Defeating Harry Reid

The defeat of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in November should be the No. 1 priority for everyone who wants to stop the Obama agenda, the out-of-control spending in Washington, and the all-too-cozy relationship between lobbyists and elected officials.

Reid is an old-time deal-maker who's been accused of using his influence to line his own and his family's pockets. Like many of his colleagues, he has an ethical tin ear and he will never admit that he's wrong.

As majority leader of the Senate, Reid has been Obama's biggest cheerleader. Reid single-handedly jammed Obama's costly liberal agenda through the Senate by introducing a bold new leadership tool -- bribing members to get their votes. During the health care debate, Reid brokered a deal to get the crucial 60th vote: He promised Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska full federal funding for Medicaid expansion in his state -- worth about $100 million -- in exchange for his support. And that was just part of it. Nelson also made another deal with Reid to help insurance companies in Nebraska. According to published reports, Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Nebraska would save between $15 million and $20 million in new fees under the provision in the Senate bill that Nelson negotiated. And other Nebraska insurers will be excluded from taxes on supplemental Medigap insurance sold to the elderly. That's quite a deal! Reid is awfully generous in handing out millions of dollars in taxpayer money. Those of us from the other 49 states won't be so fortunate; we can be forgiven for criticizing Reid's magnanimous gift to Nelson. Not only won't we get the same subsidy, we'll be paying for the one Reid gave to Nebraska.

But Reid isn't worrying about people like us. He's spent his entire career worrying about the casino/gaming industry that dominates Nevada, and about the trial lawyers, banks, telecommunications companies and lobbyists who pay for his campaigns. They're his constituents.

In running the Senate, money has been no object for Reid. It's the means to keeping his team in line and rewarding his friends. When Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana was wavering about voting for the health care bill, for example, Reid handed her a $300 million gift for her state. She wasn't at all undecided after that. And Reid also tossed out another $100 million to his friend and fellow ObamaCare advocate, Chris Dodd, for a $100 million new medical facility in Connecticut -- a state that already has the prestigious Yale University and UConn medical centers to cover its 3 million people. What are the odds that the soon-to-be-former-Sen. Dodd finds his name on the new facility? But, hey, what are friends for?

Despite Reid's considerable power in Washington, his leadership in the Senate doesn't appear to matter too much to his constituents in Nevada. In fact, most people don't even like him. According to The Wall Street Journal, a recent poll commissioned by the Las Vegas Review-Journal found that 52 percent of Nevadans had an unfavorable opinion of Reid and only 40 percent indicated that they would vote for him. But Reid won't go away quietly. He's announced that he'll raise $25 million for the race, if he needs to -- and the special interests will be glad to help him out.

They need him there. At the beginning of 2010, Reid had already raked in more than $15 million. But money may not be enough. After spending $22,000 a day from October through December (for a total of almost $2 million), Reid hasn't made any significant inroads in the polls. The people of Nevada, it turns out, just aren't wild about Harry.

Raising money won't be hard for Reid. He's always had the financial support of the casinos, personal injury lawyers, banks, telecommunications companies, lobbyists and mines. They're his people and they'll come through for him. Just like he comes through for them.

It's interesting to note that Reid has received almost $1 million of the $4,447,000 that the casino/gaming industry has already shelled out in this election cycle. For good reason: Reid has been the industry's mouthpiece in fighting online gambling -- a serious threat to Las Vegas. He's their boy.

And, so far, he's kept the Internet folks at bay. But it's not just the Las Vegas gambling interests that Reid has helped. He's been available to help other casinos, too. In fact, when the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal broke, lobbying firm records revealed that Reid had intervened with the Department of Interior on behalf of several tribes who were Abramoff clients. Abramoff and his lobbying firm, Greenberg/Traurig, were at the core of a landmark lobbying investigation into the more than $80 million that Indian tribes paid to him and affiliated groups. Prosecutors were especially interested in the contributions of over $4 million that were made available to friendly congressmen. In 2006, Abramoff pleaded guilty to conspiracy, tax evasion, and corrupt practices arising from his lobbying and campaign activities.

According to John Solomon of The Associated Press, Reid sent a letter urging then-Interior Secretary Gale Norton to reject a casino project opposed by two Abramoff clients, the Louisiana Coushatta and Mississippi Choctaw tribes. These tribes, of course, had nothing to do with Nevada. But Reid was only too happy to help them.

QUESTION: Why would a Nevada senator go to bat for tribal gambling interests in Louisiana and Mississippi?

ANSWER: Because he's just such a nice guy -- he'd help out anyone.

Or was there more to it?

