Ranked Choice Voting – Rigged, Ranked, Wretched! – with Mike Vallante – [Ep. 206]

Linda J. Hansen:  Welcome. Thank you for tuning in to this episode of the Prosperity 101® Breakroom Economics Podcast. My name is Linda J. Hansen, your host and the author of Prosperity 101®- Job Security Through Business Prosperity: The Essential Guide to Understanding How Policy Affects Your Paycheck, and the creator of the Breakroom Economics Online course, the book, the course and the entire podcast library can be found on Prosperity101.Com. I seek to connect boardroom to break room and policy to paycheck by empowering and encouraging employers to educate employees about the public policy issues that affect their jobs. My goal is to help people understand the foundations of prosperity, the policies of prosperity, and how to protect their prosperity by becoming informed, involved, and impactful. I believe this will lead to greater employee loyalty, engagement and retention, and to an increased awareness of the blessings and responsibilities of living in a free society. Listen each week to hear from exciting guests and be sure to visit Prosperity 101.com

Thank you so much for joining with me today. Many of my listeners are aware of the history I've had working in politics and of my desire to advance America first freedom promoting policies, including the policies of free and fair elections. Election integrity is a bedrock of a free society. While election fraud has likely been occurring in some form since the very first election ever held, the increase of fraud and the rampant rise in the variety of methods used has made identification of fraud more difficult. On this podcast, we have discussed the lack of security in voting machines, the widespread abuse of absentee voting and mail in ballots, the importance of a proper and legal chain of custody for each ballot, protecting vulnerable voters, and the processes to expose illegal activity when discovered. We have also discussed creating election integrity task forces in local communities, and the importance of each person becoming involved at the local level. One very important topic we have covered is ranked choice voting. It has many names, including instant runoff voting or IRV or final five. But no matter the name, the system of voting is a danger to the integrity of our elections and to the ability of citizens to clearly choose their elected officials. Ranked choice voting is overly complicated and not very popular among most Americans.

If our goal is to create a process that makes it easy to vote and hard to cheat, then ranked choice voting should be totally rejected, for it creates confusion and discouragement among voters, and it increases opportunities for fraud. Here to discuss how this affects you, your family, your business, and your community is my guest, Mike Vallante. Mike Vallante currently serves as the director for the center for Election Integrity at the America First Policy Institute, known as AFPI. Mike has more than 40 years of experience in campaigns, public affairs, and business consulting. He has worked for clients around the country, including candidates, nonprofit organizations, associations and political organizations. Most recently, he served in the small business administration as an associate administrator of field operations. Mike understands politics and business, and he is committed to ensuring free and fair election processes for America. Thank you so much for joining me today, Mike.

Mike Vallante:

Thank you for having me. It's a great pleasure and great honor to be with you and to talk to the folks that listen to your podcast here, Linda, because they can make a difference. That's the important thing. They need to understand. They can definitely make a difference in making this country better.

Linda J. Hansen:

Yes, everybody can make a difference. That is how our founders created our system of government, that it's of the people, by the people, and for the people. And we the people are the ones who can make the difference. Too often we've just let it go to politicians and oftentimes power corrupts. And it's just a horrible thing that we've seen happen to America.

Mike Vallante:

History shows that, both recent history and in the past. And that's absolutely, people forget who they serve. And I think that's one of the problems that we face sometimes in state legislature, certainly in Congress, the halls of know, they forget who pays the bills. They forget. Or they think that people, I think sometimes they believe that people are so busy with life, which they are, that they're not going to pay attention. And so they can get away with things that they shouldn't be trying to get away with. Or they can try and sell people on ideas like rank choice voting, that if you listen to it, the advocates of ranked choice voting, it's not only a great election system, but I think it also cures male padded baldness like I have. I mean, it does everything. So the old adage, if it sounds too good to be true, it is. More than ever when it comes to RCV, that's a good mantra to keep in mind.

Linda J. Hansen:

Well, it truly is. And I've shared before on the podcast, but I've often worked the polls, and I know a recent election we had two people to vote for or two positions to fill. And so as we handed people the ballots, we said one name per position. And I can't even tell you how many spoiled ballots we had or how many times we had to throw them out redo, because people got confused. And I remember thinking, if it's confusing for some people to pick one name for each position, how must it be for ranked choice voting? I mean, just trying to explain ranked choice voting is confusing to me sometimes, but it is just to me, just a ridiculous mishmash of ideas in terms of how we would choose our elected officials. Can you explain to the listeners, it might be kind of difficult because it's rather confusing? Feels like you're in a maze of information. But could you explain to the listeners ranked choice voting?

