Record and Controversies - Harry Reid

From KeyWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Harry Reid

Acceptance of Boxing Tickets

Reid accepted free ringside seats at three Nevada boxing matches between 2003 and 2005. The passes were provided by the Nevada Athletic Commission. This is the official Nevada State Agency that "regulates all contests or exhibitions of boxing, including the licensure and supervision of promoters, boxers, mixed martial artists, karate boxers, seconds, ring officials, managers, and matchmakers." (Source: Reid accepted the tickets at a time that he was pushing legislation that would diminish the power of the commission. The bill was passed in the Senate, but stalled in the house.

In December of 2006, the Senate Ethics Committee cleared Reid of any wrong doing in the matter. Reid, however, said that he understood the negative image his actions created and would refrain from acting similarly in the future.[1]

Actions as Senate Majority Leader


On February 8, 2007, despite concerns and objections by many Republicans and some Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Reid moved for the Senate to consider the continuing resolution for FY2007 the following week with limited debate.[2]

Blocking White House Nominees

Harry Reid and other Democrats threatened to use the option of blocking all future White House nominations along with shortening the August break in response to the White House appointing three controversial figures during the 2007 spring recess.[3]

Scooter Libby Pardon

After Vice-President Dick Cheney's former Chief of Staff Lewis "Scooter" Libby was convicted on four counts of perjury, obstruction of justice and making a false statement (March 6, 2007), Reid demanded that President Bush pledge not to pardon him.[4]

Threatens to Call Off August, 2007 Recess

Reid threatened to cancel the Senate's scheduled August, 2007 recess if Senators did not come to an agreement over two pieces of legislation that the Democrats were depending on per their platform in the 2006 elections. The first bill would have implemented the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and the second bill would have overhauled ethics, disclosure, transparency, and lobbying regulations.[5]

Opposition to Ted Olson as Attorney General

Harry Reid stated on Sept. 12, 2007 that the President's first choice to succeed Alberto Gonzales as attorney general, Ted Olson, would never be confirmed. Ted Olson was the former solicitor general and had represented President Bush before the Supreme Court concerning the 2000 Florida vote recount case. Reid and other Democrats claimed that Olson was too partisan for the position. Reid stated, "Ted Olson will not be confirmed... I intend to do everything I can to prevent him from being confirmed as the next attorney general." Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) was also against Olson as a choice for attorney general, stating that Olson was "certainly not a consensus nominee. He’s had a very political background at a time when you want ... somebody who puts the rule of law first."[6]

Warning of Late Adjournment Date

On September 20, 2006, Reid warned members of Congress that they might have to stay in session until Christmas if progress was not made on passing "must pass" appropriations bills. The target adjournment date on the House calendar is October 26, but Congress rarely gets out before November. In 2006, then Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), proposed doing away with target adjournment dates altogether, saying "It means nothing. You all know it means nothing because it really does mean nothing. Anyway, there is no reason to have a target adjournment on the schedule."[7]

Reid claimed that the lack of progress on the appropriations bills (none had been passed), was President Bush's "usual" method of negotiating. Reid said: "It's his way or no way."

Bush is a "Loser" and Other Comments

Reid made a disparaging comparison between President George W. Bush and Bush's father in May of 2005: "The man's father is a wonderful human being. I think this guy is a loser." He later apologized for the remark. Reid also called Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas an "embarrassment" and referred to Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan as one of the biggest political hacks we have here in Washington.”[8]

Clash Over 9/11 Bill

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Reid disputed a provision to a 9/11 Bill. The legislation in 2007 gave collective bargaining rights to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screeners. The Democrats said the provision was a necessary clause for the homeland security bill. Meanwhile, Republicans blasted the Democrats, arguing that the bill was a giveaway to the labor interests that have given crucial political support to the new majority.[9]

Earmark for a Bridge Near Personal Land

In November 2006, a bridge building project located near 160 acres of land held by Reid, was earmarked by him, according to the LA Times. The bridge was intended to span the Colorado River between Laughlin, Nevada and Bullhead City, Arizona. Reid's land is several miles from the proposed site of the bridge in Arizona. His office explained that the new bridge was necessary due to the Hoover Dam's closure to truck traffic because of terrorism fears and categorically denied that it had anything to do with his landholdings.

In January 2007, Reid's 2002 acquisition of the property came under scrutiny as he only paid $166 an acre for the 160 acre parcel.

