[ktta]

The thing is, these sort of situations (creating dependence) are very hard to pick apart and point out who is at fault.

Say an organization 'A' funds another organization 'B' (maybe non-profit, maybe not), and over time 'B' becomes very dependent on the donations they are getting from 'A'. Then say they start to have a conflict of interest, and 'A' drops funding(which probably kills 'B').

Who's the bad guy here? How should've 'B' known there might be a conflict of interest in the future if not immediately?

[gonmf]

It's a simple issue, bar entities that should not have conflicts of interest from accepting gifts/investment/etc that could create a conflict of interest.

It is appalling how US senators are allowed to receive gifts or be compensated in creative ways by companies.

[euyyn]

But we're talking about a think tank, right? It's a private group of people that write about their opinions. Why shouldn't they have conflicts of interest?

[lbeltrame]

Or you can limit the percentage of funds you can get from certain types of entities in order to reduce or prevent dependence. My current employer (a research no profit) has this limitation in its basic rules

[foota]

Afaik, us senators can't. Their campaigns can.

[joshuamorton]

A second question then: how do you define a conflict of interest?

[kobeya]

Those prohibitions are in place. I think you are confused...