Mike Vallante:

Well, I pull a rabbit out of my hat here. If I had a hat, and it would be like, okay, we've got these three people here, and then this fourth person comes in and they end up winning even though they got less votes. But it kind of is that way. I mean, basically what happens is you walk into your polling place and there are four people on the ballot, and instead of voting for the one person you think is the most qualified, you like the best is talking the issues that are important to you, expressing beliefs that you believe in as well. You're now supposed to pick. You're supposed to rank the four candidates. So you rank the person that you like the most, number one, and then you're supposed to rank the other three people now, even though you may hate the other three people. And I live in California, okay? So when I go in to vote, if I find one person on the ballot who even comes close to my conservative beliefs, I'm doing a novena for them before I go vote because I'm so happy to find four people on that ballot.

Forget about it, as we used to say back home in Rhode Island. But the idea is you got to rank these people. And then what happens is when the polls close, they add up all the ballots, and the first ballot winners are the people that came in first, and the person that got the least number of votes is dropped off the equation. And then what they do is they take all of the rest of the people, the remaining three, and they see who voted for number two and who voted maybe the ones that dropped off. They're not in the process anymore. So it's this constant thing until someone gets to 50% plus one, which results in the fact that someone could conceivably finish third or even fourth in the race and still end up being declared the winner. The person, this is the most basic way I can put it. The person with the most votes doesn't always and sometimes very rarely wins. There is something fundamentally un-American about that concept, whether it's in politics or any other competitive situation. Usually the person that performs the best has the most votes, the most goals, the most, hits the most, whatever. They're the ones that win. In this process, you have someone that could finish third or fourth ending up being the winner. There's something fundamentally wrong with that. But more than that, and that's what happens for the voter. There are also other factors that come into play. I walk into the polling place and I see four people. There's only one that I'm voting for. So I vote for that person. Well, if that person doesn't finish in the top three, my vote is now discarded completely, which means that if you went in and you said, well, I like this person, and then I'll vote for these three others in a ranked order, your vote will continue.

Your ballot will continue to be counted until the end. Mine will not. Which means that your vote and your ballot is worth more than my ballot. And that is fundamentally, by the way, unconstitutional because the last time I checked, even including, by the way, the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which will never be confused with a democratic or constitutional group. But the new Supreme Court in Wisconsin just ruled on redistricting, saying that the lines that were drawn by the Republicans in the legislature violated one person, one vote. Well, RCV violates one person, one vote unless you vote for all four people. So even the extremely liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court proved that point, that if there's a process in place where your ballot is worth more than my ballot or your ballot is counted more times than my ballot, that is fundamentally, you know, maybe I'm not here to tell people what to do, but maybe someone in Wisconsin might want to look at that, since the Supreme Court just established within the last week or two that one man, one vote, or one person, one vote is something that they could decide to throw out a whole bunch of redistricting lines. That's kind of what rank choice voting is. It is something that is bad for the voter. It's bad for the candidate. It's also bad for the election workers because they're under so much pressure as it is to get it right, to get it quickly, to get it in a speedy manner so that people get results and there's not questions about what's going on behind the scenes, that they have to now get all of these results in all of these different tabulations. It opens the door to many different ways, whether it's like you had mentioned, chain of custody or other things that can cause people to not have confidence or have transparency in our election system.

Linda J. Hansen:

Well, it really does. And it's so confusing to so many people. I think that whole chain of custody issue is something that is not discussed enough. I think that the 2020 election and the 2022 elections brought that to light in so many states how that was handled. But ranked choice voting is something that is being promoted as a better way, and it really isn't. I know in other interviews I've done on ranked choice voting, we've talked about how studies have shown that in pretty much every election that ranked choice voting is used, we see disenfranchised voters, and that is just not very much so. Yes. And so could you spread some light on that? Maybe some examples?

