Senate Democratic Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) accepted free ringside tickets from the Nevada Athletic Commission to three professional boxing matches while that state agency was trying to influence him on federal regulation of boxing.
Reid took the free seats for Las Vegas fights between 2003 and 2005 as he was pressing legislation to increase government oversight of the sport, including the creation of a federal boxing commission that Nevada’s agency feared might usurp its authority.
He defended the gifts, saying that they would never influence his position on the bill and he was simply trying to learn how his legislation might affect an important home state industry. “Anyone from Nevada would say I’m glad he is there taking care of the state’s number one businesses,” he said. “I love the fights anyways, so it wasn’t like being punished,” added the senator, a former boxer and boxing judge.
Senate ethics rules generally allow lawmakers to accept gifts from federal, state or local governments, but specifically warn against taking such gifts — particularly on multiple occasions — when they might be connected to efforts to influence official actions.
[...]
Several ethics experts said Reid should have paid for the tickets, which were close to the ring and worth between several hundred and several thousand dollars each, to avoid the appearance he was being influenced by gifts.
The article also talks about Reid’s Abramoff connection (something I blogged about back in February):
In an interview Thursday in his Capitol office, Reid defended his decisions to accept the tickets and to take several actions benefiting former lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s clients and partners as they donated to him.
“I’m not Goodie Two Shoes. I just feel these events are nothing I did wrong,” Reid said.
Reid had separate meetings in June 2003 in his Senate offices with two Abramoff tribal clients and Edward Ayoob, a former staff member who went to work with Abramoff.
The meetings occurred over a five-day span in which Ayoob also threw a fundraiser for Reid at the firm where Ayoob and Abramoff worked that netted numerous donations from Abramoff’s partners, firm and clients.
Reid said he viewed the two official meetings and the fundraiser as a single event. “I think it all was one, the way I look at it,” he said.
One of the tribes, the Saginaw Chippewa of Michigan, donated $9,000 to Reid at the fundraiser and the next morning tribal officials met briefly with Reid and Ayoob at Reid’s office to discuss federal programs. Reid and the tribal chairman posed for a picture.
Five days earlier, Reid met with Ayoob and representatives of the Sac & Fox tribe of Iowa for about 15 minutes to discuss at least two legislative requests. Reid’s office said the senator never acted on those requests.
A few months after the fundraiser, Reid did sponsor a spending bill that targeted $100,000 to another Abramoff tribe, the Chitimacha of Louisiana, to pay for a soil erosion study for which Ayoob was lobbying. Reid said he sponsored the provision because Louisiana lawmakers sent him a letter requesting it.
Abramoff, a Republican lobbyist, has pleaded guilty in a widespread corruption probe of Capitol Hill. Reid used that conviction earlier this year to accuse Republicans of fostering a culture of corruption inside Congress.
Reid also wrote at least four letters favorable to Abramoff’s tribal clients around the time Reid collected donations from those clients and Abramoff’s partners, the Associated Press reported recently. Reid has declined to return the donations, unlike other lawmakers, saying his letters were consistent with his beliefs.
Those beliefs which are, apparently, do as I say not as I do.
Will Nancy Pelosi hold a press conference on the Democratic culture of corruption, discussing Senator Harry “I’m not Goodie Two Shoes” Reid?
Hat tip: John Hawkins
Read more via Outside The Beltway, Scrappleface (heh!), Iowa Voice
Related Toldjah So posts:
- Rep. Jefferson - the latest news
- Special interest junkets: Massachusetts lawmakers exposed
- While Republicans struggle to get on track, Dems have problems of their own
- Democrats and ethics
- Pelosi urges people not to “make a big deal” out of McKinney altercation with Capitol Hill police officer
- The Harry Reid-Jack Abramoff connection
- The Abramoff Democrats
- The Carl Levin-Jack Abramoff connection
- House Dems and Pelosi: trouble in paradise?
- Tom Delay isn’t the only one with Abramoff connections
Typical Democrat. Complain about corruption, but ignore and cover up their own.
If this had been Bill Frist, the lefties here and the trolls would have been calling for Frist to resign immediately.
I call on all these same people and trolls to call for Harry Reid’s immediate resignation.
