Two influential Georgia voter turnout organizations, which were pivotal in helping secure a win for Joe Biden in 2020 and the election of two Democratic U.S. Senators, have announced their closure due to unsustainable costs.
Founded in 2013 by Stacey Abrams, a prominent Democratic figure and two-time gubernatorial candidate, the Georgia Voting Project (GVP) and its sister organization, the New Georgia Project Action Fund (NGP), played a significant role in mobilizing voters, particularly from minority groups.
However, these organizations’ shutdowns come after a series of legal and financial hurdles that have ultimately undermined their operations.
In the wake of her defeat in the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race, Stacey Abrams founded the Georgia Voting Project and the New Georgia Project Action Fund to address what she described as "voter suppression" targeting non-white voters.
The groups aimed to counteract restrictive voting laws in Georgia, such as voter ID requirements and the purging of voter rolls, by boosting turnout among Black voters and other historically marginalized communities.
The organizations gained national attention during the 2020 election cycle, particularly after Georgia, once considered a reliably red state, flipped blue for the first time in nearly three decades in the presidential race.
Many credited Abrams and her organizations with mobilizing key voters in urban and suburban areas, leading to Biden’s victory in Georgia and the election of Senators Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock.
However, the success was not without controversy. Abrams’ groups faced accusations of operating outside the legal framework for political advocacy organizations, which would later result in significant financial and legal penalties.
The downfall of the New Georgia Project and the Georgia Voting Project came as a direct result of massive legal costs. In January 2023, the Georgia Ethics Commission imposed a $300,000 fine on the New Georgia Project and its affiliated groups for violating state campaign finance laws during the 2018 elections.
The penalty, which is the largest in the history of the commission, was levied for failing to register as independent campaign committees and for not reporting millions of dollars in contributions and expenditures.
According to reports, the groups were found to have accepted $4.2 million in contributions and spent $3.2 million—much of it supporting Abrams’ 2018 gubernatorial campaign—without the proper registration.
The commission’s investigation also uncovered significant discrepancies in reporting, with the New Georgia Project failing to disclose $646,000 in contributions and $174,000 in spending related to a public transit referendum in Gwinnett County in 2019.
This legal battle, compounded by the financial strain of trying to defend against these charges, became untenable for the organizations. As the cost of legal representation and fines mounted, it became clear that continuing operations was no longer sustainable.
In an official statement, Rev. James Woodall, the chair of the New Georgia Project Action Fund, acknowledged the challenges, emphasizing that the organizations had been unable to sustain their work due to "unsustainable costs" and mounting legal issues.
He underscored the urgency of continuing to work towards a "just and truthful world," even though the organizations would no longer be able to operate in their current form.
The closure of these organizations adds to a growing list of financial controversies surrounding Abrams and her political activism. Fair Fight Action, another organization she founded in 2018 to combat alleged voter suppression, has also faced scrutiny for its handling of funds and legal costs.
Like the New Georgia Project, Fair Fight Action was established to fight against what Abrams has called "voter suppression" tactics. However, the organization has been plagued by financial mismanagement allegations.
Between 2019 and 2020, Fair Fight Action paid a total of $9.4 million to Lawrence & Bundy, a law firm led by Abrams’ close friend and campaign chairwoman, Allegra Lawrence-Hardy.
This legal spending was part of an ongoing lawsuit against the state of Georgia, though it has been largely unsuccessful in achieving its goals. The total cost of legal fees for the lawsuit exceeded $39 million between 2019 and 2021, draining the organization’s funds.
By 2024, Fair Fight Action found itself in severe financial distress, facing $2.5 million in debt and only $1.9 million in cash reserves. The financial strain led to massive layoffs, with 75% of the organization’s staff let go in an effort to reduce overhead costs.
The organization's inability to balance its spending on legal battles with its mission to protect voting rights has raised questions about its long-term sustainability.
Despite the setbacks, Abrams has maintained a strong political presence, especially in Georgia, where she is still seen as a leading figure in the fight for voting rights.
However, the financial difficulties of her organizations, along with the ongoing controversies surrounding their operations, have left some Democrats questioning her future in Georgia politics.
The closure of these groups has sent shockwaves through the Georgia Democratic Party, particularly as the state prepares for the critical 2026 Senate elections.
Many Georgia Democrats fear that the fallout from the financial troubles surrounding Abrams’ organizations could have long-lasting effects on the party’s credibility and its ability to win elections in the state.
Greg Bluestein of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution quoted multiple Democratic leaders and activists who expressed concerns about Abrams potentially running for office again, especially given her past failures as a candidate.
Interviews with over three dozen party officials suggest that Abrams may not have the same level of support that she enjoyed after her 2018 gubernatorial loss.
Some party members even hinted that a different, more charismatic Democratic figure might emerge to lead the party in 2026, especially as Republicans have made significant inroads in the state.
“Interviews with Democratic officials suggest that Abrams may face a more divided and less enthusiastic base if she decides to run again,” Bluestein reported. “In Monroe County, Democratic Party Chair Yvonne Stuart said that there might be another candidate who could lead the party to victory in 2026.”
These concerns are amplified by the looming specter of the 2026 Senate race, where Georgia’s current Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff will seek re-election.
While Ossoff has been a strong advocate for progressive policies, his success in 2020 was in large part due to the successful mobilization of voters by groups like the New Georgia Project and Fair Fight Action. With these organizations now closed, the Georgia Democratic Party faces an uncertain future.
Nationally, the closure of these organizations has sparked a wider debate about the effectiveness of outside organizations in influencing elections. Many of Abrams' supporters continue to view her as a champion for disenfranchised voters, and they argue that the shutdown of these groups is a result of an unfair and politically motivated legal attack.
They contend that the allegations of financial mismanagement are being blown out of proportion by conservative critics who wish to discredit her efforts.
On the other hand, critics of Abrams point to the financial mismanagement and the legal penalties as proof that these organizations were not operating transparently and in accordance with state laws.
They argue that the massive legal costs incurred by Abrams’ groups could have been better spent on more direct voter outreach efforts, and that the shutdown of these organizations represents a failure in the broader effort to expand voting rights in Georgia.
As the Georgia Voting Project and New Georgia Project Action Fund close their doors, the future of Stacey Abrams' political career remains uncertain.
The financial difficulties faced by her organizations, combined with the legal challenges they have faced, have created significant hurdles for Abrams in her quest to continue shaping Georgia’s political landscape.
While her supporters remain loyal, the controversies surrounding her organizations may have lasting repercussions for her reputation.
As Georgia heads into the 2026 Senate race, the state’s Democratic Party must confront these challenges and decide whether to continue relying on Abrams’ brand of activism or look for new leadership to lead the fight for voting rights and electoral reform.
Whatever the outcome, the closure of these groups marks the end of a significant chapter in Georgia politics and raises questions about the future of progressive organizing in the state.