Mike Vallante:

Absolutely. And the examples I'll use are not from conservative institutions like maybe pepperdine or Chapman University or something. Okay, let's start with the University of Minnesota, the Hubert Humphrey Institute of Public Policy. You aren't going to find anything more liberal than that. I lived in Minnesota for about three years. I love the state. But you will not find a more. Even UC Berkeley, I don't think, is as liberal as the University of Minnesota. They put out a study that said they looked at the different things that the proponents of RCV said it would do. The first thing they said it would do, it would take the bitterness of campaigns, the negative campaigning out of the equation. What they found is that it actually increases it. It creates more partisan divide. They said it would help increase the number of minority candidates that running. It did not. They said it would help create voter confidence. It did not.

All of the things they claimed it would do that the advocates claim. This report from this very liberal institution said otherwise. MIT in Massachusetts did a survey of it and specifically about the state of Maine, because they have had rank choice voting in Maine, they found the same things we also have, which is a policy think tank, like many others, that embrace the idea of America first, that people would say is conservative in nature, but look at some liberal groups. The NAACP filed a lawsuit in New York City saying that RCV was discriminatory against the minority community. The NAACP, and I think it was the urban League in Oakland, California, as a result of an election that was held where people had their vote discarded, they call it ballot exhaustion. They went in to vote for mayor. They didn't vote for all four people. They saw one person. That's who they liked. That's who they voted for. Well, what happened? They didn't get more than 50% of the vote. Those that did not vote for other people, their ballots were discarded. The person won by less than the number of votes that were discarded. I think it was like 18 or 19,000 ballots were discarded. Most of those were by minority voters. So they actually filed a suit. And what happened was the city of Oakland, which is supposed to be this big scion of openness and taking care of minorities and everything else, they were going to charge them. I don't know how much it was a page to get all of the information and they would have basically bankrupted the, you know, you've got those liberal groups that are pointing out the facts that it is not easier. It does disenfranchise people. It does not make elections any less nice or the campaigns any less aggressive and that it does not promote unity within the community.

In Arlington, Virginia, I mean, they just recently, it was in 2023, they have off year elections for local office. They tried it, they scrapped it. And that's a heavily, heavily Democrat area outside of Washington, DC. And so you look at those places, you don't even have to look at Alaska, which was a huge thing where the person who finished third or fourth ended up winning the congressional seat. You can look at Democrat enclaves and see how it has not worked amongst the minority community or the things that they say it's going to do. And that's why I think I do know why some people in Wisconsin are so rapidly for it. It has to do with this. We like to sing Dore Mi has to do with money. That's a basic rule in politics. Follow the money and you have people making campaign contributions to Democrat and republican legislators in Wisconsin to support things like final five and things of that nature and rank choice voting. And when you trace back where all that money comes from, you see it comes from a lot of the left wing groups that are getting money and channeling it into the political process. All of those things. People need to be aware of that. A good rule of thumb for anybody that's listening that doesn't have a lot of time to pay attention to politics. If it sounds too good to be true, chances are it's too good to be true.

Linda J. Hansen:

Well, that is true. So that is true. But the follow the money thing is very true. And not just with candidates, but with the consultants behind the candidates. We have to pay very close attention to their track record, who has funded them before, what organizations they've worked with and where some of their money comes from. Because a lot of times the consultants or organizations that are even outside the candidate campaign itself can be funded by these outside organizations that really do not have the best interest of the voter in mind. And so we really do need to alert people to why this is harmful and actually dangerous to our republic. But as we've talked before the interview, too, my heart is always to empower employers to educate employees about all the issues that affect their jobs. And I would huge issue that affects their jobs. We encourage employers to let employees get time off to vote. We encourage employers to allow people time to maybe volunteer to be a poll watcher or to be a poll worker even. We encourage employers to educate employees about the basic issues in their state and in the nation that will affect the viability of the company and their security of their job. But this is a tough one for employers to say, hey, we're going to talk about ranked choice voting today, but it's very important because helping the employees understand how critical it is for them to protect their vote. How would you recommend they share this information with employees?

Mike Vallante:

I think the biggest thing to understand in this is that, and if you haven't seen it, it doesn't matter if you're an employer or an employee. The first thing to understand is the policy. The politics impacts the policy and the policy impacts your life. That's the know. AFPI is a policy organization. We put out policies that put America first. But if you haven't seen again, whether you're an employee or an employer over the last three and a half years, how policy can change your life, then you haven't been paying attention because you see it every day when you go to the gas station. You see it every day when you turn on the news and you see people flooding over our southern border, not just into Texas or Florida, but now into states like Iowa and North Carolina and other places. So it's no longer a border issue. It's an American issue in every state. And what happens to all of the resources in that state when those resources now have to be diverted to take care of the problem that we have at the open borders in the south that's happened in the last three and a half years. You see it every day not only when you go to get gas, but when you get your electric bill because we no longer are energy independent. You see it every day when you go to the market because the foods cost more out here in California. You see it every day because know they've set in rules and regulations that say that you're going to have to buy an electric car, which I'm still trying to figure out, who has the extension cord at a home Depot that allows me to get an electric car because they don't have charging stations.

