Harry Reid can discuss how important he is and how important the boxing match was but the Senate Ethics Manual indicates that a sporting event is not an event for which free tickets may be accepted. While Reid could contend that he was performing an official function for the purpose of his job (which he did say) he did not do anything job related. He watched a fight. Additionally, the sole purpose of his invitation was to influence legislation.The event itself was strictly sporting entertainment:
‘‘Free attendance’’ at a widely attended event does not include an offer of free attendance (i.e. a ticket) to a sporting, entertainment, or other purely recreational event. See the section on sporting events in this chapter and the section on attendance at a charity event, below. (Ethics Manual page 38)
The Senate Ethics Manual also requires that Senators report gifts with a value of more than $285. The Nevada Commission indicated the tickets had no value and they could not take money for them. By Senate rules (page 60), if the seat has no value or price then Reid was required to use the closest seat to him that does have a price (ringside). They have certain time frames in which to report them and there is an annual form that must be filed. Harry Reid is amending his right now because of the questionable deals he made with regard to land he sold a few years ago, as was indicated in this post. I searched Reid's financial disclosure forms for 2004 and 2005 and the only gift he reported was the gift of land left to him when a friend died. Harry Reid did not report the tickets he received in 2004 or any of the other times he was reported to have received free tickets. This is another violation of the Senate Ethics Rules.
In addition to the violation of one Senate Ethics Rule after another, there is one other thing that the government should look into. The gifts were of value and therefore they might be required to be reported as income on tax returns. It needs to be determined if these items were required to be reported and if so, were they. If they were and Reid did not, he is also guilty of tax evasion. I would like to see an ethics investigation of Harry Reid's activities with regard to these boxing tickets. If he violated the ethical requirements of his job then he needs to step down. It is only right to expect an investigation and to not take Harry's word for it. He has shown that he can not exactly be trusted to do what is ethical. Additionally, he should be held at least to the same standard as the people who pay his salary. This happened in 2004, but Reid has been a bit lax in the ethics department and is just now repairing other unethical behavior on his disclosure forms. It is only right to make sure this one is addressed as well.
Article comments
1 - Dave Nalle
Good lord, who cares.
Dave
2 - Big Dog
Given that Harry Reid is the first to beat the drum about a culture of corruption and given that he has been involved in quite a bit of it, all taxpayers should care.
Though I know you draw a fine line of distinction between legal bribes and illegal, and therefore think neither is worth the time, I feel that our workers, those in Congress, need to be held to higher standards.
We as a citizenry should demand accountability from all members. I personally do not like Reid so he is a target and whenever there is a story about his wrong doing I will try to be on it. Perhaps if he had learned to keep his mouth shut he would not have drawn attention to his dark dealings.
Fact is, there are ethics rules for a reason and they should be upheld. Hell, if one of our soldiers found a hundred thousand dollars in a Hussein palace and kept it. Reid would be the first one demanding accountability. The difference between reid and Jefferson (of LA) is that Reid does not keep his booty in the freezer.
Remember, glass houses.....
3 - Scott
fuckin' hell man
4 - gonzo marx
Big Dog sez...
*Remember, glass houses.....*
this coming from a complete partisan shill who posts the same fucking article twice in a single day?
that would be this one and "reid him his rights", both posted on the 17th
nice to see you can copy the talking points so quickly
as for "glass houses"... howabout, Abramhoff, Safavian, Ney, Cunningham, DeLay, "Scooter" Libby...
the first 4 are convicted, the last two under indictment
we have the dem with the 90 grand in his freezer, and this stupid shit from Reid... both deserve derision and investigation
but when you go and post two of the same articles in the same day and go from the last paragraph in the "reid him his rights" article that deplores corruption from both sides...to this one
well, yer partisan hat is showing, you have blown any credibility towards objectivity and shown instead just another shill, a cog in the noise machine...
at least be funny or something...
full disclosure: nope i ain't a dem or a GOP type, been a registered Independant for 27 years now...
Excelsior?
