• A $100 million scheme funneled through progressive groups like the Sixteen Thirty Fund has swayed ballot initiatives in 25 states, including Ohio, targeting abortion, election law changes and drug decriminalization.
• A 2021 Federal Election Commission ruling allowed foreign nationals to fund ballot measures — bypassing traditional oversight — sparking bipartisan criticism over foreign interference.
• Over $14 million in foreign-linked funds supported abortion expansion and drug decriminalization in Ohio, despite 85% of voters opposing foreign influence. The state later banned foreign contributions, but not before potential gerrymandering impacts.
• Watchdogs warn that without federal action to close the FEC loophole, foreign meddling will persist — turning ballot initiatives into ideological battlegrounds. Bipartisan momentum is growing, but the future of election integrity remains uncertain.

A $100 million foreign dark money scheme, uncovered by the America First Policy Institute, reveals how anonymous donations from abroad have swayed ballot initiatives in 25 states, including Ohio’s controversial 2024 abortion and drug decriminalization measures. The findings revive debates over election integrity, congressional inaction and the growing power of progressive groups like the Sixteen Thirty Fund to bypass state legislatures. The investigations also highlight a 2021 Federal Election Commission ruling that opened the door to foreign funding, despite widespread bipartisan public opposition.

The foreign funding pipeline

The Sixteen Thirty Fund, a major backer of progressive causes, emerged as the primary conduit for a shadowy network of foreign donors seeking to influence U.S. policy, according to a new report by the America First Policy Institute. Researchers traced over $100 million in foreign-linked contributions to initiatives in states such as Ohio, Arizona, Michigan and North Dakota. The funds targeted divisive issues like abortion access, election law changes and drug decriminalization — policies often deemed too extreme to pass through traditional legislative processes.

This influx leveraged a 2021 Federal Election Commission ruling permitting foreign nationals to donate to ballot measures, a system critics labeled a “loophole” to evade oversight. Caitlyn Sutherland, executive director of Americans for Public Trust, told Fox News the practice allowed foreign billionaires to “impose their will on U.S. citizens,” using ballot measures to sidestep scrutiny. The findings show 16 states, including Ohio, have already banned foreign contributions following recent scandals, but most laws exclude foreign individuals, focusing only on corporate entities.

A closer look at Ohio’s 2024 stakes

Ohio’s experience epitomizes the controversy. Over $14 million in foreign-linked funds poured into campaigns backing abortion expansion and reduced penalties for fentanyl possession, despite 85% of Ohio voters opposing foreign involvement in state politics. Initiatives promoted by the Sixteen Thirty Fund included constitutional amendments mandating abortion access through tax dollars and decriminalizing drug possession — a stark contrast to conservative-leaning public sentiment.

In response, Ohio legislators enacted a 2024 law banning all foreign contributions to ballot measures. Yet, the damage had been done: the report notes foreign money also spurred gerrymandering schemes disguised as “democracy reforms,” which could have altered congressional redistricting. “They know their far-left agenda can’t withstand scrutiny,” Sutherland said, “so they cut to the ballot box with foreign money.”

Litigation, public backlash and the fight for reform

The scandal has ignited calls for federal action after years of state-by-state patchwork reforms. California, Colorado and Washington have curbed foreign corporate contributions, but only eight states have strict bans on both individuals and entities. A 2022 University of Maryland poll found 80% of voters — across party lines — favor a nationwide prohibition.

Congress remains gridlocked, however. Democrats, who historically supported ballot measures, have yet to address foreign interference concerns, even as Republican-led states push legislation. Meanwhile, the Sixteen Thirty Fund defends its activities, stating its contributions comply with all laws. “Our donations advance reproductive rights and democracy,” the group said in a Fox News statement.

Watchdog organizations counter that compliance with lax state rules doesn’t align with public intent. “Democracy doesn’t mean letting foreign dark money rewrite state constitutions,” Sutherland said. “States are waking up — but Congress must act to stop this nationwide.”

The unfinished battle for election integrity

The revelations underscore how outdated laws and a lack of federal consensus have left ballot initiatives vulnerable to foreign interference — a threat that goes beyond partisan divides. As more states follow Ohio’s lead, the push for sweeping reforms intensifies. Yet without congressional action to close the FEC’s 2021 loophole, the same money could return voter mobilization and funding patterns mentioned because foreign donors continue exploiting America’s democratic process.

The political stakes are high: ballot initiatives allow organizations to bypass lawmakers altogether, making them ideal tools for ideological “bombs.” As Sutherland noted, “The more states act, the clearer the bipartisan demand becomes — foreign money has no place in American democracy.”

The nation must now decide: Is the ballot initiative system a grassroots triumph or a backdoor for foreign agendas? The answer could redefine electoral ethics in the coming years.

A nationwide tipping point?

The Sixteen Thirty Fund scandal lays bare a fractured system where progressive policies, lucrative donor agendas and foreign money collide in less-protected state contests. With bipartisan sentiment favoring reform and momentum building in key legislatures, the debate over foreign influence may finally force federal action — a testament to how state-level fights can reshape national priorities. As voters and lawmakers seek transparency, the question remains whether democracy can outpace its vulnerabilities.

Sources include:

YourNews.com

AmericaFirstPolicy.com

TheGatewayPundit.com