Politics
Opinion: 'Zuckerbucks' make elections more secure, no matter what red states say
Democracy isn’t free.
Tell that to the more than half the states that have banned or limited donations to the roughly 8,000 county and municipal offices that run our elections.
Opinion Columnist
Jackie Calmes
Jackie Calmes brings a critical eye to the national political scene. She has decades of experience covering the White House and Congress.
The beleaguered public servants who make it possible for us to cast ballots, whether for school boards or the presidency, are already woefully underfinanced. Now the Big Lie that won’t die — that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump — is making that underfunding worse.
Red (and reddish) states have bought into the obnoxiously dubbed “Zuckerbucks” conspiracy, a far-right falsehood that in 2020, Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to election offices not for the stated reason — to pay for costly protections against COVID-19 — but to help Democrats win. (Just how they supposedly achieved that the conspiracists don’t say.)
Election offices’ need for the money is evident from coast to coast. A 2021 study by the MIT Election Data and Science Lab found that the U.S. investment in our voting system falls “near the bottom of spending for public services, ranking at approximately the same levels as spending by local governments to maintain parking facilities.”
Yet maintaining parking lots isn’t anything like contending with the complexity and costs of modernizing and securing voting machines; investing in better ballot counting and voter registration technology; staffing and running polling centers; combating disinformation, AI scams and cyberattacks, and protecting against the threats of violence that have become a fact of life for election officials and their staffs in the Trump years.
Despite the crying needs of voting administrators, 28 states — 22 red ones and six swing states — have prohibited or restricted philanthropic funding for their election offices since 2020. Of those, only Pennsylvania paired its ban with offsetting state funds. It’s a double-whammy: no private money, yet skimpy public funds. As much as we might prefer that our elections aren’t subsidized by private interests, if states aren’t going to pony up more public dollars, let the charity flow.
States and local governments have historically had the most responsibility for voting under our decentralized election system, and the federal government chips in pitifully little. Yet MAGA Republicans in Congress want to get in on the anti-Zuckerbucks craze and extend the ban on election-administration donations nationwide. As early as next month, the House could vote on an “election integrity” package that’s anything but, and which includes a so-called End Zuckerbucks Act.
Fortunately, if it were to pass in the House, the bill would almost certainly be buried in the Senate. But that still leaves the state bans in effect across wide swaths of the country — including such pivotal and hotly contested states as Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin and Georgia.
“What we’ve seen is not only is there not an investment in election departments in a way that ultimately will make them successful and keep our election process secure, but also a really concerted effort to cut off other avenues” of support, Tiana Epps-Johnson, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Tech and Civic Life, told me.
The center, whose mission is to promote election modernization and civic engagement, distributed most of the $420 million that Zuckerberg and Chan donated in 2020. The grants went to more than 2,500 government entities in nearly every state and Washington, D.C. — every election office that applied. The nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research doled out the rest.
To put the Zuckerberg-Chan gift in perspective, it was nearly eight times greater than the $55 million that the federal government is providing to election offices this year. The grants, as advertised, mostly paid for COVID-response measures necessary to safely conduct the 2020 elections: to buy masks and other personal protective equipment, supply and handle many more mail-in ballots, hire and train additional staff and reach out to wary voters.
But the funds covered other expenses as well: In Clark County, Nev., home to Las Vegas, election administrators used grant money to order in meals for vote counters who feared going outside because of the armed protesters there, according to Epps-Johnson. And some offices used the donated funds to build ramps and make other adjustments for disabled voters, finally putting their facilities in compliance with the three-decades-old Americans with Disabilities Act.
Local officials welcomed the help, of course. But state and national Republican groups took to the courts and the Federal Election Commission, alleging an illegal conspiracy to give Democrats an election advantage. The usually polarized FEC, evenly divided between Republican and Democratic commissioners, voted unanimously in mid-2022 against every complaint, finding “no reason to believe” the allegations against Zuckerberg, Chan and the nonprofits.
In fact, the Republican complainants lost everywhere except one place: Republican-controlled state legislatures. Politicians, unlike the courts and the FEC, aren’t constrained by truth and facts. The nonprofits dispersing Zuckerberg and Chan money “effectively commandeered the machinery of the actual elections,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis lied in 2022, hailing a law he signed banning private grants and making other election changes stemming from conspiracy theories.
What’s confounding is that Republicans arguably are short-changing themselves in short-changing election offices. Their base of rural and working class voters could be especially inconvenienced — and perhaps dissuaded from voting — by fewer polling places and ballot drop boxes, for example, and by restrictions on early voting and voting by mail. A coalition of voter advocacy groups and election administrators is pressing Congress now for $400 million, pretty much matching what they once got from Zuckerberg. Yet the MAGA-fied House is unlikely to be receptive.
