another example...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)_organization
Wiki seems to think that 501c3 corps should not be involved in politics, by law.
before I read that, everytime i heard ‘501c3’ it sounded
political...
what is the deal?
The law is that no single candidate can be associated with the tax exempt organization. They are able to express issues that are important such as ‘Balancing the Budget’, ‘Limited Government’, ‘Constitutional Conformance’, ‘Pro-life Alternatives to Abortion’, ‘Voter Drives’, ‘Tax Reform’, ‘Border Security’ and so on. All of these are 1st Amendment issues that are political but do not endorse a political candidate.
Wiki is not a reference to be relied on for political facts. It is often populated by trolls.
Also you are looking at the wrong part of the code. It’s not 501(c)3 organizations that are at issue but 501(c)4’s:
Commonly known as 501(c)4’s in the political world, they’re tax-exempt nonprofits that engage in issue advocacy and don’t typically disclose their donors. Americans for Prosperity, the Koch-funded conservative organization that’s a favorite for Democrats to demonize, has a 501(c)4 arm, for instance. The Karl-Rove-co-founded American Crossroads also includes a 501(c)4 operation.
The democrats also have their 501(c)4 political tax exempt groups. But they were trying to shut down Tea Party 501(c)4 groups and in fact intimidated many of them. Nothing of the kind was done to liberal or moderate groups, only conservative and Tea Party affiliated groups were harassed.