BS: Dirty Harry Gate

Subject: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 12:42 PM

Harry Reid, aka Pinky aka Dirty Harry is another Washington DC crook who tries to avoid suspicion by constantly accusing others of wrongdoing. Putting up a smoke screen in other words.

What we have here is a member of the Senate Ethics Committee preaching about violations while he himself is violating ethics requirements:



In the wake of the 2006 corruption conviction of lobbyist Jack Abramoff, media criticism led over four dozen Congressmen, as well as President Bush, to return campaign donations associated with Abramoff. Reid did not receive any contributions from Abramoff, but Reid had contact with clients and lobbying partners of Abramoff,[citation needed] and Reid's campaign received over $60,000 in contributions from these groups, including about $50,000 from Native American gaming interests. Several times, Native American tribes that were clients of Jack Abramoff donated money to Reid after Reid's votes produced favorable results for the tribes. According to an Associated Press article, "Reid collected donations around the time of each action. Ethics rules require senators to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest in collecting contributions around the times they take official acts benefiting donors."[19] Among dozens of contacts between Abramoff's lobbying team and Reid's office, were several discussions about a bill to raise the minimum wage of the Northern Mariana Islands. Reid supported the bill, which Abramoff's clients opposed. Some claim that privately he was working against it, though have noted no evidence to support their claims.

Reid said that the contributions and contacts were legal and his actions were proper. He also described the Abramoff affair as "a Republican scandal," referring to Abramoff's felony conviction for making illegal contributions to Republican Congressman Bob Ney and his close affiliation with the Republican K Street Project. [23] A spokesman said that Reid had never met Abramoff personally, that neither Reid nor his campaign has ever received money directly from Abramoff, and that his legislative work was done on behalf of his Nevadan constituents.

Boxing tickets

In May 2006, John Solomon of the Associated Press erroneously reported that Reid had accepted free tickets valued at hundreds of dollars each for three boxing matches between 2003 and 2005 from the Nevada Athletic Commission, though it was later reported that Reid had in fact received "credentials" intended specifically for public officials, which, not being retail tickets, have no selling price. At that time and afterwards, Reid, a former amateur middleweight boxer and boxing judge, supported legislation to create a federal boxing commission, which had the potential to dilute the state commission's authority. After receiving the tickets, Reid voted for the legislation, which was opposed by the state commission.

Senate ethics rules permit gifts from such governmental agencies, but advise caution "where it appears" that the gift is an attempt to influence, and also state that repeatedly taking otherwise permitted gifts should be avoided. A former House ethics lawyer said that it would have been "the more cautious thing, the more prudent thing" for Reid to have paid for the credentials or refused them. However, the promoter of the fights said that it would have been illegal for Reid to have paid for the credentials.]

Las Vegas land deal

Some have accused Harry Reid of collecting a $1.1 million windfall on land he owned through a limited liability company (LLC). In 1998 Reid bought a plot of land for $400,000. One of the sellers was a developer who arranged a land swap to protect environmentally sensitive land in exchange for improvable property that Reid supported. In 2001, it is alleged that he sold that land to the LLC for $400,000 in exchange for an equivalent ownership percentage of the LLC and, when the LLC sold the land, Reid made a profit. However, many media reports indicate the allegations are false.

The deal was structured by former casino attorney Jay Brown, a long time friend who some had alleged was associated with political bribery and organized crime, although these claims have never been proven. If it's determined that Reid failed to disclose the a sale to a company owned by a friend and his subsequent ownership interest in the company, it would violate Senate rules according to former Federal Election Commission overseer Kent Cooper. The allegations against Reid also claim that Brown paid a small portion of Reid's taxes on the ownership stake, and that Reid continued to report to Congress that he still owned the land for 3 years after he sold it to the LLC he partially owned...

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: kendall
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 12:58 PM

IF he is guilty he should be expelled from the Senate. If not, the desperate republican who started this rumor should be expelled.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 01:12 PM

If anyone is guilty they should be punished and, preferably, expelled from Congress. Bipartisan.

Hell, let's vote 'em ALL out and start over with a whole new set of rascals!

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 01:22 PM

Who is this "the desperate republican" you speak of?

How do you know he is a republican?

How do you know he is desperate?

Why do you immediately claim it is a rumor?

Are Democrats that start rumors desperate?