Reid's interest in the barren parcel dates back to 1979 and through 1982, when he and Clair Haycock bought the 160 acres. Haycock bought a three-eighths interest, equivalent to 60 acres, for $90,000 — $1,500 an acre. Reid bought the other five-eighths, the equivalent of 100 acres. They did not divide the parcel.

Allegations have been made that Reid introduced legislation on behalf of Haycock, who was a "lubricants dealer" in Las Vegas.[10]

Environmental Record

Yucca Mountain

One of Harry Reid's chief concerns has been the designation of Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste storage site. Reid has worked diligently to keep Congress and the President from approving the site permanently. In the 1990s he worked to ensure that the Senate could not override President Bill Clinton's veto of legislation that sought to make Yucca Mountain a permanent nuclear waste depository.

During the 2000 Presidential campaign Albert Gore, Sr. took the same position as Bill Clinton, declaring that he would veto any legislation permanently establishing Yucca Mountain as a high level nuclear waste site. George W. Bush, the eventual victor of the election, stated that he would rely on "sound science" to determine his position.

In 2002, President Bush and his Department of Energy approved of Yucca Mountain as a permanent nuclear waste site. Reid is reported to have shouted at the President while at the White House and has publicly called George Bush a liar because of this decision.[11] Reid is rumored to have voted in retaliation to block a Utah wilderness bill meant to keep a native American Utah group from accepting nuclear waste in exchange for monetary return, because their senate delegation voted in favor of the Yucca Mountain project.[12]

In his December 5, 2004, appearance on Meet the Press, Reid reiterated that he believed Bush was a liar:

MR. RUSSERT: When the president talked about Yucca Mountain and moving the nation's nuclear waste there, you were very, very, very strong in your words. You said, "President Bush is a liar. He betrayed Nevada and he betrayed the country."
Is that rhetoric appropriate?
SEN. REID: I don't know if that rhetoric is appropriate. That's how I feel, and that's how I felt. I think to take that issue, Tim, to take the most poisonous substance known to man, plutonium, and haul 70,000 tons of it across the highways and railways of this country, past schools and churches and people's businesses is wrong. It's something that is being forced upon this country by the utilities, and it's wrong. And we have to stop it. And people may not like what I said, but I said it, and I don't back off one bit.[13]

Since Democrats have taken control of the House and Senate and President Obama was elected, Obama has decided against Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste depository.[14] This decision has been claimed as a victory by Reid and the Democrats.

Governmental Issues

Hold on Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act

In April 2007, when a Republican Senator placed an anonymous hold on the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnel (R-KY) blamed Majority Leader Reid for the failure of the bill's passage due to his refusing to bring the bill up for a floor debate, admitting that the objecting Senator wished to add amendments to the bill.

On June 26, 2007, when Reid tried to stop the appointment of conferees for S.1, an important lobbying reform bill (which had passed the Senate before), by demanding the addition of an amendment (a so-called "poison pill" amendment) to the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act, Reid was able to block the maneuver, but the conference committee for S.1 was delayed as a result.[15]

Honest Leadership and Open Government Act

When the Republican majority presented their ethics reform package in 2006 entitled the Lobbying Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 to the floor, Minority Leader Reid offered an amendment to replace the proposed bill with the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act which was the Democrat's ethics bill. The vote on the amendment fell on party lines and was defeated 44-55.

Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2007

On January 4th, 2007, the Senate began its legislative work in the 110th Congress with the introduction of the Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2007 (S.1) by Senate Majority Harry Reid. The bill would make numerous changes to ethics rules and laws in Congress. On January 18, 2007, the Senate overwhelmingly passed the bill, 96-2. The Senate went to conference committee on the bill after the House passed similar lobbying and transparency legislation in several other bills. When Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI), who sought to extend the "revolving door" time period from one year to two years, asked to be on the conference committee to pursue those reforms, Majority Leader Reid denied his request. Many lobbying reform advocacy groups, including Public Citizen, the US Public Interest Research Group, Democracy 21, Common Cause, and the League of Women Voters, aware that the make up of the conference committee would be crucial in determining the final outcome of the legislation, were disappointed over the announcement. On June 28, 2007, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) blocked a deal between Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) that would have started up long-stalled conference proceedings on the bill. DeMint made an objection to the agreement by phone to the Senate floor, minutes after McConnell had said Republicans would drop their objections to naming conferees. DeMint argued that he would not let the bill proceed until certain earmark reforms were accepted. He stated, "We will not have earmark reform during this year’s appropriations process. That is why this is being done," DeMint charged on the floor, adding later that "the only reason to go to conference with [the rules] in is to take them out." Democrats responded, Reid commenting, "Here we are, seconds from going to conference and a call comes in to the Republican cloak room. I understand the Minority Leader has a responsibility to take that... but the eyes of the nation are on us... to not let us go to conference on some petty issue that my friend has raised is really bad.”

