From a
post I made on CU:
Standing Rules of the United States Senate, Rule XXXV
1. (a)(1) No Member, officer, or employee of the Senate shall knowingly accept a gift except as provided in this rule.
(2) A Member, officer, or employee may accept a gift (other than cash or cash equivalent) which the Member, officer, or employee reasonably and in good faith believes to have a value of less than $50, and a cumulative value from one source during a calendar year of less than $100. No gift with a value below $10 shall count toward the $100 annual limit. No formal recordkeeping is required by this paragraph, but a Member, officer, or employee shall make a good faith effort to comply with this paragraph.
(b)(1) For the purpose of this rule, the term `gift' means any gratuity, favor, discount, entertainment, hospitality, loan, forbearance, or other item having monetary value. The term includes gifts of services, training, transportation, lodging, and meals, whether provided in kind, by purchase of a ticket, payment in advance, or reimbursement after the expense has been incurred.
But wait! There's an exception!
[A Member may accept a gift of] (18) Free attendance at a widely attended event permitted pursuant to subparagraph (d).
Maybe Reid's in the clear. Let's check out good ol' subparagraph (d):
(d)(1) A Member, officer, or employee may accept an offer of free attendance at a widely attended convention, conference, symposium, forum, panel discussion, dinner, viewing, reception, or similar event, provided by the sponsor of the event, if
(A) the Member, officer, or employee participates in the event as a speaker or a panel participant, by presenting information related to Congress or matters before Congress, or by performing a ceremonial function appropriate to the Member's, officer's, or employee's official position; or
(B) attendance at the event is appropriate to the performance of the official duties or representative function of the Member, officer, or employee.
Unless Reid was there as an official speaker, I think he's up the creek without a paddle. I don't think that attendance at a boxing match is appropriate to the performance of his official duties.
Or is it? Let's check the Senate Ethics Committee's Ethics Manual:
"Free attendance" at a widely attended event does not include an offer of free attendance (i.e. a ticket) to a sporting, entertainment, or other purely recreational event. See the section on sporting events in this chapter and the section on attendance at a charity event, below.
Okay, let's see the section on sporting events:
Sporting Events
As noted above, a Member, officer, or employee may accept an offer of free attendance from the sponsor of a charity event that is substantially recreational, i.e. a sporting event, however, reimbursed travel expenses may not be accepted in such circumstances. A ticket to a sporting or recreational event that is not a charity event would be considered a gift of the face value of the ticket and must come within the gift limit of $49.99 and the aggregate limit from the source of $99.99 to comply with the Senate Gifts Rule.
Events which are solely sporting, recreational, or entertainment events do not meet the requirements of the ‘‘widely attended’’ exception to the Gifts Rule. The widely attended exception requires, in part, that the activity relate to a matter before Congress or to a ceremonial function appropriate to the Member’s or employee’s official position or to the performance of official duties or representative functions.
Oh dear, oh dear, Harry.