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 02:16 PM

Old Guy, read what you post. Please. You are posting allegations as though they were proven facts- never mind that in the same breath those allegations are rendered dubious in the article itself.

Among the things that struck me forcibly is this: "At that time and afterwards, Reid, a former amateur middleweight boxer and boxing judge, supported legislation to create a federal boxing commission, which had the potential to dilute the state commission's authority. After receiving the tickets, Reid voted for the legislation, which was opposed by the state commission."

In what way is it pertinent to say that he voted for the legislation after he received the tickets? Given his history, don't you think that Reid was likely to vote for it anyway?

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Jeri
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 02:21 PM

Article copied/plagarized from Wikpedia (here's the whole thing).

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 02:31 PM

Yes like,

...Abramoff,[citation needed] and ...

Quite comical really.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 02:32 PM

(presented here like that)

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 03:10 PM

OOPS I forgot to put in a link to the source:

Harry Reid

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: pdq
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 06:04 PM

...here is a "fair and balanced" discussion of Harry Reid's boxing "freebies"...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


RINGSIDE SEATS: Fight freebie defended

Reid says attendance at matches part of job

Nevada Sen. Harry Reid on Tuesday denied that he improperly accepted a free seat at a boxing match between Bernard Hopkins and Oscar de la Hoya in September 2004 at the MGM Grand.

By MOLLY BALL
REVIEW-JOURNAL


Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said Tuesday his free attendance at boxing matches was necessary for him to understand boxing regulations and represent Nevada's interests.

Reid, D-Nev., was responding to accusations that, in sitting ringside for free at several Las Vegas fights from 2003 to 2005, he improperly took gifts from an agency he was involved in regulating at the time, the Nevada Athletic Commission, which oversees boxing in the state.

"I represent the state of Nevada," Reid said, answering news media questions at a veterans event in Las Vegas. "The Nevada Athletic Commission is part of the state of Nevada. It seems to me only logical that anything good for the state athletic commission is good for the state of Nevada."

Reid, a former amateur middleweight boxer and boxing judge, compared his attendance at the boxing matches to tours of water facilities in order to understand water-related legislation or to attendance at a state university's football game.

Reid said he represented the athletic commission and its interests in Washington, D.C., as part of his representation of the state. While Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., paid $1,400 for his seats at a fight he attended with Reid, Reid said he didn't pay because he was in his home state, researching the interests of a part of his constituency.

"Senator McCain is from Arizona. He's not supposed to get free tickets in the state of Nevada," Reid said. "He came here to watch the fight. I came to work for the state of Nevada and to watch the fight. If I were going to a fight with John McCain in Arizona ... I would pay for my ticket."

Reid was speaking alongside Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, who was making a pitch at the American Legion Post 8 in downtown Las Vegas that Democrats are the party that best speaks for war veterans. The forum was attended by about 50 Democratic activists and veterans.

Despite the accusations against Reid, Dean didn't back down from his frequently repeated claim that corruption was solely the province of Republicans in Washington. He said Monday's Associated Press report about Reid's attendance at the boxing matches was "nonsense" and "ridiculous."

"It is a Republican culture of corruption," said Dean, the former Vermont governor and 2004 presidential candidate. "We think Republicans and corrupt officeholders, which seem to be one and the same in many cases, will be probably thrown out by the voters. People are tired of it."

Reid said his attendance at boxing matches didn't violate Senate ethics rules, which say senators "should be wary" of gifts aimed at influencing their votes but don't prohibit such gifts.

Reid has been vocal about what he terms Republican corruption. In particular, Reid has pointed to the still-unfolding scandal surrounding Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who recently pleaded guilty to federal corruption charges.

But Republicans point out that Reid accepted donations from groups represented by Abramoff, including at a fundraiser for Reid at Abramoff's firm. Reid has said he won't return the donated money because he did nothing wrong and voted according to what he believed the best policies were.

Republicans say recent corruption scandals in Washington are specific to a few individuals, including some Democrats, and have nothing to do with party affiliation.

"The revelations of Harry Reid's own ethical missteps establish the hypocrisy of Reid's ethical pronouncements," Nevada Republican Party Chairman Paul Adams said Tuesday. "Ethics is an issue with individuals; it is not a partisan issue. For Howard Dean to have any credibility on ethics, he must admit that Reid's behavior is part of the problem in Washington."