Comment by PCD @ 5/30/2006 - 9:34 am
Reid’s claim that he did nothing wrong only shows how jaded and corrupt he is. If that beam was in a republican’s eye, Reid would have no trouble condemning another for what he himself is so obviously guilty of doing. Senator Reid; Do the right thing (if that is possible for a democrat) and resign!
Comment by bindare @ 5/30/2006 - 10:04 am
The Five Stages of Democratic Denial
Whenever a Democrat is caught with his or her hand in the taxpayers’ cookie jar, there are five distinct stages the Democrats and the MSM go through:
Stage 1: Silence. It is as though the person in question has entered the Federal Witness Protection program.
Stage 2: Downplay. We are told that there is nothing to the story. It is a “complicated” issue. The public is not interested. Nothing to see here folks so please move along.
Stage 3: Compare and Contrast. It is usually at this point that we hear something like everybody-does-it-but-Republicans-do-it-worse. An unmistakable sign that we have entered Stage 3 is the appearance of Richard Nixon’s ghost (or some other Republican) in the MSM reports on the subject, and how they are worse than poor little Democrat X.
Stage 4: Counter-scandal. Republican Y got a parking ticket when he was 17 years old. Obvious a hanging offense! And why was the news not broadcast on al-CNN 24/7 for the last 30 years? A coverup! So why are we talking about Democrat X when we should be lynching Republican Y?
Stage 5: Move On. This stage is reached when Democrat X is cooling his/her heels in the slammer. “The Democrat X issue? I’m glad you asked! It is important that the public know the whole truth. Let’s talk about Abu Ghraib.”
Comment by Mwalimu Daudi @ 5/30/2006 - 12:22 pm
LOL! Sounds about right, MD
Comment by Sister Toldjah @ 5/30/2006 - 1:00 pm
Librul WMD’s - “Weapons of Mass Delusion”
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 5/30/2006 - 4:36 pm
But wait! It gets better! He stated the reason he did it is because boxing is the number one industry in Nevada. Really? Gee. I thought it was, um, gaming? OK, maybe it’s mining. This is what I don’t respect about Dems. Blame everyone and take no responsibility and if one excuse doesn’t flow, quick come up with another.
Comment by Luv2Box @ 5/30/2006 - 9:28 pm
Not only will Nancy Pelosi avoid a Press Conference on Reid’s corruption but I’m sure the Democratic party will do their best to “gloss over” this incident. Or, they might engage in their favorite tactic of making any excuses for anyone in our party while we crucify the conservatives for as much as possible. Either way, I’ll be waiting for this to make the nightly news headlines - I’m guessing I’ll be waiting a long time…
Comment by AnnaB @ 5/31/2006 - 7:10 pm
“Not only will Nancy Pelosi avoid a Press Conference on Reid’s corruption”
Is it corrupt to get tickets (and was it legal?) and then vote against the person that gave you tickets?
Comment by andrew @ 5/31/2006 - 7:11 pm
You need to go read the Senate rules andrew. It is considered a violation of Senate rules to accept gifts or considerations that appear to offer the image of impropriety. What Reid did was not illegal in the absolute sense, not like Jefferson’s actions, but it is a violation of Senate ethics rules.
But then, the Democrats don’t really have any compunction about that. It’s the Republicans who have a rule that even if you’re indicted you must step down from a leadership position, the Democrats won’t step down unless they can’t manage to legislate from a prison cell, i.e. if their cell phone priviledges are cut off.
Comment by Severian @ 5/31/2006 - 8:23 pm
” It is considered a violation of Senate rules to accept gifts or considerations that appear to offer the image of impropriety.”
But didn’t he vote against the people who gave him the gifts? that doesn’t appear to offer the image of impropriety.
Comment by andrew @ 5/31/2006 - 11:29 pm
Let me say it s-l-o-w-l-y for you andrew. The image of impropriety arises from actionable involvement in any legislation connected to an interested party, from whom you may have recieved gratuities of any nature, regardless of outcome of the legislation. Can you think of why?…. take your time….. we’ll wait….
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 6/1/2006 - 1:17 am
“The image of impropriety arises from actionable involvement in any legislation connected to an interested party, from whom you may have recieved gratuities of any nature, regardless of outcome of the legislation.”
And to me the image goes away once you clearly act act against the interest that you are close to. Its a different matter if he was ambiguous, or voted for the interest. But to me the image is gone.
Comment by andrew @ 6/1/2006 - 8:27 am