Stacey Abrams-founded organization faces layoffs after ethics fine

The New Georgia Project, founded by Stacey Abrams, has undergone significant staff reductions after being hit with a sizeable state ethics penalty.

The organization, tasked with voter engagement, enacted layoffs soon after being fined $300,000 for campaign finance infractions linked to Abrams' 2018 run for governor and other campaigns, Fox News reported. 

In a timeline that began on December 27, The New Georgia Project (NGP) started reducing its workforce, with layoffs continuing into January. The backdrop to these terminations is a state ethics commission's decision to penalize NGP, including its affiliated political action fund, for campaign-related violations. Specifically, the nonprofit faced accusations of improperly supporting Abrams' gubernatorial bid through unreported donations and expenditures.

Ethics Commission Finds Campaign Violations

According to the ethics commission, NGP and its fund amassed over $7 million during the 2018 election cycle, benefiting Abrams and other Democratic candidates. These fundraising and reportage irregularities drew criticism from multiple quarters. Additionally, the group faced scrutiny in relation to a 2019 voter referendum in Gwinnett County, adding to its list of challenges.

Beyond the immediate fallout, historical leadership figures such as Raphael Warnock, now a senator, are linked to the NGP. While Abrams founded the group in 2014 and left in 2017 to pursue the governor's office, Warnock chaired the board until 2020. The organization played an instrumental role in helping Democrats secure victories in Georgia during the 2020 elections, marking a turning point for the traditionally Republican state.

Economic Downturn Cited as a Factor

Current NGP policy director Stephanie Ali addressed the layoffs via a statement on a crowdfunding platform. According to Ali, the "reductions in force" were driven by economic challenges and decreased monetary support during a non-election year. However, the context of the state-imposed fine suggests a wider array of contributing factors leading to the nonprofit’s financial strain.

Abrams expressed disappointment over the organization's setbacks, directing her thoughts to those affected by the job cuts. Despite NGP’s current challenges, Abrams affirmed her unwavering belief in its foundational mission to ensure that every Georgian has the opportunity to participate in democratic processes.

Republican Reactions to the Controversy

Critics of Abrams have not minced words in their response to the situation. Georgia's Lieutenant Governor Burt Jones accused her of misleading tactics and criticized the nonprofit's actions as a repeat offense in Georgia's political sphere. Meanwhile, Cody Hall, another critic, posed rhetorical questions about Abrams' knowledge of the violations, implicitly questioning her involvement or awareness.

Such sentiments were echoed by the Republican Senate President of Georgia, John F. Kennedy, who described the recent NGP developments as just "the tip of the iceberg." He speculated on potential future issues, suggesting that Abrams may continue to challenge campaign finance boundaries until external pressures intervene.

Focus on Voter Registration Achievements

Despite current adversities, NGP has been credited with significant accomplishments, notably aiding in the registration of 55,000 Georgians to vote—particularly targeting Black and younger demographics. These efforts were instrumental in altering the state's political climate, contributing to crucial Democratic victories.

As the situation unfolds, the story of The New Georgia Project serves as a case study of the intricate ties between nonprofit activities, political campaigns, and legal boundaries. The political landscape in Georgia remains dynamic, underscored by evolving narratives such as these.

Amidst the legal controversies and job losses, the conversation around voter engagement and ethical conduct in politics persists. While the implications of NGP's challenges resonate across political circles, the discourse reflects broader concerns about transparency and accountability in electoral efforts.