The boxing controversy stems from Reid and McCain's failed push for federal boxing regulation in 2004. Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis were forced to fight in Memphis in 2002 because Nevada, as well as Texas and Colorado, wouldn't license Tyson, who has multiple felony convictions and once bit a piece out of another boxer's ear during a fight.

Reid says he became convinced that federal regulation of boxing would ensure uniform standards for the sport.

The bill passed the Senate on a voice vote in March 2004 but died in the House.

Marc Ratner, who was the executive director of the Nevada Athletic Commission at the time, told The Associated Press he invited Reid and McCain to a September 2004 bout between Bernard Hopkins and Oscar de la Hoya in part because he wanted to convince them that the state's regulation was sufficient and federal regulation wasn't needed.

Reid said Tuesday he "took care of" Ratner's concerns but didn't drop his push for federal oversight.

Ratner said Tuesday the seats Reid and McCain got weren't tickets available to the general public but "credentials" the commission gives only to public officials hoping to observe the commission's activity.

Skip Avansino, current chairman of the athletic commission and a commission member since 2002, said Reid, McCain and the athletic commissioners sat on folding chairs in a small, cramped area, not in the posh ringside seats for which pricey tickets are sold. Avansino also said the commissioners were too busy to spend much time bending Reid's ear during the fight.

"I do remember Senator Reid visiting," Avansino said. "I would have said hello and welcomed him, and then I have a job to do."

While Ratner may have had an opinion about federal regulation's potential effect on Nevada, Avansino said the commission never took an official position on the federal proposal but merely monitored the bill's progress to see if the commission would be affected.

"I can imagine why he (Reid) would want to watch us in action -- to watch how the scorecards are taken from the judges and what we do with the scorecards -- to see whether there was a need for legislation at the federal level," he said.

Boxing promoter Bob Arum said Reid and McCain also sat in ticketed seating at about three matches each but paid for their tickets "invariably." Arum said McCain and Reid's seats at the Hopkins-de la Hoya fight, on the other hand, were credentials from the commission, not tickets from Arum. But McCain, who brought his wife to the fight, sent Arum a check for the price of two ringside seats.

Arum said he didn't know what to do with the money.

"Those credentials cannot be sold," he said. "There's no price on them. (They are given to) governors, attorney generals, boxing commissioners of other states. ... It's illegal to accept money for a credential."

Arum said he couldn't accept McCain's money but McCain wouldn't take it back, so Arum donated it to Catholic Charities.

Arum said Reid's relationship with boxing is that of a longtime supporter of one of the state's biggest industries, as Reid says.

"Bitter rivals like Don King and myself have each contributed to his campaign," Arum said. "He doesn't favor one promoter over another. He's just a big supporter of the boxing industry in the state of Nevada."

Carl Tobias, a former professor at UNLV's Boyd School of Law who follows Nevada politics from his current post at the University of Richmond, Virginia, said Reid could be expected to protect Nevada's boxing industry in the same way as he would support gaming.

"It's not that anything that was done was wrong, but people could say that this wasn't the best thing to do," Tobias said. "It just had that appearance of, if you're going to regulate something, it doesn't look good" to take gifts.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 08:01 PM

From USNews:

Democrats: The Republicans' Best Hope

Republican leaders trying to outrun their own scandals are expected to ramp up attacks on Democratic leaders like Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi in hopes that voters reject the changes they would bring to Washington. The plan is to warn voters that a Reid and Pelosi majority will raise taxes and run from Iraq. "I think that voters are more scared of them than they hate us," said one GOP strategist. "The only hope that the Republicans have is the Democrats," added former Sen. Fred Thompson in an interview. Citing their partisan attacks on President Bush and Republicans, Thompson said, "Pelosi and Reid, I just don't think Middle America goes for that stuff."

Think again, Mr. Thompson!

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 08:04 PM

Be sure to read the WHOLE thing, OG:

AP's Reid Story Doesn't Add Up
By Paul Kiel - October 11, 2006, 11:10 PM

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) "collected a $1.1 million windfall on a Las Vegas land sale even though he hadn't personally owned the property for three years," the AP reports.

Except that's wrong. Reid made a $700,000 profit on the sale, not $1.1 million. Also, the story, by the AP's John Solomon, makes it sound as if Reid got money for land he didn't own. But that's not the case.