All of those things are policy stuff that impact you as a consumer and an employee and most importantly as an employer because this administration has been hostile to employers. Those are the kinds of things that I would say these are the issues you have to put forward to people because it not only affects your bottom line as an employer, it affects their bottom line as an employee. Their dollar is not going as far as it used to go. You just look in your grocery basket and you see what used to buy, what you used to be able to get for $100, and now what you can get for $100 if you can get it. I mean, for a while out here in California, I was trying to figure out what the hell happened. All the chickens. I mean, you go to the market and there's no chicken in the thing, and when you see it, it's like 699 a pound. Its like, is that a golden going to? What? So those kinds of things affect everybody from an employer standpoint. It also affects the work environment, the wage that has to be paid, all of the rules and regulations that this administration has put on employers, not necessarily to protect employees, but to protect unions, which don't always have the best interests of employees at heart, by the way. They have the best interests of their union bosses at heart. So all of those things plays into that. And I think that's what I would tell employers. The other thing I would tell them is to get to the point you had mentioned about the money stuff. Zuckerbucks was a big issue in 2020. So let's talk about that for a second. So different states have done things to stop Zuckerbucks. Wisconsin was one that tried through the legislature. The governor vetoed it, but other states have done it. But there are still ways. For example, foreign nationals cannot contribute to political campaigns or candidates. So what do they do? They contribute to third party organizations that then contribute to local organizations that then put money into politics, both in terms of candidates and in terms of ballot initiatives. We at AFPI, at the center for Election Integrity, actually had our chairman, Ken Blackwell, former secretary of state of Ohio, in Ohio, earlier this week testifying on that because the Ohio legislature wants to ban these organizations that receive foreign money, that basically launder that money through a system so that it can end up affecting ballot initiatives.

Those are the kinds of things that are going on while you every single day, whether you're employer or employee, are going to work making a living, trying to grow your business, to hire more people, pay the taxes, and contribute to your community. While you're all doing that, there's this other thing going on over here that you need to be aware of that has got a completely different agenda in place. That's why these things like tools like rank choice voting or final five are off the wall. Can I just say one other quick thing? Because on final five, I think it's important. Here's the other thing I would say to your people. Look at what happens when it's done someplace else. Final five, we call it here a jungle primary. Everybody's put in together. And again, the concept was that if you have everybody being able to vote in the same primary, whether you're a Republican, a Democrat, Green party, libertarian, independent, it's going to make for a more balanced and centric candidate pool. It's done just the opposite here in California, because you have the left, then you have the far left, and then you have the furthest left. It's ended up with candidates that are extremely on the fringe. So when you end up going to the ballot in November through a final five, someone who may have been a moderate or a conservative is pushed out because the people that have the money to impact those primaries are the labor union, the teachers union, and the liberal organizations. And so what you end up with is your choice is either way left or semi way left. And that creates policies that absolutely destroy, again, look to California and the business climate out here and all of the crazy laws that they pass out here because they have this final five jungle primary. And take a lesson from that before you import it into your state. That would be my advice.

Linda J. Hansen:

Well, that is really great advice. And we can see in a lot of these big cities, we can think of Oakland, San Francisco, we can think of Chicago, New York. If anyone is really paying attention and looking beyond the mainstream media, you can begin to see what's truly happening in these cities that have become sanctuary cities and they're overrun with illegals, they're overrun with crime, and they have defunded the police. And now I know some places, California, and there's other places in the nation that they're talking about deputizing illegals to be on the police force. And what could possibly go wrong right now in California, they actually had someone who was an illegal immigrant from, believe she was from China that was sworn in as an election inspector. It's like, what are we doing?

Mike Vallante:

Yeah, they were on board of election supervisors in. And her, by the way, her stated goal is to ensure that people who aren't citizens in the United States are able to vote.