Well, Reid was probably happy when the very day after he sent his letter his PAC, the Searchlight Leadership Fund, received a $5,000 donation from the Coushatta tribe -- at Abramoff 's direction. But, of course, that was just a coincidence. It had nothing to do with his concerns about the tribes. Reid was probably also happy about the additional contributions he received from Abramoff clients. Between 2001 and 2004, $68,000 in Abramoff-related donations went to Reid.

But, again, we're sure that money was totally -- totally -- unrelated to his work for the tribes. Reid actively helped Abramoff's tribal clients on a number of occasions. According to Solomon, Reid sent four letters to officials in the Bush administration on their behalf and argued for their position once on the Senate floor, successfully opposing a fellow Democrat's bill. "Reid collected donations around the time of each action," Solomon reported.

Again, the timing? Just a coincidence. There were frequent phone contacts and meetings between Abramoff's firm and Reid's office. At one point, one of Reid's top aides quit the Senate office to go to work for Abramoff's firm as a lobbyist, where he quickly organized a fundraiser for Reid. But that, too, was just a coincidence. Surely it had nothing to do with Reid's positions on gambling or his willingness to help the tribes.

As you can see, Reid is a master hypocrite. After the Abramoff scandal, Reid actually called for ethical reforms to control the influence of lobbyists, including: Closing the revolving door between the Congress and lobbying firms by doubling (from one year to two) the cooling-off period during which lawmakers, senior congressional staff and executive branch officials are prohibited from lobbying their former offices.

Did that, by any chance, include his own staff?

But Reid went even further: He criticized Republicans who accepted contributions from Abramoff, while at the same time he refused to refund the very same Abramoff-related contributions he himself had received. Because, you see, those were different. Reid claims that none of this was any problem -- since he'd never met Abramoff himself. But how did Reid know to write the letters and speak up on the floor? How did he know to show up at the lobbyists' fundraisers to benefit him?

Just another coincidence. It wasn't just the gambling interests that connected Reid and Abramoff 's firm. The lobbying office's billing records documented 21 other contacts with Reid's office about another client -- the Northern Mariana Islands, a U.S. territory. Dozens of phone calls and meetings with Reid's office about the extension of the minimum wage to the island were detailed:

Reid, along with his Senate counsel, Jim Ryan, met with Abramoff deputy Ronald Platt on June 5, 2001, "to discuss timing on minimum wage legislation," according to an invoice that Greenberg Traurig -- Abramoff's firm -- sent to the Marianas. Three weeks before the meeting, Greenberg Traurig's political action committee donated $1,000 to Reid's Senate re-election committee. Three weeks after the meeting, Platt himself donated $1,000 to Reid.

A Reid representative confirmed Platt had regular contacts with the senator's office, calling them part of the "routine checking in" by lobbyists who work Capitol Hill. As for the timing of donations, Manley said, "There is no connection. This is just a typical part of lawful fundraising."

Unfortunately, he's right -- it is very typical. That's what's wrong with Washington.

That's what's wrong with Harry Reid.

All in the Family: Reid's Three Sons and Son-in-Law All Represented Special Interests

Until several years ago, the Reid family were the folks to go to if you needed something in Nevada from the federal government. Reid's sons, who are lobbyists, could often be found in Harry Reid's Senate office, blurring the line between family and business.

But that all got a little uncomfortable after an investigation by the Los Angeles Times exposed the pervasive role of Reid's three sons and one son-in-law in representing special interests in Washington and Nevada. After the article, Reid finally -- and belatedly -- blocked the sons from working from his office or lobbying his staff. And while his sons went back to work on various projects in Nevada, Reid's son-in-law Steven Barringer stayed.

He's still an active lobbyist at the D.C. firm of Holland & Hart, where he has been a rainmaker for the firm: The year before he joined, Holland & Hart made only $100,000 in lobbying fees. Since he arrived in 2006, it has averaged about $2 million in lobbying fees. It helps to be related to the majority leader of the Senate, doesn't it? By any measure, Reid and his family have set some kind of new record for inappropriate conduct.

As the Los Angeles Times put it, when it came to lobbying by family members of a congressman or senator, Harry Reid is in a class by himself. One of his sons and his son-in-law lobby in Washington for companies, trade groups and municipalities seeking Reid's help in the Senate. A second son has lobbied in Nevada for some of those same interests, and a third has represented a couple of them as a litigator. In the past four years alone, their firms have collected more than $2 million in lobbying fees from special interests that were represented by the kids and helped by the senator in Washington. So pervasive are the ties among Reid, members of his family and Nevada's leading industries and institutions that it's difficult to find a significant field in which such a relationship does not exist.

During that time, Reid was vice chairman of the Senate Ethics Committee. He apparently asked for an opinion on whether his sons could work as lobbyists -- and was told that there was no problem. Talk about the goats guarding the garbage! Since then, Senate rules have prohibited lobbying of a member by a spouse or immediate family member. Of course, Reid himself saw nothing improper about Nevada clients paying his sons to lobby him!