It's not the first time that Solomon has published a misleading story about Reid. This is the third such story by Solomon over the past six months. Each time, Solomon has hit Reid for taking actions which might create the appearance of ethical impropriety. But because Solomon writes for the most powerful news organization in the land, these very gray-shaded stories pack a wallop. It doesn't help that on numerous occasions, he has missed or distorted key details – missteps that help blow up his stories.

This story is no different. It purports to show that Reid collected $1.1 million on the sale of land he didn't own.
Yet, as Solomon obliquely acknowledges, Reid, who had bought the land along with a friend in 1998, transferred his ownership in the land to a limited liability company in 2001. The company, which was composed solely of this land owned by Reid and his friend, in turn sold the land in 2004. That's when Reid collected his $1.1 million share of the sale. Since Reid had originally put down $400,000 on the sale, his profit was $700,000, not the full $1.1 million, as Solomon states in his lead.

Solomon persists in straightforwardly describing the 2001 land transfer as a sale, even though no money changed hands; Reid's share of the land after the transfer was the same as before. In his financial disclosure forms, Reid did not disclose his transfer of the land to the LLC, although he did continue to disclose his ownership of the land through 2004, when it was sold.

So what's the story here? Well, it's not clear that Reid broke any ethical rules -- let alone any laws. Solomon cites one expert as saying that Reid should have disclosed the transfer to the LLC, because "[w]hether you make a profit or a loss you've got to put that transaction down so the public, voters, can see exactly what kind of money is moving to or from a member of Congress." The thing is, of course, that no money moved in the LLC transaction. Reid still owned the same amount of land - it was just under the cover of the LLC.

Now, members of Congress should go out of their way to avoid the appearance of impropriety. The purpose of financial disclosure is for the public to gauge whether lawmakers might run into a conflict of interest. By that higher standard, Reid should have disclosed his involvement in the LLC. And although Solomon is unable to make any specific allegations of wrongdoing, the informality of the LLC arrangement is potentially open to abuse. Reid's office, in a statement on the matter, says they're willing to go back and make such "a technical correction" to the financial disclosures if the Ethics Committee sees fit. One wonders why they don't go ahead and make the correction anyway so as to be above reproach.

That said, let's put this in context.

On two earlier occasions, Solomon has over-inflated his stories on Reid. TPM readers might remember his expose on Reid's involvement with Jack Abramoff (which, after exhaustively detailing an Abramoff's associate's contacts with Reid's office, failed to mention that Reid didn't vote the way Abramoff wanted him to) and his stories on Reid's acceptance of passes to a boxing match from the Nevada Gaming Commission (which managed to expunge a host of mitigating details too plentiful to name here).

There's an old saying in journalism that three examples make a trend. I think we have a trend here. Solomon's apparent weakness for detail is one issue. But most curious is the fact that we live in the muckiest times in recent memory, and yet Solomon, at the helm of the most powerful news agency in the country, persists in roaming the wide ocean of Congressional corruption in a Captain Ahab-like hunt for Reid's ethical missteps.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 15 Oct 06 - 09:37 PM

Why would the Washington post publish this article by Soloman if it is just a pack of lies ?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/12/AR2006101200129.html

"Reid hung up the phone when questioned about the deal during an AP interview last week."

"Senate ethics rules require lawmakers to disclose on their annual ethics report all transactions involving investment properties _ regardless of profit or loss _ and to report any ownership stake in companies...."

So when did Dirty Harry disclose the formation of the LLC as per the requirements of the comittee he headed?

...Kent Cooper, a former Federal Election Commission official who oversaw government disclosure reports for federal candidates for two decades, said Reid's failure to report the 2001 sale and his ties to Brown's company violated Senate rules.

..."This is very, very clear," Cooper said. "Whether you make a profit or a loss you've got to put that transaction down so the public, voters, can see exactly what kind of money is moving to or from a member of Congress"

Stanley Brand, former Democratic chief counsel of the House, said Reid should have disclosed the 2001 sale and that his omission fits a larger culture in Congress where lawmakers aren't following or enforcing their own rules...

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Grab
Date: 16 Oct 06 - 09:17 AM

Why would the Washington post publish this article by Soloman if it is just a pack of lies?

Because they can't independently verify everything, perhaps? Like those faked photos from Iraq, news organisations aren't set up to second-guess the people who write their stories.