Yes, democracy isn’t free. Then again, we’ve learned the hard way: Republicans aren’t invested in democracy.
@jackiekcalmes
Politics
How Republicans and Democrats are Redistricting Urban Areas to Tilt the House
American cities — densely populated and overwhelmingly Democratic — are typically prime targets for aggressive gerrymanders. This past year has been no different, as urban areas became casualties of newly partisan maps, drawn by both Republicans and Democrats in a rare bout of middecade redistricting.
With nearly 80 percent of the United States population living in urban areas, according to the census, mapmakers using modern data technology can surgically split cities block by block to eke out a partisan advantage. They “pack” like-minded voters into a single district, or “crack” them, linking slivers of concrete-covered downtowns with farmland hundreds of miles away.
While the intentions are often political, these julienned districts often leave communities with little in common, and no cohesive representation in Congress. Roughly 37 percent of congressional districts are either urban or an urban-suburban mix, while 63 percent remain rural or rural-suburban, according to the District Density Scale.
So far this year, state lawmakers have carved up major Democratic cities in the nationwide redistricting arms race, drawing new maps in five states. Virginia could be next, if voters approve a referendum Tuesday to redraw boundaries and potentially add four Democratic seats.
Kansas City, Mo.
Take the Kansas City, Mo., area as a clear example. Late last year, Gov. Mike Kehoe signed into law a new map that would pave the way for eliminating a Democratic seat and add a Republican one, potentially ousting a longtime representative, Emanuel Cleaver, who was also the first Black mayor of Kansas City.
2024 districts
The proposed map effectively slices apart — or “cracks” — the old Fifth District, which previously held a majority of Democratic-dominated Kansas City and its metropolitan area, into three parts.
2024 districts
District
Margin
5th
Dem. +23.2 D +23.2
6th
Rep. +38.9 R +38.9
4th
Rep. +42.3 R +42.3
New districts
District
Margin
5th
Rep. +18.2 R +18.2
4th
Rep. +21.2 R +21.2
6th
Rep. +26.7 R +26.7
As a result, Democratic voters from Kansas City are spread out across three new districts where they are likely to be outnumbered by Republican voters. The Kansas City area went from having one Democratic district and two Republican districts to having three Republican districts.
Northern Virginia
While Missouri illustrates how a single-district city can be cracked apart to dilute the votes of a densely packed partisan area, Virginia is taking a different approach. Its proposed map spreads out Democrats from the crammed northern Virginia suburbs into multiple districts spreading more than a hundred miles into deeply red areas for the opposite outcome: to tilt more districts blue.
2024 districts
While there is no central city in northern Virginia — Fairfax County, the state’s largest municipality, boasts nearly 1.2 million people but sprawls across nearly 400 square miles — the northern reaches of the state have a population in the millions and are mostly Democratic.
2024 districts
District
Margin
8th
Dem. +49.3 D +49.3
11th
Dem. +34.0 D +34.0
10th
Dem. +8.3 D +8.3
7th
Dem. +2.9 D +2.9
6th
Rep. +23.8 R +23.8
New districts
District
Margin
8th
Dem. +17.5 D +17.5
11th
Dem. +13.4 D +13.4
10th
Dem. +12.4 D +12.4
7th
Dem. +8.1 D +8.1
1st
Dem. +7.5 D +7.5
The result is an exceptionally aggressive “cracking” of Democratic voters in the northern part of the state across five congressional districts, which would lead to the elimination of three Republican-held seats (the proposed Virginia map eliminates all but one Republican-controlled district).
Houston
In larger cities like Houston, mapmakers have the opportunity to get creative in their carving. At President Trump’s behest, Texas was the first state to redistrict last year. Let’s look at Houston’s old Ninth District.
2024 districts
The old Ninth District was mostly swallowed by the newly crafted 18th District, and remaining voters were funneled into three Republican-leaning districts and one Democratic one.
2024 districts
District
Margin
9th
Dem. +44.0 D +44.0
18th
Dem. +39.7 D +39.7
7th
Dem. +20.7 D +20.7
29th
Dem. +20.3 D +20.3
38th
Rep. +20.7 R +20.7
New districts
District
Margin
18th
Dem. +54.9 D +54.9
29th
Dem. +30.4 D +30.4
7th
Dem. +23.4 D +23.4
9th
Rep. +19.9 R +19.9
38th
Rep. +21.0 R +21.0
But Houston’s maps also illustrate a second gerrymandering strategy: “packing.” The new 18th District was drawn to be exceptionally Democratic, “packing” a high concentration of Democrats into a single district, thereby ensuring that they would be outnumbered in neighboring districts.