Here are some of the significant findings from the Los Angeles Times story:

■ Mining companies paid $200,000 in lobbying fees to the law firm where Barringer worked from 1999 to 2000.

■ When Barringer moved to another firm, Lionel Sawyer & Collins, in 2001, the mining interests followed him. The National Mining Association and other mining companies active in Nevada paid the new firm $780,000, and Barringer was their registered lobbyist on the mining accounts. "Doug Hock, a spokesman for Newmont Mining Corp., said the company used Barringer 'based on his expertise in mining and environmental law' and not because of his family ties."

Note: From 2001–02, Lionel, Sawyer & Collins contributed $150,000 to Reid's PAC.

■ According to the Los Angeles Times, "In 2003, Reid's four sons -- Rory, 40, Leif, 35, Josh, 31, and Key, 28 -- work[ed] for Nevada's largest law firm, Lionel Sawyer & Collins. Rory Reid was a partner in the firm and was a Nevada lobbyist before his election to the Clark County Board of Commissioners in November 2003. (Rory Reid is now a candidate for governor of Nevada. Leif Reid is a litigator who has represented mining and resort industry associations in Nevada.)"

■ Key Reid was hired by the firm in 2002 to help open its Washington office.

■ According to the Los Angeles Times, "The mining firm Placer Dome Inc. paid the Lionel Sawyer law firm $5,000 a month in 2001 to be its 'eyes and ears' in Nevada and sought out Rory Reid's services."

■ The American Gaming Association followed Barringer from firm to firm and paid Lionel Sawyer & Collins over $180,000 from 2001 to 2003.

■ Barringer was hired by a helicopter-tour company fighting new federal flight restrictions near the Grand Canyon. Reid helped out on the matter.

■ "A chemical company seeking federal money to clean up radioactive waste and a hydrogen-fuel maker looking for a federal contract also got help from [Harry] Reid. Both hired son Rory to lobby on unrelated issues in Nevada."

■ The Howard Hughes Corp. paid $300,000 to Barringer's newly formed consulting firm "to push a provision allowing the company to acquire 998 acres of federal land ripe for development in the exploding Las Vegas metropolitan area." Reid pushed the bill.

■ "Other provisions of the same bill were intended to benefit a real estate development headed by a senior partner in Lionel Sawyer & Collins -- the Nevada law firm that employed all four of Reid's sons -- by moving the right-of-way for a federal power-transmission line off his property and on to what had been protected federal wilderness."

■ "Reid never told his Senate colleagues or the public that the provisions he authored, some of which were technically and not apparently beneficial to anyone, were, in fact, introduced on behalf of clients who paid his sons and son-in-law over $2 million."

■ "The governments of three of Nevada's biggest cities -- Las Vegas, North Las Vegas and Henderson -- also gained from the legislation, which freed up tens of thousands of acres of federal land for development and annexation. All three were represented by Reid's family members who contacted his staff on their clients' behalf."

■ Steven Barringer is still very much involved as a lobbyist and partner at Holland & Hart. Since arriving at the firm, he has represented the following very familiar clients with businesses in Nevada: American Gaming Association; Barrick Gold; city of Henderson; Coeur d'Alene Mines Corp.; The Howard Hughes Corp.; Newmont Mining; Quinetiq Government Relations; Apogen Technologies.

It must be very helpful to have the ear of the majority leader -- especially one who's shown just how willing he is to go out of his way to help his family.

Harry Reid has adamantly insisted that there was -- and presumably still is -- nothing wrong with his family members lobbying him and others on behalf of Nevada businesses. According to Reid, the fact that lobbyists have to file reports means that everything is transparent -- that there's no issue.

What's not transparent is what motivates the introduction of certain amendments, like the ones Reid sponsored to secretly help out his sons and benefactors. What's not transparent are any conversations Reid had with his sons about helping their clients. What's not transparent is the kind of information a majority leader might give his lobbyist son-in-law.

What is transparent is that Reid needs to go.

Reid's Special Earmark: A Bridge to His Own Land

In 2005, Reid sponsored an earmark to the 2006 transportation bill that provided $18 million in federal funds to build a bridge over the Colorado River to connect Laughlin with Bullhead City, Ariz. Laughlin is a casino town, but most of its workers live across the river in Bullhead. Also located in Bullhead -- just a few miles from the bridge site -- is a 160-acre parcel of land owned by Sen. Harry Reid.

So did Reid sponsor an amendment that would increase the value of his own land? Looks like the answer is yes.

In 2006, some local officials predicted that the construction of the new bridge would "undoubtedly hike land values in an already-booming commuter town, where speculators are snapping up undeveloped land for housing developments and other projects."