"Reid hung up the phone when questioned about the deal during an AP interview last week."

Don't blame him. If you asked for an interview and then called me a thief, I'd do the same.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Oct 06 - 12:08 PM

"Whether you make a profit or a loss you've got to put that transaction down so the public, voters, can see exactly what kind of money is moving to or from a member of Congress" quoted by OG

As the article said, there was no movement of money.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 17 Oct 06 - 01:31 AM

So why did Kent Cooper, a former Federal Election Commission official who oversaw government disclosure reports for federal candidates for two decades, say that Reid's failure to report the 2001 sale and his ties to Brown's company violated Senate rules?

Are you saying Harry Reid did not make any money on the deal?

"called me a thief" is there evidence that he was called a thief on the telephone?

Native American tribes donated money to Reid after Reid's votes produced favorable results for the tribes. Ethics rules require senators to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest in collecting contributions around the times they take official acts benefiting donors.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Oct 06 - 04:12 PM

Can't people learn the trick of summarising what has been written, with a link to the original?

Particularly when the original is is not very well written in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 17 Oct 06 - 11:55 PM

More Financial Trouble For Harry Reid: Christmas Bonuses Paid From Campaign Funds

October 17, 2006 6:21 p.m. EST

Matthew Borghese - All Headline News Staff Writer

Washington, D.C. (AHN) - The Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid (D-NV) is facing more financial trouble after news breaks that the support staff at his $750,000 condo at the Ritz-Carlton were given Christmas bonuses with campaign funds.

Staff like the doorman at the hotel where Reid lives were paid with $3,300 from his re-election campaign. The entries in the accounting logs were listed as a campaign "salary" and a "contribution."

According to reports, the practice had been going on for years, yet Reid maintains that the way the accounting handled the donations was a "clerical error."

"These donations were made to thank the men and women who work in the building for the extra work they do as a result of my political activities, and for helping the security officers assigned to me because of my Senate position."

Reid says, "I am reimbursing the campaign from my own pocket to prevent this issue from being used in the current campaign season to deflect attention from Republican failures."

The admission comes after, according to CNN, Reid announced he was amending his ethics reports to Congress to more fully account for a Las Vegas land deal - highlighted in an AP story last week - that allowed him to collect $1.1 million in 2004 for property he hadn't personally owned in three years.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 18 Oct 06 - 11:43 PM

The Reid connections, LA Times:

In June, 2003, the Los Angeles Times published an investigation that revealed the wide-ranging and extensive involvement of relatives of U.S. Senators involved in the direct lobby efforts of mummy and daddy - including revelations as to a wide variety of land-related dealings involving Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), and his four lawyer sons, Rory, Leif, Josh and Key Reid, and lawyer son-in-law, Steven Barringer.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 21 Oct 06 - 03:01 PM

Here is that link again

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 21 Oct 06 - 03:13 PM

How a pro-gun, anti-abortion Nevadan leads the Senate's Democrats.

   ...In Nevada, a state where the federal government owns nearly ninety per cent of the land and politics can be incestuous, Reid's power and influence are widespread. He was embarrassed two years ago when a Los Angeles Times story revealed that one of his sons and his son-in-law had lobbied in Washington for "companies, trade groups and municipalities seeking Reid's help in the Senate." Over the previous four years, the newspaper reported, these efforts, supported by Reid, brought more than two million dollars in business to firms that employed family members. At the time, Reid's four sons, ranging in age from thirty to forty-two, worked for Nevada's largest law firm, Lionel Sawyer & Collins. The story noted that the Howard Hughes Corporation alone "paid $300,000 to the tiny Washington consulting firm of [Reid's] son-in-law Steven Barringer to push a provision allowing the company to acquire 998 acres of federal land ripe for development" in the Las Vegas metropolitan area. When I asked Reid about the L.A. Times story, he pointed out that his son-in-law had been a lobbyist before his daughter married him. Susan McCue, Reid's chief of staff, said in an e-mail that when the newspaper started making inquiries "Senator Reid (and I) agreed that we needed to put up a wall between any family members lobbying and this office for the sake of appearances, even if they're working on issues that benefit Nevada." Soon after he was interviewed by L.A. Times reporters, Reid banned relatives from lobbying his office....

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 16 Nov 06 - 10:35 PM

Will the pork stop here?

