CDC Employees Made More Than 8,000 Federal Contributions To PACs And Politicians Since 2015. Only 5 Went To Republican Causes, FEC Records Show

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Quote

 

Out of more than 8,000 federal contributions from over 550 CDC employees since 2015, only five went to Republican PACs or candidates.

The vast majority of donations went to ActBlue, an online fundraising platform for Democratic and left-leaning organizations. Other common recipients included Bernie 2020, Biden for President, Hillary for America, and Warren for President, Inc.

Employee contributions include those from epidemiologists, public health advisors, economists, physicians and health communication specialists working at both the Atlanta and Washington offices.

Employees at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have made more than 8,000 contributions totaling over $285,000 to Democratic candidates and causes since 2015, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation analysis of political contributions.

Only five contributions were sent to a Republican PAC or candidate. Out of these five contributions, which totaled just over $1,000, three sent money to President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign efforts, Federal Election Commission (FEC) records indicate.

 

Quote

 

The most common recipient was ActBlue, an online fundraising platform for Democratic and left-leaning organizations.

 

Other common recipients included Bernie 2020, Biden for President, Hillary for America, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Warren for President, Inc.

Aside from supporting specific candidates, employees also donated money to progressive organizations like Indivisible Action, which seeks to “elect progressive leaders, rebuild our democracy, and defeat the Trump agenda.”

 

https://dailycaller.com/2020/07/17/cdc-employee-political-contributions-democratic-pacs/

 

#Diversity

[Steeleballz 7,550]

      

     Wonder why this could be?

 

    Trump silences government scientists with gag orders

    https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/24/14372940/trump-gag-order-epa-environmental-protection-agency-health-agriculture

 

     NIH, DOE Office of Science face deep cuts in Trump's first budget

     https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/nih-doe-office-science-face-deep-cuts-trumps-first-budget

[90DayFinancier 910]

It is a curiosity to me that over the years the Republican members have transformed into a group of "believers" and pushed away from rational, scientific thought. In looking at the past that was not necessarily the case as far as I can tell.  I don't know if the culture changed or if the groups reorganized. The current denials around covid and the ongoing dispute about the facts of co2 are two important examples.

[yuna628 9,581]

Just wondering, if the individuals had donated to causes you approved of or those that skewed in the other direction, would you find it much better and appropriate and not worth complaining about? How much of a ratio of those on one side or another makes things better? Seems a bit cancel culture to me, if a person that has a job cannot privately donate to whatever they see fit without being accused of an agenda. If the entire bunch donated to some other causes, I doubt the dailycaller would kick up a fuss about it.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

11 minutes ago, 90DayFinancier said:

It is a curiosity to me that over the years the Republican members have transformed into a group of "believers" and pushed away from rational, scientific thought. In looking at the past that was not necessarily the case as far as I can tell.  I don't know if the culture changed or if the groups reorganized. The current denials around covid and the ongoing dispute about the facts of co2 are two important examples.

 

    It has definitely become more polarized, and with many of the issues, there seems to be less focus on resolving problems and more on keeping problems in the forefront to generate voter turnout. 

 

   That said, it's no surprise that scientists would donate more to democrat candidates. Just as we are not similarly surprised to find NRA members donate more to Republican candidates. People tend to donate to candidates that support issues that concern them. 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Steeleballz

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

It's polarized because you have people that aren't the country's elected leaders trying to usurp political choices from the elected person they sit under. 

 

When you saw Fauci do his little facepalm gag, that was orchestrated, along with all his other stances trying to facilitate the same non-science driven political approach. It's the same logic behind hauling administrative state people i.e. Yovanovich before Congressional hearings on impeachment to pointlessly testify about how Trump is a bad man and soliciting Youtube style reactions about a "tweet" in real time. After seeing this sort of garbage happen over and over again, it's very clear that this is about power, and taking power, the corruption of trying to use that power against someone elected President. CDC people are citizens and have the right to donate to whom they want, but the premise is quite clear given their public antics, and should be looked at in the greater scope of things done this year (from the incompetence to the Democratic Party skits of anti-Trumpism), they have no business being politically active against (to the point of trying to overthrow) a person they're supposed to be serving. They are not policy makers, they are the policy enforcers of someone else, and that someone is the President. 

 

Let me know if you need me to make it any clearer. I can see people are fumbling with this and naturally trying to steer the topic away to their own preferred topic of discussion, such as the NRA, which isn't a branch of the federal government.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[Ban Hammer 12,999]

one post removed for tos violation and draconian admin action taken.

 

charles

vj moderation

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,343]

8 hours ago, yuna628 said:

Just wondering, if the individuals had donated to causes you approved of or those that skewed in the other direction, would you find it much better and appropriate and not worth complaining about? How much of a ratio of those on one side or another makes things better? Seems a bit cancel culture to me, if a person that has a job cannot privately donate to whatever they see fit without being accused of an agenda. If the entire bunch donated to some other causes, I doubt the dailycaller would kick up a fuss about it.

I just want it 50/50. MOR life. Its lonely in the middle, but every one wants in. 

[Dashinka 23,781]

19 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

      

     Wonder why this could be?

 

    Trump silences government scientists with gag orders

    https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/24/14372940/trump-gag-order-epa-environmental-protection-agency-health-agriculture

 

     NIH, DOE Office of Science face deep cuts in Trump's first budget

     https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/nih-doe-office-science-face-deep-cuts-trumps-first-budget

Maybe they are all racist considering it is the Democrat Party.