Harvey Whittemore and Coyote Springs

Harvey Whittemore is a Nevada attorney/lobbyist who gave large contributions to Reid's campaigns and leadership fund. He is a multimillionaire lobbyist and land developer. Whittemore's personal attorney is Harry Reid's son, Leif. Whittemore developed a $30 billion golf course named Coyote Springs. This project was protested by environmental groups because it would supposedly have detrimental effects on several endangered species. With Reid's influence and help, Whittemore was able to proceed with construction of the course.[16][17]

The Los Angeles Times penned a series of investigative reports laying out the case that Harry Reid introduced legislation and put pressure on regulatory agencies to advance the business interests of Whittemore, a close friend and business associate.

  • In Nevada, the Name to Know is Reid Chuck Neubauer / Richard T. Cooper, Los Angeles Times, June 23, 2003. Members of one lawmaker's family represent nearly every major industry in their home state. And their clients rely on his goodwill. Series: Second of two parts.
  • Desert Connections. Chuck Neubauer / Richard T. Cooper, Los Angeles Times, Aug. 20, 2006.


As Senate Majority Leader, Reid was involved to an unusual degree in assembling the final health care bill. He met with almost every Senate Democrat to assess concerns and personally oversaw the complicated piece of legislation through a favorable review by the Congressional Budget Office.

On December 9, 2009, Senate Democrats reached what Reid called a "broad agreement" on the health care debate.[18] According to senior Democratic aides and a document distributed to senators who met with Reid, the bill would:[19]

  • Require individuals to get health insurance and parents to insure their children. Penalties on individuals who are not covered will phase in from $95 per year to $750. Employers with more than 50 workers would have to offer insurance or pay a penalty for each worker who buys coverage through a health insurance exchange;
  • Provide a tax deduction for small businesses for up to 50 percent of the cost of covering employees;
  • Reform insurance company practices, making it illegal for insurers to drop or deny coverage based on the cost of care or pre-existing conditions. It would also let parents keep their children on their insurance through age 26.

The passage of the Patient and Affordable Care Act is unarguably the biggest accomplishment of Reid’s political career; however, its passage has not come without great struggle. The bill had no Republican support, so Reid had to rely on all 60 members of his Democratic coalition. As Dick Durbin (D-IL) stated: “Harry Reid had to fight great political forces and the Senate rules to bring us to this moment, and the fight continues.”[20] The bill has since passed and been signed into law by President Obama.

Improper Donation from Lobbyist

In 1999, Reid received a $3,000 donation from Ben Barnes (a friend from Texas) for his legal defense fund during a recount process which followed his 1998 Senate campaign against his present-day colleague, Sen. John Ensign (R-NV). Congressional ethics rules, however, prohibit lawmakers from accepting legal defense fund donations from registered lobbyists, which Barnes was at the time. The donation went unnoticed until the Center for Public Integrity released a report in August 2005 about a handful of lawmakers, Reid among them, who'd accepted improper lobbyist donations into their legal defense funds.

Reid brought the matter to the Senate Select Committee on Ethics, and repaid the $3,000 to Barnes in October 2005. The Ethics Committee informed him that he should also pay interest for the time he had the donation. Reid had an accountant calculate the exact amount using the statutory rate under Nevada law (prime plus two percent adjusted annually), and sent Barnes a check for $1,611.47 on May 22, 2006 out of his campaign fund.

Reid spokesman Jon Summers stated, "As soon as this came to our attention we resolved this as quickly as possible."[21]

Improper Reporting of Land Deal

In 1998, Reid bought two parcels of land on the outskirts of Las Vegas. He bought one parcel himself, and another jointly with his partner and longtime friend Jay Brown. In 2001, Reid sold the land to a limited liability company created by Brown for an equivalent share of the company. He did not disclose the sale to Congress, however, and continued to list the land as a personal asset. When the land sold for over $1 million dollars in 2004, Reid received $1.1 million and listed the transaction as a personal land sale. Reid's name was not formally attached to Brown's company in any way. Reid claimed that this was because the two men had known each other for 35 years and trusted each other completely.

