This confuses me, but "only donations to the 501(c)(3) foundation are tax deductible, and only the 501(c)(4) group can engage in unlimited political lobbying. The two organizations share office space and employees." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union
An organization can be simultaneously a 501(c)3 and a 501(c)4 - often this is managed by having two separate legal entities with a mutual relationship, but it's possible for the same organization to be classified both ways.
Separately, a 501(c)3 is allowed to engage in lobbying - they are just subject to restrictions on how much time and money than can spend (last I checked, it's up to 10% of time and 10% of money).
This is all correct -- Notably, you can't spend 501(c)(3) dollars on (c)(4) activities. All of those employees that work for both entities have to accurately record their time and expenses the (c)(3) must charge the (c)(4) for any support that they give it. It's a big pain in the ass but worth it to keep the IRS off your case.
Looking through last year's class, it's fairly easy to see a political bent to 50% of the groups or more.
Increasingly - and assuringly IMO - it's difficult to coherently distinguish "groups involved in politics" from other groups (ie, there is no other type of group).
Depends. Lots of people consider the EFF to be a political organization, but it has always enjoyed major social privileges here. Not sure about the specific financial relationships and don't feel like investing hours in compiling that information, but I'd be quite surprised if YC hadn't supported the EFF financially, directly or indirectly.
No, they asked about funding organizations involved in politics. I wondered if they believed reddit to be apolitical, not whether they believed it fit some definition of some other concept.
"Peter is a part-time partner at YC, meaning he spends a small fraction of his time advising YC companies, does not have a vote in how YC is run, and in his case waives the equity part-time partners normally get."
