New Bill Bans Non-Profits from Funding Election Operations Starting 2026

The “Safeguarding Trust in Our Politics Act” cuts straight to how elections are funded in the U.S. Specifically, Section 2 of this bill bans all 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations—think non-profits, charities, and foundations—from giving any money to state or local governments if that money is intended or expected to be used for running elections. This isn’t about campaigning; it’s about the logistics: the polling places, the voting machines, the staff training. If this passes, the ban kicks in for tax years beginning after December 31, 2025.

The Ban on Private Election Funding

What this means in practice is that a major source of supplemental funding for election administration is being shut down. For years, non-profits have stepped in to help local election offices, especially those in smaller or under-resourced counties, cover costs for things like buying better equipment or running voter education programs. The bill prohibits both direct funding—like a grant specifically earmarked for buying new ballot scanners—and indirect funding. The indirect ban is the tricky part: a 501(c)(3) can't give money to a state or local government if they “reasonably expect” that money will end up being used to administer public office elections. This language is broad and could create a lot of confusion and legal risk for organizations trying to support local governments on non-election issues.

Who Feels the Pinch?

If you live in a county that struggles to fund its election office, this change could hit close to home. State and local governments are ultimately responsible for election costs, but many rely on these non-profit funds to bridge gaps, especially during major election cycles. Take a small, rural county: if they were relying on a foundation grant to pay for extra temporary staff or to increase the number of early voting locations, they’ll have to find that money elsewhere, likely from already strained local budgets. If they can’t, voters might see fewer polling places, longer lines, or reduced services. The organizations themselves—the 501(c)(3)s—will have to completely revise their funding strategies, even for non-partisan efforts aimed at increasing voter access or education.

The Trade-Off: Intent vs. Impact

The intent here is clear: to ensure that the administration of elections is funded solely by public money, removing any perceived or actual influence from private organizations. For those concerned about partisan influence in election mechanics, this offers a clean break. However, the practical challenge is significant. By removing a non-governmental safety net, the bill places the full, immediate burden on state and local taxpayers and budgets. If those governments don't step up with replacement funding, the real-world impact is slower, less efficient, or less accessible elections. The vagueness of the “reasonably expect” clause also means that any non-profit funding a local government for any purpose will have to be extremely careful not to accidentally run afoul of the new rule, potentially chilling legitimate charitable giving.