On October 16, 2006, Reid announced that he was filing a correction to his ethics form that would better represent the actualities of the arrangements surrounding the land deal. He also stated that he would be amending the reports to include two other small holdings that had been previously unreported.[22]

Improper Use of Campaign Funds for Christmas Bonuses

From 2002-2005, Harry Reid used money that had been donated to his political campaign fund to contribute to the holiday bonus fund for the staffers of his Ritz-Carlton condominium. Federal law forbids the use of campaign funds for personal matters. Reid claimed that he had consulted his lawyers and had been told it was legal as he was thanking them for extra work. Nevertheless, in October 2006, he pledged to personally pay back the money (a total of $3300).[23]

Iraq War

Reid voted for the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq in Oct. 2002.

Iraq War Legislation

On April 3rd, 2007, Sen. Reid indicated that if the President vetoed the current Iraq appropriations bill, then he would in turn endorse a measure by Russ Feingold to cut general appropriations for the War on Terror. The measure would still permit money appropriated for “targeted” and “limited” campaigns against al Qaeda, protecting U.S. workers and training Iraqi forces. On May 14, Reid introduced two amendments to a water-resources bill, aimed at addressing the Iraq War. The first amendment mirrored the Feingold legislation. The second amendment was similar to the previously passed legislation (which Bush vetoed) and would provide funding to U.S. combat troops, as well as call for withdrawal deadlines. The amendment, however, would include waivers allowing Bush to sidestep any Iraq withdrawal timeline. On May 16, the Senate failed to invoke cloture on the Feingold measure, 29-67.[24]

In March and April 2007, the Senate considered an Iraq supplemental spending bill which included a deadline for troop withdrawal from Iraq. When President Bush threatened to veto such a measure, Majority Leader Reid responded by stating “This is a new thing for the president... In six years he’s had one veto, because he’s basically gotten everything he wanted.” He maintained, however, that he would like to reach a compromise with the White House, stating, “I would like to have a bill that he wouldn’t veto.” When the spending bill first passed the Senate, Reid stated, "We've spoken the words the American people wanted us to speak... There must be a change of direction in the war in Iraq, the civil war in Iraq." When the House and Senate passed such a bill, President Bush made good on his promise and vetoed it.[25]

Following the veto, Democratic leaders began considering another approach. Initially, a spokesperson for Majority Leader Reid said, “It's not anything that will fly in the Senate.” Later, however, when it became clear the measure would be considered by the House, the same aide stated “It is something that Senator Reid intends to take a look at.”[26]

On May 22, 2007, after numerous attempts at including timetables in an Iraq supplemental spending bill, Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate announced that they would each introduce supplemental spending bills which would not include timetables for combat withdrawal. Reid stated "And then, as I've indicated, the defense authorization, we're going to start right where we've left off with this bill, continuing our push to change direction in the war in Iraq."[27]

On Tuesday, June 12, 2007, Senate Democrats unveiled amendments to the defense authorization bill that would attempt to modify the role of U.S. combat troops in the Iraq War. These amendments followed previous, unsuccessful Democratic efforts to end U.S. involvement in the war, which resulted first in a presidential veto and, finally, a revised bill that did not address withdrawal. Majority Leader Reid said that each of the proposals would be given a separate floor vote before the Senate's Independence Day recess.[28]

The new amendments discussed would:

  • Mandate beginning troop withdrawals within 120 days of passage
  • Set new troop readiness measures and ensure a minimum break between Iraq deployments
  • Block spending on military presence in Iraq except for troops working on counter-terrorism and training
  • Force a vote in Congress on revoking the 2002 authorization for the war

Opposition to President Bush's Troop "Surge" in Iraq

Majority Leader Reid along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) announced their opposition to the President's plan for a troop "surge" in Iraq. Both Pelosi and Reid expressed their disapproval in a letter to President Bush on January 5, 2007, several days before the President's speech announcing the plan, but after its content was leaked to the public.

On February 5, 2007, the Senate planned to address several of the proposed nonbinding resolutions concerning the troop "surge." Senate Majority Leader Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) were unable, however, to agree on which resolutions would be debated and the manner in which they would be considered. Republicans successfully blocked debate on the bill. When a cloture vote was attempted on one of the measures, Reid also voted with Republicans against debate, once it became clear the measure would fail, a procedural move that would provide him the option of reopening the issue in the future. Following the vote, Reid objected to Republican allegations that "Democrats were seeking to minimize consideration of alternative resolutions of support for the Bush surge." He continued by telling Republicans, "You can run but you cannot hide...We are going to debate Iraq."