Dallas
As another densely populated city, and one with a large population of people of color, Republicans in Texas sliced some congressional districts in the state, while packing Democrats into others.
2024 districts
The newly drawn 32nd District is a textbook example of “cracking,” splitting apart the eastern and northern suburbs of Dallas and extending the district more than a hundred miles east, into more rural and deeply Republican areas of East Texas. As a result, the new 32nd District is solidly red compared with its previous blue tint.
2024 districts
District
Margin
33rd
Dem. +33.7 D +33.7
32nd
Dem. +23.6 D +23.6
24th
Rep. +15.5 R +15.5
5th
Rep. +27.0 R +27.0
6th
Rep. +28.4 R +28.4
New districts
District
Margin
30th
Dem. +47.0 D +47.0
33rd
Dem. +32.6 D +32.6
24th
Rep. +16.1 R +16.1
32nd
Rep. +17.6 R +17.6
5th
Rep. +21.4 R +21.4
The cracking and packing in Dallas achieved another outcome: drawing current incumbents out of their districts, forcing some into primaries against one another while prompting others to leave the House entirely. In Dallas, Representative Jasmine Crockett chose to run for Senate after being drawn out of the 30th District (She lost in March to James Talarico).
Politics
Byron Donalds cracks down on persistent border blind spot leaving US vulnerable to overstays
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
FIRST ON FOX: Florida Republican Rep. Byron Donalds introduced legislation that would require biometric tracking of every entry and exit from the United States, as part of a Republican push to crack down on visa overstays and fraudulent immigration documents.
With illegal crossings down sharply under President Donald Trump’s second term, Republicans are shifting toward the next phase of immigration enforcement — tracking visa overstays and closing documentation loopholes. Donalds’ bill aims to force full nationwide use and federal oversight of the biometric entry-exit system.
Donalds told Fox News Digital exclusively he introduced the legislation on Monday.
“Thanks to President Trump’s decisive actions, our borders are more secure than they have been in decades. We are now moving to finish the job by introducing the Reform Immigration Through Biometrics Act, which provides the oversight needed to ensure every entry and exit is fully verified,” Donalds told Fox News Digital.
FLORIDA SHERIFF SAYS ICE PARTNERSHIP ONLY THE BEGINNING IN ILLEGAL MIGRANT CRACKDOWN
Congressman Byron Donalds is introducing Reform Immigration Through Biometrics Act to tighten immigration enforcement nationwide. (Paul Ratje / AFP via Getty Images)
The bill would close gaps to ensure full coverage at every port, provide system flow updates, and identify what is “slowing” it down by requiring DHS to report to congress. The biometric data system collects fingerprints, facial images, and iris scans.
Immigration reform is a central focus of the second Trump administration, with officials shifting attention toward internal tracking and enforcement gaps, not just border crossings.
The biometric entry-exit system was first introduced a decade ago, following a 2004 recommendation from the 9/11 Commission to strengthen national security through a comprehensive tracking method.
HOUSE GOP BILL COULD TRIGGER SELF-DEPORTATION FOR SOMALI REFUGEES AMID MINNESOTA FRAUD PROBE
Previous administrations failed to fully implement the system across all ports of entry, leaving it incomplete. A final rule issued in December 2025 now mandates a nationwide rollout.
Donalds’ legislation aims to ensure it is fully executed this time by holding DHS accountable.
“The border has been secured, but the work is far from over,” said Donalds in a press release. “Visa overstays and fraudulent documentation remain a large piece of the overall illegal immigration puzzle that needs to be addressed.”
Byron Donalds, a Florida lawmaker and gubernatorial candidate, unveiled legislation cracking down on immigration overstays. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
Data from the Border Patrol cited by Pew Research found there were 237,538 migrant encounters at the Mexican border in 2025. It is the lowest number since Richard Nixon was president in 1970 when 201,780 were encountered.
I REPRESENT A BORDER DISTRICT THAT WAS SWAMPED BY ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. WHAT I’M SEEING NOW MIGHT SURPRISE YOU
Migrants wait in line to turn themselves in for processing to US Customs and Border Protection border patrol agents near the Paso del Norte Port of Entry after crossing the US-Mexico border in El Paso, Texas, on May 9, 2023. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP)
Donalds, candidate for Florida governor to succeed term-limited Gov. Ron DeSantis, said he anticipates “swift passage” of the bill.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Republicans are steadfast in our commitment to the mandate entrusted to us by the American people,” he told Fox News Digital.
Fox News Digital reached out to DHS for comment.
Politics
Former state Controller Betty Yee drops out of the governor’s race
Former state Controller Betty Yee dropped out of the governor’s race on Monday, citing low levels of support from voters and donors.