Linda J. Hansen:

Yeah, it's crazy. So we who are taxpayers and we are the ones, like you mentioned, who go to work every day, who try to build our companies, pay our taxes, raise our families, these know we are paying for all of this. And you were talking about the money behind the scenes. And one of the things you said before the interview when we were just visiting was how just like water money will trickle through to the source and it just trickles through. And it's so secretive in so many ways, and they have so many different layers for how they fund things. And so we have to be very aware. And like you said, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. But anything that has to do with people that are not citizens and who the money, the foreign money, we have to look. So when I was talking before about following the money, not only the candidate and the campaign, but the consultants, but then these third party organizations that are funding these things, where is that money coming from? And you might have to look back a few layers. And there are people who are exposing these things, but usually they get called conspiracy theorists or crazy or they get taken off the Internet because they're telling truth. And so we just have to be willing to learn the truth about what's going on.

And I think a lot of times, people really don't want to accept the fact that it's as bad as it is, and they don't believe it can be as corrupt as it is. But as all of these things at different layers of government, whether it's elections or campaign finance or whatever it is, as we're finding the corruption and it's coming to the surface, I've often said it's like having an appendectomy. You have to, one, feel the pain. You have to have it diagnosed, and then you have to remove it. And so these are things that we're seeing here in America. We're definitely feeling the pain. We're beginning to dig down and find the so. But through the citizens of America who wake up and do their part as we the people, we need to take back that government. And when we say America first, we certainly don't mean America only. I mean, America's always been the beacon of freedom for the world. And we have been a nation that has given and given and given and offered freedom and hope and prosperity and money to many other nations. So I think that the media likes to paint us as isolationists and things, but no, America first. It's like in any kind of coaching or self help books, you're always know, take care of yourself first. You can't pour from an empty cup. Well, America needs to stay strong so we can pour from the cup of freedom. And that is just so true. So if you would have one final comment for the listeners in terms of how they should really approach this in their communities, like what they can do to prevent this in their communities. What would you say?

Mike Vallante:

I would say to get involved and get active. It doesn't take much. Having been in politics for as long as I have and having seen how public policy works, there's two things that move elected officials voices and money. You don't have to always put the money in. To your point, I do want to mention something. I think that's very important because it's just happened within the last, literally two or three days, the vice president of the United States, Kamala Harris, stood up and talked about how the Biden Harris administration were now going to automatically send out voter registration forms to anybody who got services from the Department of Health and Human Services. You want to talk about a quid pro quo? We've given you something, so now we're going to send you a voter registration card so that you can register to vote. They talked about paying college students to go register people to vote. They talked about paying college students to go be poll workers and poll watchers. Those are the kinds of things where they are abusive government services. That's not Biden Harris money there. That's our money there. That's the workers tax dollars that they pay.

That's the corporate taxes that the employers, you know, you now see, I don't want to call it the weaponization of government, but certainly the intervention of government to specific groups to help this current administration using resources that you and I pay for. People need to be aware of that kind of thing. And they need to counter that by taking the step to talk to people and to talk to their elected officials. Why these things are bad. There are many resources out there on the Internet. Americafirstpolicy.com, our institute, there's honestelections.org, there's TPUSA is another group. There are many other groups out there that have the information you need, but you need to take the action because if you don't, in that vacuum, what you just saw from the top levels of our federal government this past week and the intervention that they're doing will become the law or the rule of the land. And there's something inherently and fundamentally wrong with something like that because again, they're using taxpayer resources and it's not like they're going to everybody. They're going to a specific targeted group. That's like with Zuckerbucks. They went to a specific targeted group. If it was for everybody, it would be one thing but when you target it, there's a political purpose behind it, and that's what needs to be countered. And people can do that if they're willing to pick up the phone, shoot an email, show up at an event, and let their voice be heard. Politicians will pay attention when people gather and rally towards something.

Linda J. Hansen:

Well, that is true. And before we close, you touched on Zuckerbucks again. And I know we're really out of time, but there's probably listeners who aren't as familiar with that term or aren't really sure what that means in terms of election integrity. And for those of us in Wisconsin who have been paying attention and involved with election integrity, I know exactly what you're talking about. But could you give a brief explanation of Zuckerbucks to listen? Be unaware.

