Search

$370 Billion in Taxpayer Dollars for WHAT? The Matching Funds Fairness Doctrine

by Lawrence Kadish October 9, 2022 at 4:30 am

The recent Schumer-Manchin so-called Anti-Inflation Climate Bill and the actions of US President Joe Biden have seemingly resulted in a $370 billion slush fund in the hands of not a climate change expert, but a power broker, John Podesta, and will likely find its way into the 2022 and 2024 elections for Democrat candidates.

Accordingly, members of Congress must make a correction with a FAIRNESS DOCTRINE, allowing $370 billion in matching funds to be put into the hands of the Republican primary winners in order to level the playing field.

After all, if, in the run-up to the 2020 election, $419 million could swing votes to that extent, what will a thousand times that funding be able to buy?

Although private funding by Zuckbucks has been "banned or restricted" in quite a few counties or states, public funding has not been banned. And what do you know, thanks to Congress, here it is!

How it works, as Mollie Hemingway notes, is:

"Wisconsin [which Biden won by just 20,000 votes] is a prime example of how a supposed nonpartisan 'get out the vote group' really was a Democratic Party-aligned effort to flip a state back their way.

"The Center for Technology and Civic Life, funded by Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg and founded by three Democratic operatives, said their mission was to ensure voting could be 'done in accordance with prevailing public health requirements' to 'reduce the risk of exposure to coronavirus.'

"But really they were infiltrating local election operations and pushing for as many Democrats as possible to vote by mail....

"Once early voting started, Woodall-Vogg would provide him with a daily update on the numbers of absentee ballots returned and still outstanding in each ward, prized information for a political operative.

"'Here's what I'll need,' Spitzer-Rubenstein wrote to her in late October, '1) Number of ballot preparation teams, 2) Number of returned ballots per ward, 3) Number of outstanding ballots per ward.'...

"If a ballot was going to be voided for not following instructions, the Democratic groups were happy to step in to 'cure' the ballot."

In another article, Hemingway states:

  1. " The money was not spent on COVID-related issues. For instance, the three counties that received the most Zuck Buck funding spent only 1.3 percent of that funding on personal protective equipment. The rest was spent on salaries, laptops, vehicle rentals, attorneys' fees for public records requests, mail-in balloting and other measures that allowed elections offices to hire activists to work the election. Not all 159 counties in Georgia received the funding. Of those that did, Trump-voting counties received an average of $1.91 per registered voter, while Biden-voting counties received, on average, $7.13 per voter.....

  2.  Trump won Georgia by more than five points in 2016. He lost it by three-tenths of a percentage point in 2020. On average... most counties moved Democratic by less than one percentage point in that time. Counties that didn't receive Zuck Bucks showed hardly any movement, but counties that were funded by Zuck Bucks moved, on average, 2.3 percentage points more Democratic....

  3. Trump counties received an average of $0.59 per capita, while Biden counties averaged $2.85 per capita...

  4.  Philadelphia, the most richly funded Biden county, received $6.32 per capita, compared to a mere $1.12 for Berks, the most

richly funded Trump county."

To assure election integrity, it seems only appropriate that the same amount be available to both political parties.

Lawrence Kadish serves on the Board of Governors of Gatestone Institute.

12 views0 comments