Yee, a Democrat, was part of a sprawling field of politicians vying to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom. But despite the bevy of prominent candidates running to lead the nation’s most populous state and the world’s fourth-largest economy, this year’s governor’s race has lacked a clear front-runner well known by the electorate.
“It was becoming clear that the donors were not going to be there. Even some of my former supporters just felt like they needed to move on as well,” Yee said in a virtual news conference Monday morning, adding that her internal polling showed voters did not prioritize “competence and experience … and that’s really been my wheelhouse in terms of how we grounded this campaign.”
The former two-term state controller did not immediately endorse another candidate and said she would take a few days to assess the field before making an announcement.
The race was upended this month when then-Rep. Eric Swalwell, among the leading Democrats in the contest, was accused of sexual assault and other misconduct. The East Bay Area Democrat, who is facing multiple criminal investigations, promptly ended his gubernatorial bid and resigned from Congress.
Yee said the contest would probably go down as “one of the most unusual, unpredictable and unsettling races in modern California history.”
“I certainly could not have imagined the twists and the disturbing turns that this race has taken,” she said. “But through it all, my values and my vision for California has never wavered.”
“Voters are scared right now, and I think they really are placing a lot of prominence on a fighter in chief against this Trump administration,” she said.
Though she was prepared to be a governor that would push back against the Trump administration, Yee said her calm demeanor did not help her grab attention.
“We are living in like a reality TV era, where to get traction, you have to either be the loudest, you have to have gimmicks. You’ve got to do what you’ve got to do to get attention. I got no gimmicks. I have no scandals,” she said before calling herself “Boring Betty.”
Yee, 68, was well regarded by Democrats during her tenure in Sacramento.
But she never had the financial resources to aggressively compete in a state with many of the most expensive media markets in the nation.
Yee reported raising nearly $583,000 in 2025 for her gubernatorial bid, according to campaign fundraising reports filed with the California secretary of state’s office. Yee’s announcement that she is dropping out of the race came days before the latest financial disclosures will be publicly reported.
Despite being elected to the state Board of Equalization twice and as state controller twice, Yee was not widely known by most Californians. She never cracked double digits in gubernatorial polls.
Her name will still appear on the ballot. She was among the candidates who rebuffed state Democratic Party leaders’ request this year to reconsider their viability amid fears that the party could be shut out of the November general election because of the state’s unique primary system. The top two vote-getters in the June primary will move on to the November general election, regardless of party affiliation.
Though California’s electorate is overwhelmingly Democratic, the makeup of the gubernatorial field makes it statistically possible for Republicans to win the top two spots if Democratic voters splinter among their party’s candidates. Yee said fear of that scenario playing out “kind of took over” the gubernatorial race.
“Was it possible? Yes. Was it plausible? No, we’re in California. That was not going to happen,” she said, adding that the top-two primary system “has got to go.”
The daughter of Chinese immigrants, Yee said she was disappointed that other Asian American donors and community members did not show up for her as “robustly” as they had in the past.
“We had the opportunity to make history,” she said. “I’m going to want to do a deep dive about … what was it about my campaign that just did not resonate with them.”
Still, Yee was beloved by Democratic Party activists and previously served as the party’s vice chair.
No Democratic candidate reached the necessary threshold to win the party’s official endorsement at its February convention, but Yee came in second with support from 17% of delegates despite calls for her to drop out of the race.
“Every poll shows that this race is wide open, and I know this party,” she said in an interview at the convention. “Frankly, I’ve been in positions where it’s been a crowded field, and we work hard and candidates emerge.”
Yee became emotional Monday as she thanked her supporters and family, including her husband, siblings and mother. “She’s now 103 years old, and her life and voice and wisdom are my compass,” Yee said.
The gubernatorial primary will take place June 2, though voters will start receiving mail ballots in about two weeks.
-
Rhode Island10 seconds ago
RI just moved its primary elections for 2026. Here’s why, and when.
-
South-Carolina6 minutes ago
SC lawmakers’ second push to ban most abortions advances
-
South Dakota12 minutes agoTim Begalka seeks re-election to South Dakota Senate
-
Tennessee18 minutes agoTennessee Kids Serve Summer Challenge 2026: First Lady Lee invites students to give back
-
Texas24 minutes agoGlam influencer who drowned during Texas Ironman had battled flu but ignored pleas to ditch race
-
Utah30 minutes agoOne hospitalized in St. George after rollover crash south of Utah-Arizona border
-
Vermont36 minutes ago7 Prettiest Small Towns In Vermont
-
Virginia42 minutes agoVirginia mother slams Steve Descano for protecting illegal immigrants, calls for DOJ probe