Of course, Rebecca Kirszner, Reid's communications director, insisted, "Sen. Reid's support for the bridge had absolutely nothing to do with property he owns." Of course. Construction on the bridge is expected to begin in 2010 and continue until 2013. Meanwhile, building continues in the town, and a new "world-class" resort is planned.

Reid bought the property more than 20 years ago, paying $150,000 for 100 acres; his friend Clair Haycock, the owner of Haycock Petroleum in Las Vegas, bought an additional 60 acres for $90,000. At one point in the 1990s, Reid and his partner sold the land for $1.3 million, but the buyer defaulted on the note and the land returned to the partners. Haycock sold his interest to Reid for $10,000 in 2002, even though the property was assessed at more than $2,000 an acre.

So why didn't Haycock charge Reid $120,000 (60 acres at $2,000 per acre)?

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

What's that supposed to mean? Presumably, if Hancock needed to sell, he needed the cash. But even if he did, why would he settle for less than 10 percent of his land's value?

Years earlier, they'd been offered more than $1 million for the property. So the sale price makes no sense. Meanwhile, property prices began to jump after the bridge proposal. According to the Los Angeles Times, one California businessman bought property near the Reid property in 2006, "paying $240,000 for 37.52 acres, an average of $6,396 an acre."

Yet, strangely enough, Sen. Reid has indicated a decrease, not an increase, in the value of the property. From 2001 to 2005, Reid disclosed that the property was worth $500,000 to $1,000,000. Then, in 2006, after the earmark for the bridge went into effect, he indicated that the entire 160-acre property was worth only $150,000. That same year, another nearby purchaser paid over $6,000 an acre. In 2007 and 2008, Reid valued the asset at $250,000 to $500,000.

Is Reid's property the only one in town that's decreasing in value? Or has he failed to disclose the true value? And was the property a gift from his oil company pal?

Wishing You a Merry Christmas -- With Campaign Funds

Although Reid is freehanded when he's doling out taxpayer funds, he can be quite the tightwad with his own money -- even at Christmastime. When it came time to give out Christmas gifts to the service people who work at his luxurious condominium building in Washington, he apparently didn't want to dig into his own pockets. So he used a total of $3,300 of campaign contributions from his political action committee instead.

In 2002, Reid generously gave $600 in Christmas gifts to the help. In 2004, he gave $1,200. And in 2005 he gave $1,500. This money all came from campaign funds and it was all given "to an entity listed as the REC Employee Holiday Fund. His campaign listed the expenses as campaign 'salary' for two of the years and as a 'contribution' one year."

But for the tenacity of the astute John Solomon of The Associated Press, Reid would have gotten away with it.

Once the gifts were disclosed, Reid's office suddenly claimed that listing the gifts as salary was a "clerical error" and that his lawyers approved the use of campaign money for the residential fund. "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," he said.

Hey, Harry, it wasn't Republicans who dug into campaign funds to pay your personal expenses. It was you. Reid actually tried to suggest that the money was related to his work because of the extra security he required.

Hey, Harry, do you really think cleaning floors and operating elevators qualifies as "security work"? Do you really think "distracting from Republican failures" is why the press raises these kinds of questions about the way you run your office?

Hey, Harry, you're a cheapskate and a fraud. Go back to Nevada.

The Land Grab: One More Ethical Issue

In 2004, Reid received a windfall profit of $1.1 million from the sale of Nevada property he hadn't personally owned for at least three years before the sale. Reid and his wife bought the property for $400,000 in 1998, but they sold it in 2001 for the same price. When Reid submitted his financial disclosure form to the Senate for that year, he failed to divulge the transfer of the property to a limited liability company he owned with a friend, Jay Brown, a former casino lawyer "whose name [has] surfaced in a major political bribery trial ... and in organized crime investigations," according to USA Today.

In 2004, after a change in zoning, Brown sold the land -- and Reid made $1.1 million.

After John Solomon reported the 2001 transaction, Reid suddenly amended his 2001 disclosure form to reflect the sale. Although Reid claimed he was a part-owner of the limited liability corporation, public records don't list him as a shareholder. Must have been another clerical error.

It's nice to triple your money on an investment. So why didn't Reid disclose it?

Note: Brown is a longtime contributor to Reid, contributing $9,800 to his campaign and $20,000 to his PAC, the Reid Victory Fund, in 2009. Brown was also a law partner with Reid's son-in-law, Steven Barringer: His firm was formerly known as Singer, Brown & Barringer.

Dick Morris is a prominent political consultant who has served as adviser to clients of all political views. Eileen McGann, an attorney and consultant, works with Mr. Morris on campaigns around the world, specializing in using the Internet to win elections. Together they write weekly columns for the New York Post and foxnews.com. They live in Florida.