Reid pledges change, but he pushed funding that may benefit him.

By Chuck Neubauer and Tom Hamburger, Times Staff Writers

November 13, 2006

WASHINGTON — Incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vows to make reform of congressional earmarks a priority of his tenure, arguing that members need to be more transparent when they load pet projects for their districts into federal spending bills.

But last year's huge $286-billion federal transportation bill included a little-noticed slice of pork pushed by Reid that provided benefits not only for the casino town of Laughlin, Nev., but also, possibly, for the senator himself.

Reid called funding for construction of a bridge over the Colorado River, among other projects, "incredibly good news for Nevada" in a news release after passage of the 2005 transportation bill. He didn't mention, though, that just across the river in Arizona, he owns 160 acres of land several miles from proposed bridge sites and that the bridge could add value to his real estate investment.

Reid denies any personal financial interest in his efforts to secure $18 million for a new span connecting Laughlin with Bullhead City, Ariz.

"Sen. Reid's support for the bridge had absolutely nothing to do with property he owns," said Rebecca Kirszner, Reid's communications director. "Sen. Reid supported this project as part of his continuing efforts to move Nevada forward."

But some Bullhead City property owners and local officials say a new bridge will undoubtedly hike land values in an already-booming commuter town, where speculators are snapping up undeveloped land for housing developments and other projects. Experts on congressional spending say Reid's earmark provides yet another sign of the need for reform.

"It's a really bad idea for lawmakers to earmark projects when they have a financial interest that could in any way be affected by it," said Norman Ornstein, coauthor of "The Broken Branch" a recent book that examines earmarking and other practices.

Ornstein said he did not have enough information to fully evaluate the Reid deal. But, he said, "we already have too many examples — including a number of Southern California representatives — who are very directly using this process to enrich themselves."

Said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan watchdog that tracks congressional spending, "Unwittingly, the taxpayer may have helped inflate the value" of Reid's property.

Earmarking allows congressional leaders, committee chairs and other insiders to insert narrowly targeted spending orders into pending legislation without going through the normal budget review process. Members of both parties defend earmarking as a way for Congress to get attention for local concerns when executive-branch agencies are unresponsive.

Earmarking was at the heart of the case against former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Rancho Santa Fe), now in prison for using his congressional seat to secure federal funding for individuals who provided him personal benefits. It was also the basis for much of the wealth amassed by criminal lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who referred to the appropriations committee as "the favor factory."

Reform has been difficult to achieve in part, critics say, because leaders of both parties encourage earmarking to build popularity at home and power among fellow Congress members.

Reid is not the only powerful member known to use the practice. Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a former appropriations panel member, has used earmarks prodigiously.

The minority leader of the new Senate, Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), is an active earmarker, as is current Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), who last year secured funding for a highway interchange near property he owned outside Chicago. (He too has claimed there is no connection between his earmarks and personal land holdings.)

Last week, when Reid's status rose as Democrats took control of the Senate after the midterm election, the senator promised, like Pelosi, to make earmark reform a top priority when party members caucused.

"With Democrats running Congress, we are in a much better position to achieve real transparency and openness," said Kirszner.

In earlier years, Reid has boldly claimed credit for getting earmarks for his constituents. Last year, he boasted of securing $300 million in earmarks in the transportation bill.

When pressed about his position on earmarks in an interview on public television in January, Reid acknowledged abuses, but added: "There's nothing basically wrong with earmarks. They've been going on since we were a country."

Actually, earmarks have skyrocketed in recent years, from 1,439 in 1995 to 15,268 last year, according to a Senate estimate.

The proposed bridge between Laughlin and Bullhead City was not on the priority list sent to local members of Congress by either the Nevada or Arizona transportation agencies.

But beginning in 2003, local supporters of the bridge — which would be the second span connecting the two towns — found a receptive audience when they approached some members of the Nevada and Arizona congressional delegations. Civic leaders argued that an additional bridge was needed because traffic on the existing connector bridge, on the northern edge of Bullhead City, had become overwhelming.

Laughlin consists mainly of casinos and hotels, and has little housing or shopping. Most of the casino workers live across the river in Bullhead City, which also has shopping and a hospital. Elected officials say both communities would benefit from a second bridge.

Reid's land, three to five miles from several proposed sites for the second bridge and near the local hospital, is undeveloped. New housing is springing up around it.