Mike Vallante:

In 2020, Mark Zuckerberg and his wife had a nonprofit, and they decided that they would get in the election administration business. And so what they did is they went to certain counties around the country and target states. Big surprise. Target counties, big surprise. Milwaukee and I think Brown county up in Green Bay, if I remember correctly, and said, we will give you money to help with your election administration if you do the following things. So there was what we call a quid pro quo. And when you stopped and looked at all of the money that they gave and where they gave most of that money, it was heavily focused on Democrat areas. I mean, there was dribs and drabs here in republican areas. But the lion's share was in places like in Wisconsin, would be in Milwaukee, in Pennsylvania in the 2020 election, it was Philadelphia, those kind of places where there is a heavily Democrat vote. And what they did is they were supposed to give for, what was it called?

Linda J. Hansen:

PPE.

Mike Vallante:

I think it was the personal protection stuff, like gloves, masks, hand sanitizer. Well, instead it went to things like voting machines. I think in Green Bay, they got a truck, an Ford F 150 truck. They used the money for other places like Philadelphia. They used it to send out mailers to turn people out. Again, not everybody, but just a targeted group. They used it for ads within hispanic community. Again, not everybody, just a target group. And so basically, it was an end run around the election administration being done by the government, which is the way it should be. It was an outside influence with a quid pro quo attached. Those are the kinds of things that happen. Those are the kinds of reasons, by the way, that over 60% of Americans do not have confidence in the election system in this country. There's a reason that many people have that feeling when you have people at that kind of level, it's not just Republicans or conservatives. It's across the board and there's a reason for it. And that's why. And I would put RCV and first five or final five into that same category.

Linda J. Hansen:

I would, too. And so for listeners, if you feel uneasy about election integrity and you feel like it could be compromised, then it's up to you. It's up to you. It's up to you. You need to make sure that maybe you're taking time off to be an election observer, be a poll watcher, take time off. It doesn't take a lot to actually become an election worker where you actually work within an official capacity. It's not that many days out of the year. Think of people who have given their lives for our freedom. Can you give a day or two or maybe three out of a year to make sure that you and your children and grandchildren can grow up in freedom, that you can keep the opportunity to maybe have your business, to create wealth, to provide jobs, to choose where you want to live? I mean, these are things that are so important and we have taken for granted in America. We need to stand up. And as I said at the beginning of the broadcast, election integrity is a bedrock of freedom and so we need to protect it. Well, thank you so much, Mike. And if people want to reach out to you, how should they do so?

Mike Vallante:

Best way is americafirstpolicy.com. I did want to make a plug. We have coming up on March 16, a no on ranked choice voting, the dangers of ranked choice voting workshop grassroots seminar in Brookfield at the whirly ball. I think we're going to play laser tag as well and have some fun. But we've got experts from around the country coming in to talk about it, to educate people about it. And you can check that out at a website. I have a phone number, if I can give it that, people can call if they're interested in attending. It's three eight five. Three nine eight one, seven seven seven, three eight five, three nine eight. Seventeen seventy seven. The event's on March 16 from ten till three at whirly ball. And if people are interested, they should call that number. They will learn a lot, a lot more than we've been able to communicate in this short period of time. And they'll learn from some great national experts of different organizations around the country.

Linda J. Hansen:

Well, thank you for that. And that for listeners all over, that is actually in Wisconsin. Brookfield, Wisconsin.

Mike Vallante:

Yes.

Linda J. Hansen:

Yeah. And will that be live stream at.

Mike Vallante:

They will people be able, I don't think it will be live streamed. I think a couple of times that they've tried to do that, they've had some technical issues with people trying to interrupt the, you know, it's an in person event.

Linda J. Hansen:

All right, well, listeners, please go to America First Policy Institute and you can contact Mike through there. But thank you so much, Mike, and thank you for your work to ensure free and fair elections for all citizens in America. Thank you.

Mike Vallante:

Thanks, Linda.

Outro:

Linda J. Hansen: Thank you again for listening to the Prosperity 101® Podcast. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, share, and leave a great review. Don't forget to visit Prosperity101.com to access the entire podcast library to order my newest book, Job Security Through Business Prosperity: The Essential Guide to Understanding How Policy Affects Your Paycheck or to enroll you or your employees in the Breakroom Economics online course. You can also receive the free e-book, 10 Tips for Helping Employees Understand How Public Policy Affects Their Paychecks. Freedom is never free. Understanding the foundations of prosperity and the policies of prosperity will help you to protect prosperity as you become informed, involved, and impactful. Please contact us today at Prosperity101.com to let us know how we can serve you. Thank you.