5 - Big Dog
Gonzo,
These are two different articles and deal with two different aspects of criminal behavior.
I could have made them one huge article but seeing how a number of people did not read the first article completely it would be asking a bit much to expect an attention span that would allow someone to read an article the length of both. Case in point:
but when you go and post two of the same articles in the same day and go from the last paragraph in the "reid him his rights" article that deplores corruption from both sides...to this one
well, yer partisan hat is showing, you have blown any credibility towards objectivity and shown instead just another shill, a cog in the noise machine...
I guess you missed the part, in the second article, where I said that McCain should be investigated to see if he did something wrong and if he did he needs to be held accountable.
They both deal with corruption, just different kinds.
If you want to start listing politicians who have been indicted or convicted BC will need to buy more server space. Both sides have people who commit crimes. You miss the point that Reid is spewing the Culture of Corruption idea and is neck deep in it.
Partisan, yes. I believe in my political views. I am however fair and I beleive we need to take back our country from all of them. If you want funny, read Kos.
6 - gonzo marx
well now Big Dog, i understand the rationale you use to self-justify your partisanship
your Choice, and i will defend your Right to do so
however, i will also call out blatant hypocrisy when i see it
in both the instance of an excellent final paragraph, and in this articles mention of McCain you appear to have tacked it on, to try and maintain the appearance of "fairness"
in the first Article, i was happy to takethat on face value..in this one, the dig against McCain can also be thought of as a two fold jab from the faction of the GOP that considers him a RINO, sort of a pre-emptive strike, if you will
either way, two titles both digging into the same name (Reid), on the same day
at least you admit right out you are a partisan in this... points for Honesty
but to spew twice on the same person and then try and hide behind this line...
*You miss the point that Reid is spewing the Culture of Corruption idea and is neck deep in it.*
when the ENTIRE GOP has been *hiding* behidn the "Family Values" schtick for years as well as holding themselves up as more "moral" than their opposition... well, then they should beheld to the Standard they espouse, yes?
and when it is shown with shit like the...oh, let's say the "K street Project" and it's "pay to play" corruption... or Duke Cunningham.. even Ney's confession to accepting bribes to influence his Votes... ( much less the parts of the confession that implicates Grover Norquist and others)
well..the irony and hypocrisy just are too Amusing for words
Excelsior?
7 - Big Dog
McCain was not tacked on. I could only obtain his 2005 financial report so I could not check 2004. Plus, Reid said in the article that McCain paid for his ticket. I could not confirm it so I said it needed to be investigated. I believe I have been consistent in my calls for the dismissal of everyone who does something wrong, regardless of party. I think every person expects some degree of honesty from elected officials. Regardless of party, we are all still American and can have a civil discussion on matters without acting like idiots.
The Republican party espouses family values. That does not mean they are not humans. They have human failings in the party. Sure they are held to a higher standard. I would rather be held to a high standard and fall short than not have much expected of me. If you hold people to high standards they have more to achieve.
The Democrats say they are supposed to be the party of tolerance and yet some are very intolerant. Does that mean all of them?
The fact is, Reid is involved in a great deal of corruption and it should get the same attention that any Republican gets.
8 - Bliffle
Harry who? I guess he must be a real desperado, whoever he is, that he accepts free tickets to a prize fight! Wow.
9 - Goober
I hate both major parties, and LOVE to see articles like this, especially with Reid up on the pedestal himself now. Time to tear down another statue!
10 - American
Harry Reid takes money any way he can. Even enjoyment of sex crimes money from victims who suffered at the hands at his law firm even his sons get money from sex crimes at there law office Lionel, Sawyer and Collins because it gets more votes and the wallets get thicker.
Money, Money and money. He loves money and does not protect the innocent victims of sex crimes if they are poor.
11 - Dr Dreadful
Lost a case defended by Lionel, Sawyer and Collins, did we, American?
You're quite entitled to think that Harry reid is a useless turd, but who the hell put you in charge of deciding who gets a lawyer?