Newly released tax filings and internal Democratic campaign research have shed light on the immense influence of left-leaning political spending and messaging in the 2024 US election cycle, revealing how vast sums of so-called "dark money" and strategic advertising shaped key outcomes from the presidential race to crucial ballot initiatives in California.
On November 16, 2025, major US media outlets obtained tax filings showing that the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a powerful hub for undisclosed left-wing donations, poured nearly $311 million into political and ideological campaigns during 2024. This figure, reported by multiple sources including Axios and The New York Times, more than doubled the group’s outlays from the previous year but remained below its 2020 peak of almost $410 million, when Democrats secured unified control of Washington.
Despite what party strategists described as "bitter losses" for Democrats in the 2024 presidential and Senate contests, the leadership of the Sixteen Thirty Fund remained upbeat about the movement’s trajectory. Amy Kurtz, the Fund’s president, insisted in a public statement that recent off-year election results, where Democrats performed better, signaled ongoing momentum and justified their long-term approach to political progress. "Political progress is built over time, not in a single election cycle," Kurtz emphasized, according to Axios.
The Sixteen Thirty Fund, registered as a 501(c)(4) social-welfare nonprofit, has emerged as one of the most influential vehicles for left-leaning "dark money"—a term used across the political spectrum to describe groups that are not required to disclose their donors. The Fund is managed by Arabella Advisors, a consultancy at the heart of an extensive network of liberal advocacy organizations. Critics, including some on the left and right, argue that such arrangements allow wealthy donors to wield outsized influence over elections and policy debates while evading transparency rules that bind traditional campaign committees and parties.
The new filings reveal that the Fund raised more than $282 million in 2024, with over 60% of that total coming from just five wealthy donors. The largest single donation reached $58.9 million, while another donor contributed $51.4 million. Although the Fund does not publicly identify its contributors, previous disclosures from other groups have linked its financing to networks associated with Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss and the philanthropic empire of George Soros.
Even as the Fund publicly supports increased disclosure requirements for nonprofits, its own operations underscore the growing reliance of the American left on large, untraceable infusions from wealthy patrons. The group channeled almost $63 million into super PACs and political committees, and spent more than $15 million directly on political activity. These funds underwrote advertising, voter mobilization, and last-minute interventions in tightly contested races.
Among the major beneficiaries, Your Community PAC received $6.7 million and emerged as an aggressive, late-stage supporter of former Vice President Kamala Harris and Democratic candidates in traditionally conservative states. The Fund also routed money to super PACs backing Democratic House and Senate campaigns, as well as organizations aligned with the Harris presidential bid. Notably, America Votes—a coalition focused on boosting turnout among left-leaning voters—secured a nearly $28 million grant, the largest single outlay reported by the Fund.
The Fund’s influence extended to state ballot campaigns, including a $14 million push for expanded abortion access in Florida and $6 million for an anti-gerrymandering initiative in Ohio, both of which ultimately failed. Other significant grants went to North Fund ($6.8 million), another opaque advocacy entity run by Arabella Advisors, and Unrig Our Economy ($5.1 million), which campaigns on labor and economic issues.
Climate activism remained a central focus, with the Fund steering millions toward environmental pressure groups lobbying for aggressive climate legislation. The League of Conservation Voters received $11.8 million, the Climate Equity Action Fund $6.9 million, and the Climate Jobs National Resource Center Action Fund $5.8 million. Advanced Energy United, a clean-energy business association, was awarded $3.5 million. These grants underscore the Fund’s longstanding role in supporting the infrastructure of US climate activism.
Much of the Fund’s activity occurs out of public view thanks to its reliance on fiscal sponsorship—a structure that allows it to host multiple advocacy groups internally without requiring separate public disclosures. This setup enables rapid deployment of new political projects, broad spending, and nationwide operations with minimal transparency. Initiatives believed to operate under the Fund’s umbrella include Protect Our Care Action (which campaigns against Republican health-care proposals), Galvanize Action (targeting moderate women voters), and Paid Leave for All (pushing for federal paid-leave legislation). Kurtz has defended this model as essential for "flexibility and speed in an increasingly competitive political environment."
While the flow of money has drawn scrutiny, the impact of political messaging has also come under the microscope. On the same day as the tax filings’ release, Axios reported that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) delivered the most effective advertisement in California’s recent Proposition 50 campaign, according to private research conducted by the Democratic Party’s main super PAC, Future Forward.
Future Forward’s internal report found that Ocasio-Cortez’s direct-to-camera ad outperformed spots featuring California Governor Gavin Newsom, the proposition’s chief public advocate, and even former President Barack Obama. In the ad, Ocasio-Cortez drew a direct line between the technical issue of redistricting and everyday concerns, warning, "Donald Trump is redrawing election maps to force through a Congress that answers only to him." She added that stopping Trump’s redistricting push was critical "for our health care, our paychecks and our freedoms. With Prop 50, we can stop him."
According to Aaron Strauss, Future Forward’s head of data and analysis, Ocasio-Cortez’s ad increased support for Proposition 50 by 5.1 percentage points—the largest jump of any ad tested. Obama’s direct appeal was the next most effective, boosting support by 4.3 points. The super PAC tested 16 ads in total, including those from Newsom, Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett, and California Senator Alex Padilla.
Proposition 50, which voters approved by a 20-point margin, will give Democrats up to five more US House seats in California and counteract Republican-led redistricting in Texas. The campaign supporting the measure primarily ran Ocasio-Cortez’s ad digitally, including a Spanish-language version, rather than on television. Newsom’s spokesperson, Nathan Click, told Axios, "The governor is very grateful to all of the leaders from across the party who came together to help Prop 50 pass by a 20-point margin." Future Forward and Ocasio-Cortez’s team did not comment further.
Strauss, in his internal email, noted that the ad’s success might have been more about the message than the messenger: "The most persuasive ads connect politics to voters’ daily lives." Still, the results have fueled speculation that Ocasio-Cortez could be a formidable contender in a future Democratic presidential primary—potentially even against Newsom in his home state—given California’s outsize role in awarding Democratic delegates.
The revelations from both the Sixteen Thirty Fund’s filings and Future Forward’s research highlight how left-leaning groups are leveraging unprecedented financial resources and strategic messaging to influence American politics, even as debates about transparency and the ethics of "dark money" continue to swirl. With new campaign cycles on the horizon, the question of who funds the message—and how effectively that message resonates—remains at the heart of the nation’s political battles.