On February 15, 2007, Reid announced that the Senate would hold a cloture vote on a non-binding resolution regarding the troop "surge" which was being considered in the House at the time. It stated:

"(1) Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq; and (2) Congress disapproves of the decision of President George W. Bush announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq."

The vote was scheduled for Saturday, February 17, which was part of a long weekend in celebration of Presidents' Day. Some saw Reid's decision as an attempt to make it more difficult, or at least inconvenient, for Republicans to again block the resolution from coming to the floor. Reid stated:

“For nearly four years, the Republican-controlled Senate stood silent on the President's flawed Iraq policies and watched as the situation deteriorated into a civil war. The American people have chosen to change course. Democrats have chosen to change course. Unfortunately, Senate Republicans have chosen obstruction. Almost every Republican who expressed concern about the escalation chose to block the Senate from debating the issue...Today, Democrats offered Republicans another chance for compromise, suggesting the Senate debate one resolution in favor of escalation and one resolution opposed to escalation. Once again, Senate Republicans refused...Democrats are determined to give our troops and the American people the debate they deserve, so the Senate will have another Iraq vote this Saturday. We will move for a clear up or down vote on the House resolution which simply calls on Congress to support the troops and opposes the escalation...Those Republicans who have expressed their concern over the Senate’s failure to debate the war in Iraq will have another opportunity to let their actions speak louder than their words.”

The vote failed 56-34. Following this second successful Republican filibuster of a troop "surge" resolution, Reid refused to hold a vote on any other resolutions, however, arguing that they were Republican attempts to “divert attention from the issue at hand.” Following the vote, Reid said it was unlikely that the resolution would be brought to the floor again, and implied that Democrats would instead focus on measures aimed at redeploying some U.S. troops from Iraq.

In response to a binding resolution introduced by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) requiring congressional authorization for President Bush to increase troop levels in Iraq, Jim Manley, a spokesperson for the Majority Leader, said that "Senator Kennedy's resolution underscores the significant opposition on the Hill and with the American people to the President's plan. This is only one of several ideas about how to respond to the President's proposal on Iraq."[29]

Reid Threatens Las Vegas Newspaper

Reid has openly wished for the Las Vegas Review-Journal to ‘go out of business' - a newspaper which has held opposing political viewpoints with the Senator.

The comment came when Bob Brown, the Las Vegas Review Journal's Director of Advertising, met with Reid at a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce luncheon. During the simple process of handshaking, an exchange in which most people with an ounce of class can pull off without issue, Reid said to Brown: "I hope you go out of business."[30]

Publisher Sherman Frederick posted an Op-Ed column in which he called Reid's tactics childish, ugly, boorish, creepy and asinine.

Relationship to Jack Abramoff

According to a February 9, 2006 Associated Press story by John Solomon, Reid wrote letters and had "routine contacts" with lobbying partners and clients of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Reid's actions aided the interests of Abramoff's Native American clients. Reid has acknowledged receiving $61,000 from clients or colleagues of Abramoff, much of which was given to Reid by Indian tribes after Abramoff was hired.[31] Reid collected donations around the time of each action he took to help Abromoff's clients. Ethics rules require senators to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest in legislative matters regarding campaign donors. While some politicians have returned contributions they received from Abramoff or his clients, Harry Reid has steadfastly refused, claiming the Abramoff matter "is a Republican scandal."

Abramoff's lobbying firm has made public billing records and congressional correspondence of more than two dozen contacts, between Abramoff's lobbying team, and Reid's office. Many of the discussions relate to the passage of a Kennedy bill that would slowly raise the minimum wage of the Northern Mariana Islands.[32] Publicly, Reid supported an increase in minimum wage there, though some have claimed that privately he was working against it. Both Reid spokesmen Jim Manley and Ron Platt, one of Abramoff's partners involved with the Mariana lobbying, have denied the claim. Platt said "I'm sure he didn't."[33]

In his defense, Reid spokesman Jim Manley said that neither Reid nor his campaign have received money directly from Abramoff, and Reid said his legislative work was done on behalf of his Nevadan constituents. After contacting Reid's office and other fact checking, Josh Marshall wrote in his Talking Points Memo blog that, "despite the AP story's narrative of lobbyist contacts, there doesn't seem to be any evidence whatsoever that Reid ever took any action on behalf of Abramoff's Marianas clients."

