the Wyss Foundation, the Sixteen Thirty Fund, the Berger Action Fund, the New Venture Fund, the Hopewell Fund and the Fairness Project.”
Funny how the Big Money so often has dirt all over it.
“According to Nebraska State Attorney General Mike Hilgers, the organizations in question violated a 2022 state law barring foreign nationals from funding state ballot campaigns and initiatives,” Influence Watch chronicles. “Hilgers also alleged that Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss had previously sent donations to be passed through the nonprofits for the purpose of funding several local ballot initiatives.”
If reformists truly want to keep foreign money out of the state referendum process, it’s not enough to specifically ban that aspect. Sturdy regulations guarding against the use of concentrated out-of-state money to promote these initiatives must be on the table as well.
