Presidential Hopeful Gov. Bill Richardson Doesn't Grok Cock(fighting)
Nick Gillespie | February 8, 2007, 10:28am
If you doubt for a second that the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave--the Pilgrim's Pride and Land Where Ed Muskie Cried and all that--is fast becoming an open-air prison with strict no-smoking, no walking with iPods, and no transfat policies, here's a story that will make you think twice:
Cockfighting appears to be on its last legs in New Mexico, one of only two states where it is legal. And the reason might have something to do with the race for the White House.
Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat running for president, has come out strongly in favor of a ban on cockfighting. Legislation to outlaw the bloodsport has come up from time to time in New Mexico, but until recently, Richardson refused to take sides.
Some suspect he does not want to look as if he comes from a backward state.
"The bottom line is that if Bill Richardson is not running for president, this wouldn't be an issue," said Leo Lopez, 42, who has been attending matches since he was 12....
Tommy Booth, the 81-year-old owner of [cockfighting arena] Tommy's [Game Fowl Farm], said the governor has done a good job in general, but he feels betrayed: "I'm going to vote for him for president. But I'll hold my nose when I'm doing it.
The other state that allows roosters to tear each other to pieces? Louisiana.
More--including a missing subtitle to the story--right here.
Does former Reasoner Tim Cavanaugh still find Horatio Sanz-lookalike Richardson a lock for the Dem prez nom?
Keith | February 8, 2007, 5:24pm | #
Funny story: I work for a federally funded research and development center and we have people that have worked with the Department of Agriculture on controlling the spread of avian disease. (It spreads a lot through chickens for a lot of reasons, some of which are very gross.)
Cockfighting can be a problem when it comes to the spread of avian disease. Newcastle disease spread in California in 2002 precisely because of cockfighting. So you might think that there's an argument for banning cockfighting.
But here's the twist. Cockfighting,as we know, is legal in New Mexico, but a lot of the gambling on cockfighting is controlled by organized crime in New Mexico. When New Mexico was threatened by Newcastle disease, the organized criminals, not wanting to kill the cocks that lay the golden eggs, were very cooperative with public health officials (through intermediaries of course) about preventing the spread of Newcastle disease. They'd cancel matches and such based on input from federal public health officials to prevent the spread of the disease.
So I think there are some things we can learn from this.
Generally, libertarians are most right in their opposition to outright bans. A ban, after all is an attempt to implement a tax of infinity, and infinite taxes are rarely the optimal tax (except for a very narrow range of activities). Bans most often create a disconnect and opposition between government and civil society.
I think libertarians tend to underestimate the complementary roles that governments and civil society play. Without the information from federal public health officials, the cockfighters would not have know when to cancel cockfights, and the disease would have spread. Government, even beyond an extremely limited role, plays a vital role in expanding and enabling civil society.
And Richardson's not doing anybody any favors by trying to ban cockfighting.
