Will the pork stop here? Reid pledges change but he pushed funding that may benefit him

[NVMojo]

sigh ....


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."

more...

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-earmarks13nov13,0,6626376,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines

[usregimechange]

1. He needs to clean his own back yard.

[Ignacio Upton]

2. I would rather get this stuff aired out now rather than in 2008

Same with Murtha and CREW. Hopefully a third candidate will announce at the last minute, or Murtha will withdrawl his name. BTW, can someone find out if the Reid article is true? I've been burned out with so much false shit from John Solomon, that I want to make sure this is actually real.

[NVMojo]

3. LV Pundit has this for a response:

LA Times has gone too far ...

http://vegaspundit.typepad.com/vegas_pundit/2006/11/reid_says_the_l.html

[bemildred]

4. What crap.

"possibly", "could", "some"

This is speculative drivel. Dispensing pork is what Congress does. Anything that benefits the public can be argued to benefit Congresspersons too.

[JDPriestly]

5. If the bridge is really needed, if it isn't a boondoggle, if

Reid is not getting kickbacks from the contractors and if Reid is not promoting other projects that benefit him personally, it may not be such a big deal. From other accounts I have read, it appears that he did not hide the fact that he owned the property. It may be that this was a local issue that really has merit and that Reid was aware of it because he has ties to the area. We should hold Democrats to the same high standard of ethics to which we hold Republicans. But, we need to find out more about this situation before assuming that Reid's support of this project was a form of corruption. Did he support the profit for his gain, or did he support it to help his neighbors and his community? Did he gain more from the project than others in the community in question? Does the project serve the interests of the people of Nevada. Was the cost of the bridge reasonable? Did Reid receive any kick-back money? Did Reid have a say in precisely where the bridge was located? Depending on the facts, we can determine whether Reid is yet another politician in it for the money. We don't have enough information at this point to decide that. You can't conclude that Reid did anything improper just because his property became more valuable due to the bridge.

It looks like Reid owned the property a long time before the building of the bridge was an issue.

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.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-earmarks13nov13,0,6626376,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines

It also appears likely, objectively speaking, that the bridge is needed.

Development is booming in the area and local officials in Laughlin and Bullhead City support a new crossing to ease traffic on the one existing bridge. They also expect it would add to property values.

. . . .

After the Los Angeles Times published a story on the issue Monday, Reid's office issued a five-page fact sheet in response.

According to the statement, Laughlin officials began pushing for another bridge after the nearby Hoover dam crossing was closed because of security concerns after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, pushing traffic onto a single Laughlin-Bullhead City bridge.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061113/ap_on_go_co/reid_bridge&printer=1

Now, is the amount to be paid for the bridge unreasonable? Is there something else "wrong" about the deal? There could be, but based on the facts in these two articles, we can't know.

Members of Congress, and Representatives more than Senators, are supposed to represent the interests of their local communities. There is nothing wrong with promoting a project that will promote prosperity in the area that you represent. It depends on all the facts of the situation.

[JDPriestly]

6. Looks like Reid answered my questions.

We'll have to see whether his answers are rebutted.

[everythingsxen]

7. *gasp*

You mean that Democratic politicians can be corrupt too and not just Republicans?

*activates partisan programming*
*sticks fingers in ears*
*ALERT ALERT ALERT! FREEPER FREEPER FREEPER!*


:rofl:

Ah, good times. Seriously though, this is why the Democrats and Republicans both need to outlawed and reform the government based on a European Paliamentary system. Like at least 5 parties.

[NVMojo]

8. All Dems need to be very careful and keep it clean. The freeps will

be watching the like hawks in anticipation of ripping back control of Congress in 08.