Footnotes at bottom of article.
Not such a Fair Fight, now is it?
Fair Fight Action occupies the advocacy, voter-protection, and litigation end of the same Democratic-progressive infrastructure. Marc Elias formally appeared as counsel for Fair Fight, Inc.—the legally separate political committee that shares Fair Fight Action’s website and public branding—in Fair Fight, Inc. v. True the Vote. Fair Fight Action was itself pulled into that litigation as a counter-defendant. So, yes, the organizations are legally distinct; they merely share a name, website, political program, and courtroom battlefield—which apparently makes them total strangers for analytical purposes. (#1)
Elias’s connection to Catalist and NGP VAN
In the FEC’s Matter Under Review 6916, Elias co-signed the DNC’s response to allegations involving its relationships with both companies. The filing acknowledged that the DNC retained Catalist for data services, paid Catalist $60,000, and also retained NGP VAN. Elias and the other attorneys argued that those vendor relationships did not establish illegal coordination or DNC control of Catalist. He was not representing Catalist, NGP VAN, or Apax in that filing; he was representing the DNC and defending the legality of the data-and-software architecture surrounding it. In plain English, Elias was not building the machine—he was helping explain why the machine passed inspection. (#2)
The shared financial ecosystem is about as subtle as a marching band
America Votes, which openly calls itself the progressive community’s “coordination hub,” reported in its 2019 tax filing that it gave Fair Fight Action $500,000 while paying Catalist $535,775 and NGP VAN $738,229 for data services. Its 2021 filing repeated the pattern: $250,000 to Fair Fight Action, $485,615 to Catalist, and $850,822 to NGP VAN. That does not establish one legal owner issuing commands. It does establish that the advocacy organization, voter-data firm, and campaign-software provider were being supported through the same coordinating and financial center. (#3)
Apax enters downstream
Apax funds acquired EveryAction, and NGP VAN continued as the political-organizing brand within the resulting Apax-backed Bonterra structure. Thus, Apax does not need to control Fair Fight Action or Marc Elias to possess an economic interest in expanding the software infrastructure surrounding their political work. More progressive organizations, litigation campaigns, donors, volunteers, and voter-contact programs mean more demand for the underlying technology. Apparently, financial incentives only qualify as influence when someone is careless enough to title the meeting invitation “Master Plan.” (#4)
FOOTNOTES:
-----------------
(#1) https://fairfight.com/
(#2) https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/6916/16044393454.pdf
(#3) https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/264568349
(#4) https://www.apax.com/news-views/apax-funds-create-landscape-defining-social-good-software-platform/