Obama promised us transparency

Good for them! And so are these lobbiest groups...oh, excuse me....charity, non-profit, think tanks:
- MoveOn.org
- Crossroads America
- Club for Growth
- Priorities USA (for Hillary Clinton - Oh, she'll be so glad to find out she doesn't consult with special interest groups!)

Oh....the Heritage foundation is one of those conservative 501(C)(3) groups that Lois Lerner decided to unilaterally outlaw. I got it!

By a stroke of good luck DonDiego is not required to notify The Heritage Foundation about the contributions alleged by pjstroh.

The chart from which pjstroh cites the suspect contributions, includes the note that the contributions were from individuals right next to the recipients' names; somehow this is missing from pjstroh's scandalous report.
[DonDiego notes that pjstroh's link does not work; this often happens when someone gets emotional/angry about a topic.]

Nonetheless, the link itself also includes the following note at the bottom of the linked page:
"All contributions to candidates from Heritage Foundation came from individuals.
Contributions from Individuals
$28,624
Contributions from PACs
$0 "

In the interest of full disclosure as a charitable organization, The Heritage Foundation is required to report contributions from individual members of the organization; The Heritage Foundation is prohibited from making political contributions.

What part of this does pjstroh not understand?

Employees of the Heritage Foundation donated a total of $50,000. Zero was donated by Heritage Foundation.

Oh! And 501c charity group, Heritage Foundation, runs political ads. But they're not a political special interest group....they're just a charity like Unicef, or something.


$100k Charity campaign hurts Rubio's immigration plan. and boosts Donald Trump's position on the issue.

From pjstroh's own source:
"This isn't to suggest the ad is illegal. 501(c)(3) organizations have a fair bit of scope in their activity. Not every statement for or against a bill counts as lobbying and not every ad that mentions an elected official counts as campaign activity."

If the "ad" were deemed not legal, i.e. "a campaign activity", and the Heritage Foundation in violation of the Law pertaining to 501c(3) organizations, DonDiego supposes someone would have challenged them and DonDiego would, as always, support enforcement of the Law.
Perhaps pjstroh should pursue this.
n.b. Heritage Foundation for Action was created as a "sister organization" to The Heritage Foundation for the express purpose of lobbying and advocacy; DonDiego supposes the two organizations know the difference.

If the "ad" is deemed legal, as f'rinstance a message opposing a piece of legislation, the Heritage Foundation is just performing an educational public service.

For the record, The Heritage Foundation has published a study, . . . that's what think-tanks do, . . . claiming Senator Rubio's Immigration Plan would be prohibitively expensive.
And Heritage Action for America gives scores Senator Rubio a 94% score, well above-average even for Republicans, as of 23 March 2016.
This adds credence to the supposition that the ad referenced is, in fact, an informational treatise addressing a Bill, not a political ad.

For the record, . . . yes, Unicef is a 501c(3) organization just like The Heritage Foundation.

I just cant believe someone as educated and articulate as BM isn't familiar with The Heritage Foundation.

When did I say it was illegal? I suggested it was political. But I have learned quite a bit from DonDiego on this thread..

Without any fear of being labeled a "Special Interest group" a charity can:

- take unlimited money from undisclosed donors
- write federal legislation and hand it off to Washington Politicians
- compile a list of Supreme Court Justices and hand it off to a presidential candidate
- publish political propaganda to sway public opinion

I'm glad we have Washington Outsiders like Donald Trump outsourcing his leadership to such groups. Its such a refreshing change from all those nasty "special interest groups" that dictate policy to his opponents.

PJ told us that the Heritage Foundation donated to political organizations. Was this true, PJ?

pjstroh is mistaken as to poor old DonDiego's tutelage. pjstroh knows lots more than DonDiego.

i. DonDiego does not recall employing the term "special interest group". DonDiego has not been discussing what "special interest groups" can do or cannot do. He is unaware of the proper definition of "special interest group; it sounds like what one calls an organization with whom he disagrees - just to be disagreeable.

ii. DonDiego is not aware that a charity can take unlimited money from undisclosed donors. [DonDiego does not recall any posts addressing this topic.]

iii. DonDiego is not aware that a charity can write Federal legislation and hand it off to Washington politicians. [DonDiego does not recall any posts addressing this topic.]
If a politician were to seek information from a 501(c)(3) organization, DonDiego supposes the organization is permitted to respond.
Or that an educational organization can offer education to politicians even unsolicited. Or to anyone else.

iv. DonDiego is unaware of any legal proscription against a 501(c)(3) responding to a request for a list of possible Supreme Court Justice appointees. DonDiego would expect any President or Presidential-candidate to seek information addressing potential nominees from somebody! If it is not legal, DonDiego, as always, recommends enforcement of the Law.

v.Re publishing propaganda:

Definition: propaganda: "1. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation"
Ref: dictionary.com

DonDiego supposes if the "helping or harming" nature of propaganda is applied to political activity, the limits of such information spreading are specified by the IRS Exemption Requirements - 501(c)(3) Organizations as explained below:

v.A__"501(c)(3) exemptions apply to corporations organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational purposes, or for testing for public safety, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. 501(c)(3) exemption applies also for any non-incorporated community chest, fund, cooperating association or foundation that is organized and operated exclusively for those purposes."
Ref: wikipedia
As a "think-tank" DonDiego supposes The Heritage Foundation qualifies under "educational purposes". One man's educational material may be another man's propaganda.

v.B"When it comes to lobbying and political activity, 501(c)(3) organizations can appeal directly to legislative bodies and representatives and may support issue-based legislation. However, they must notify the IRS of their intent to lobby by filing form 5768, which formally informs the federal government that one has elected to use the expenditure test to have the organization's lobbying activity measured. Under this test, lobbying capacity is typically limited to spending less than 5 to 20% of the organizational budget on lobbying activities, depending on the size of your organization.
501(c)(4) organizations can engage in unlimited lobbying so long as it pertains to the organization's mission.

v.C__"501(c)(3) organizations are not permitted to engage in political activity, endorse or oppose political candidates, or donate money or time to political campaigns, but 501(c)(4) organizations can do all of the above."

[ DonDiego apologizes for the length and detail within this post. It's all about what's legal and not legal and lawyers make things very specific and detailed, so it is unavoidable if one wishes to actually address the issues as opposed to blather on about what's right-or-wrong or good-or-bad or :"my side"-or-"your side" crap. ]