Talk:Pioneer Institute

United States: Massachusetts Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as Low-importance).

Conservatism Mid‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Basically, the original page was just a campaign brochure for the center. I took out a lot of irrelevant stuff--nobody really cares about the center's study that found that X number of municipalities have too much regulation, for instance. Also took out links to wikipedia pages that don't exist, and added citations to give some background on the center's funding.

Call a spade a spade[edit]

Calling the Pioneer Institute "non-partisan" is rather dubious. They have been described as "libertarian".[1] This very article says they support "conservatives" -- what's that code for? -- and gives a laundry list of rather partisan issues they support. The article also says Ray Shamie is a board member, and that an Institute center is named for him. The first reference for the article [2] lists the political donations of the Institute's founder; they are all to Republican causes. 98.216.11.183 (talk) 13:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't dubious at all. Participants in non-partisan 501(c)(3) organizations don't have to refrain from political activity in their personal lives. If Shamie, Stergios, or other influential PI people are politically active this doesn't mean that PI is a "partisan" organization. Is the Red Cross partisan because of its association with Elizabeth Dole? By definition, as a 501(c)(3), PI is "non-partisan." If they lose their exempt status because this proves not to be so, we should include that information. I am unaware of any sources for such an assertion. DickClarkMises (talk) 21:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem here Mr. Mises is that you are hardly an impartial arbiter for this article. In fact, why am I not surprised it has been scrubbed of all references to their more controversial projects involving race realism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.35.59.5 (talk) 07:36, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]