Senator's Sons

In 2003, Harry Reid was embarrassed by a Los Angeles Times article on his son and son-in-law lobbying for private gains. In 2002, Reid introduced a bill, The Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, which was ostensibly aimed at boundary shifts, land trades and other arcane matters in Nevada. The Times article explains that the bill would provide "a cavalcade of benefits to real estate developers, corporations and local institutions that were paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in lobbying fees to his sons' and son-in-law's firms."[34]

Howard Hughes Corp. paid Reid's son-in-law Scott Barringer's small law firm $300,000 in lobbying fees and received "a provision allowing the company to acquire 998 acres of federal land ripe for development in the exploding Las Vegas metropolitan area." A Nevada law firm that employs all four of Reid's sons represented a group of real estate developers that received helpful provisions in the Clark County bill.

Reid argued that the bill would boost Nevada's economy while protecting the environment. The bill "placed an additional 440,000 acres of federal land under wilderness protection."

Reid's son Key and Barringer have represented almost every industry in Nevada. All of his sons have sought Reid's help on federal matters over the course of time. Reid initially defended his son's and son-in-law's lobbying as perfectly legal and clean, noting that they had to file biannual reports. He later banned family members from lobbying anyone in his office.

Slavery Slur

On Dec. 7, 2009, during debate over Senator Ben Nelson's abortion amendment to the Health Care Bill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid stated,

"Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all Republicans have come up with is this, 'Slow down, stop everything, let's start over. You think you've heard these same excuses before? You're right. When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said, 'Slow down, it's too early. Let's wait. Things aren't bad enough."[35]

External Links


  1. Ethics panel clears Reid The Review Journal, Dec. 12, 2006
  2. Senators try to recoup $3.1 billion for BRAC The Hill, Feb. 8, 2007
  3. Democrats May Block Nominees Roll Call, Apr. 11, 2007
  4. Harry Reid: Bush Must Not Pardon Libby TPM, Mar. 6, 2007
  5. Reid threatens to call off August recess The Hill, June 29, 2007
  6. SourceWatch
  7. SourceWatch
  8. Harry Reid Calls Alan Greenspan a “Hack” Outside the Beltway, March 4, 2005
  9. TSA Statement on Collective Bargaining TSA, July 10, 2007
  10. Reid's land deal speaks for itself Los Angeles Times, Feb. 2, 2007
  11. A Democratic senator goes nuclear on the White House Salon, Mar. 1, 2002
  12. Reid denies Yucca vote payback Las Vegas Review Journal, Dec. 17, 2002
  13. GUESTS: Sen. Harry Reid (D - NV), President Ghazi al-Yawar of the Interim Government of Iraq Meet The Press, Dec. 5, 2004
  14. Reid Celebrates Obama's Yucca Mountain Decision US News & World Report, Feb. 26, 2009
  15. Upping the Ante on McConnell as Senate Republicans Try Trickery Sunlight Foundation, June 26, 2007
  16. Harry's deal Pittsburgh Live, Sept. 25, 2007
  17. When Harry Met Vegas, Jan. 14, 2008
  18. Harry Reid: Democrats reach 'broad agreement' Politico, Dec. 10, 2009
  19. Harry Reid Moves Massive Health Bill to the Senate Floor Politics Daily, Nov. 19, 2009
  20. Reid, as Legislative Tactician, Takes Ownership of Health Care Overhaul The New York Times, Nov. 19, 2009
  21. Sen. Harry Reid Repays Improper Donation NewsMax, Aug. 14, 2006
  22. Reid decides to amend ethics reports over land deal USA Today, Oct. 16, 2006
  23. Reid to Reimburse Campaign for Payments The Washington Post, Oct. 17, 2006
  24. Water Resources Development Act of 2007/Iraq War amendments SourceWatch
  25. U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health, and Iraq Accountability Act, 2007 (H.R.1591) SourceWatch
  26. U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007 (H.R.2206) SourceWatch
  27. Congressional actions to end the Iraq War in the 110th Congress SourceWatch
  28. FY 2008 Defense Department authorization SourceWatch
  29. Congressional actions regarding President Bush’s 2007 proposed troop “surge” in Iraq SourceWatch
  30. Harry Reid Threatens Las Vegas Newspaper NewsBusters, Aug. 30, 2009
  31. Tribes gave to Reid after hiring Abramoff Las Vegas Review Journal, Feb. 3, 2006
  32.,2933,184377,00.html Sen. Reid Linked to Abramoff] Fox News, Feb. 9, 2006
  33. Talking Points Memo] TPM, Feb. 9, 2006
  34. THE SENATORS' SONS, June 23, 2003
  35. 'Slavery' slur at GOPers The New York Post, Dec. 8, 2009