[yummyfajitas]

That is a world I'd like to live in. Such people suffer from a principal/agent problem - they gain more from the government as employees/contractors/etc than as citizens, so their interest is primarily in having more money funneled to them as employees. For this reason, restricting their lobbying/voting/etc activity as one of the terms of receiving government money is perfectly reasonable.

The EFF, in contrast, has no such conflict of interest. Any organization which does not take government money is just a consumer of government services. Their interest is the same as everyone else's - encouraging the government to do the best job possible.

[ikeboy]

> Any organization which does not take government money is just a consumer of government services.

From the above comment:

>bail bond companies, criminal defense attorneys

>any company that derives most of its revenue from selling goods or services to ... inmates, or criminal defendants

All of those take no government money in the strictest sense.

[Anon1096]

The EFF "receives" money as part of being a non profit. So yes, they do take government money, and aren't only consumers of government services.

[dllthomas]

> The EFF "receives" money as part of being a non profit.

Strictly speaking, you can be a non-profit without any special tax treatment.