Acting on a request from the town of Laughlin, Reid, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee's transportation subcommittee, in 2003 secured $500,000 for preliminary studies.

Last year, Rep. Jon Porter (R-Nev.), supported by Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), got $2 million for the bridge inserted into the House version of the transportation bill.

By the time Congress approved the $286-billion transportation bill, $18 million more in bridge funding had been added. Reid took credit in a news release for securing money that would kick the project into high gear. The bridge, still in the planning stages, is projected to cost $30 million to $40 million.

Arizona's two Republican senators voted against the entire transportation bill as pure pork.

Nowhere in Reid's statements about the project was any mention of his Bullhead City land holdings; he does list it on his Senate financial disclosure forms. He valued the Arizona land at $500,000 to $1 million in his most recent disclosure, which reported total assets of at least $2.2 million.

Reid's interest in the Arizona land dates back more than 20 years and, according to his staff, has been a long-running headache. He paid about $150,000 for 100 acres of the Bullhead City parcel, and his longtime friend Clair Haycock bought the remaining 60 acres for $90,000.

Californians who bought the property from the two in the early 1990s defaulted on a $1.3-million note and returned the land to Reid and Haycock.

In early 2002, Haycock sold out to Reid for $10,000, or about $166 an acre.

At the time, the Mohave County assessor valued the entire parcel at $339,620, or more than $2,000 an acre.

The low price resulted from Haycock's need to sell and Reid's lack of interest in buying, the two men said.

The investment "had been a losing proposition for about a decade running," Reid's staff said.

Haycock, who owns Haycock Petroleum Co. of Las Vegas, said in an e-mail that he needed to sell his share to liquidate a company pension plan, which owned the property.

He said in a statement that he "expected nothing from Sen. Reid" in return for selling him the property.

"Sen. Reid has never taken any official action to provide personal financial benefit to me, and I would never have asked," Haycock said.

City and county officials say that land values have been rising in Bullhead City as developers and speculators discover the area.

"Once they build a bridge, values will go up," said Frank Capotosto of the Mohave County assessor's office.

"A new bridge will increase value because there would be better circulation, " said Pawan Agrawal, public works director and city engineer for Bullhead City.

"A lack of a bridge depresses our growth."

California businessman Ken Renfroe recently bought property near Reid's that he intends to develop in five years or so. He believes that a new bridge will increase property values.

"I am sure it has already had a positive influence," he said of the proposal.

He paid $240,000 for 37.52 acres, an average of $6,396 an acre, records show.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: kendall
Date: 17 Nov 06 - 05:23 PM

And as long as we keep sending them to DC, the corruption will follow.

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: Old Guy
Date: 18 Nov 06 - 08:04 AM

Abramoff Reports To Prison; Officials Focus On Reid, Others

...A source close to the investigation says Abramoff told prosecutors that more than $30,000 in campaign contributions to Reid from Abramoff's clients "were no accident and were in fact requested by Reid."

Abramoff has reportedly claimed the Nevada senator agreed to help him on matters related to Indian gambling.

The Associated Press reported earlier this year that Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to the tribes that had contributed money to his campaign.

Reid has denied there was any connection between the letters and the contributions and has said he is a longtime opponent of certain kinds of Indian reservation gambling.

The AP reported that Reid acknowledged "routine contacts" with Abramoff's lobbying partners and intervening to block rival tribal casinos.

The AP also reported that Abramoff's billing records showed extensive contact with Reid's office over a three-year period in which Reid collected more than $68,000 from Abramoff's firm, partners and clients.

Prosecutors have said that Abramoff's cooperation is essential to the corruption investigation, but, so far, they have brought only one prosecution against a member of Congress connected to Abramoff, Republican Bob Ney of Ohio, who resigned.

The source said prosecutors do not intend to rely solely on Abramoff's account of events, and his allegations against Reid and others will not necessarily result in criminal charges.

Sources close to the federal investigation say Abramoff has offered testimony about his contacts with "six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators" and an ever larger number of Republican members of Congress.

In addition to Reid, the sources say Abramoff has been most closely questioned about his contacts with Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), who was defeated in last week's election...

Subject: RE: BS: Dirty Harry Gate
From: fumblefingers
Date: 19 Nov 06 - 02:26 AM

Harry got rich on a senator's salary. Amazing how that works.