LULZ. When Reid entered Congress in 1983 the salary of a representative was $69,800 a year, which would be $140,769.89 adjusted for inflation. By what standard is that modest?
Anywho, did some checking because this thread lacks any real analysis, and it's important to note what assets Harry Reid actually has - having assets is not necessarily the same thing as having cash at hand. It should be noted that Reid's assets are not necessarily worth $10,360,000.00 - in fact they could be less. In fact, the same source that the article in the OP mentions, opensecrets.org, specifies that range:
Source:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/CIDsummary.php?CID=N00009922&year=2010Assets: 58 totaling $3,402,053 to $10,360,000
The $10 million figure is the high estimate, and isn't likely an accurate figure. It's likely closer to the middle - $6.8 million average according the site. That's still a lot of course.
As mentioned real-estate makes up 80% of his total assets. Real estate values can change drastically in either direction depending on the prevailing conditions, and it can be quite profitable even without insider information if you know what you're doing. On a Congressman's salary it wouldn't be unusual for someone to be able to buy some promising land on the cheap as an investment.
One real estate asset of Reid's particularly stands out - he owns 160 acres of land in Bullhead City, AZ that is valued at $1,000,001 to $5,000,000. That's almost a third of the low total and almost half of the high estimate.
Since this is his largest asset, it's the most worth investigating. I managed to dig up some history in regards to this land:
1. Reid initially purchased the 100 acres of the land somewhere between 1979 and 1982 for $150,000. (somewhere between $356,120.21 and $473,355.37) His friend Clair Haycock bought the other 60 acres in the same period for $90,000. (they actually bought it together as one parcel, and that's just how the numbers work out)
2. In 1987 Haycock turned over his interest in the land to an employee pension fund he was the trustee of.
3. In the early 1990's an investment group bought the land from Reid and Haycock for $1.3 million, but ended up defaulting and the land returned to Reid and Haycock.
4. In 2002 Haycock sold his interest in the land to Reid for a mere $10,000. The Mojave County assessor valued the whole parcel at $339,620, so Haycock's portion would have been worth ~$127,000 at the time. Six months later Reid introduced a bill that would help lubricants dealers that had their supplies disrupted by the decisions of big oil companies. Haycock runs a lubricant distribution business. The bill failed. However, this may be unrelated to the sale as records do indicate that Reid had been pushing for such legislation since the mid 90's. The pension fund was also closed out having met it's obligations, so the land being sold under market value may not have been an issue and Haycock may have just been eager to get it off the books.
5. In 2003 Reid - at the time a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee's transportation subcommittee - acted on a request from the town of Laughlin, NV,which borders Bullhead City, and secured $500,000 to do a preliminary study on building a new bridge between the two towns. In 2006 he sponsored an earmark for $18 million to build the bridge. The bridge is actually close to his land, and the bridge would likely make the value go up.
Sources:
http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profiles/Senate/Nevada/Harry_Reid/Scandals/Bridge_Earmark/http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jan/28/nation/na-reid28So Reid's history with the land isn't entirely spotless, but it isn't definitely damning either. Haycock selling him the land for less than market value could have been greasing his palms for legislation, but given that there are records that Reid was already pushing for that legislation it could be unrelated. The bridge earmark certainly benefits Reid personally, but the bridge apparently does have legitimate support from a Nevada town so his support for it was not necessarily tied to his interest in the land. His ethics in regards to this land isn't entirely clear.
However, this does show some things that address the question asked in regards to Reid in the opening of this thread:
Reid's single largest asset by far was purchased before he entered Congress in 1983. Costing $356,120.21 and $473,355.37 in today's dollars,
it's clear he had a good amount of money before he entered Congress. He also couldn't have gotten insider information from being in Congress when purchasing the land either. Potentially he might have gotten info at the time from being the Nevada Gaming Commission chairman, but anyone would have had access to the knowledge that Laughlin is a casino town and that buying nearby land would be a potentially good investment.
I'm going to err on the side of him probably not having used insider knowledge and that he's largely just a savvy real-estate investor.
