BRIAN ROSS REPORTS
TOP BLOTTER CATEGORIES
- Abramoff Lobbying Scandal
- American Al Qaeda
- Avian Flu
- Beirut Hospital Out of Gas
- CIA
- CIA Secret Prisons
- D.C. Madam Affair
- FBI
- Federal Air Marshal Service
- Homeland Security
- Hurricane Katrina
- Mark Foley Internet Scandal
- Millionaire Sex Scandal
- Nigerian E-mail Scams
- Norman Hsu, Clinton Fundraiser
- NSA: Wiretapping
- Osama bin Laden
- Payola
- Pharmacy Investigation
- Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert
- Terror
- Troopergate
- U.K. Airline Terror Plot
- U.K. Bombing Attempts
- Wen Ho Lee
- William Jefferson
- Zarqawi
« Previous | Main | Next »
Senator Puts Hold on Popular Anti-Cockfighting Bill
March 28, 2007 2:05 PM
A Republican senator is holding up a popular bipartisan bill to crack down on cockfighting that was expected to pass easily in the Senate yesterday, drawing outrage from his congressional colleagues.
The hold, placed by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., "testifies to the powers of these shadowy forces that allow this illegal and barbaric scandal to continue," said Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., one of the bill's co-sponsors in the House.
Earlier this week Republicans and Democrats in the House passed the bill by a landslide margin of 368 to 39 votes.
THE BLOTTER RECOMMENDS
Coburn's office said he is blocking a Senate vote on the bill because the federal government has no reason to be involved in the issue, especially since most states have already passed laws banning cockfighting and dogfighting.
Lobbyists for the billion-dollar industry have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to resist anti-cockfighting legislation in recent years.
Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.
Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, says Oklahoma has been a bastion for illegal cockfighting, and that Coburn has been swayed by its powerful lobbyists.
But Coburn's spokesman John Hart says the opposite is true. "Members of Congress often push bills through for public relations reasons. This legislation is solely designed to pander to special interest groups," said Hart.
He added that Coburn has been known to put holds on any bill that he feels adds bureaucracy and cost to the federal government.
March 28, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (24)
Disgusting. Senator Coburn must not care that these dogfighting networks are interstate in nature. The state police lose authority once they reach the state line. To root out these criminals they sometimes, not always but sometimes, need federal assistance.
Posted by: Dan | Mar 28, 2007 3:45:22 PM
What a disgraceful, anti-democratic act by Coburn. A one-man filibuster. Wasn't he one of the Senators to constantly drone on and on about giving things an "up or down vote"? Or does that only apply to what he likes? He is clearly a sympathizer of animal fighting. Every day that he causes delay, thousands of dogs are mutilated and killed in dog fighting rings that might not otherwise be if meaningful federal penalties were enacted.
Posted by: Steven | Mar 28, 2007 3:53:03 PM
First of all, in the relam of synchronicity, we got a guy named Coburn fighting this bill about cock fighting. My immediate word association was the character "Rooster Coburn" from the John Wayne movie of the same name.
Secondly, this senator contends that "the federal government has no reason to be involved in the issue..."
That's absurd!
The feds are up in everybody's face about all sorts of personal preferences from abortion, same sex marriages, stem cell research, legal euthanasia for the terminally ill, smoking hemp...you name it!
But for this barbaric sport, the Feds should know their place and stay out of it???
An perfectly good education has been terribly wasted on this guy.
Posted by: Zach | Mar 28, 2007 5:18:25 PM
He's right. The Feds don't have any standing to go against this kind of thing. Nowhere in Article I of the Constitution does it say, "Congress shall have the power to regulate sporting events involving animals." The closest clause which would make this applicable is the so-called "Commerce Clause," which states that Congress has the power to regulate commerce among the several states. It has been used to justify thousands upon thousands of laws, but the Supreme Court has set limits on the stretching this clause in recent years, namely that Congress could not justify a statute prohibiting violence against women under the Commerce Clause. I applaud Sen. Coburn.
Posted by: Andrew E | Mar 28, 2007 6:53:29 PM
Perhaps that's why, in the original piece on this from Anna Schecter it was stated:
"The bill makes it a felony to transport fighting animals across state or international borders and outlaws the sale of cockfighting weapons."
They do seem to be using the Commerce Clause to prohibit this practice.
But while we're on the subject, no where does it state that congress has the power to interfere with many of an American's personal perogatives, from abortion, same sex marriages, stem cell research, legal euthanasia for the terminally ill, smoking hemp, use of the internet...you name it. Still they spend our tax dollars creating rules and regs for all of these and more.
Posted by: Zach | Mar 28, 2007 8:28:16 PM
Really, there are more important things to dump on.
Posted by: wlwallace | Mar 28, 2007 10:11:57 PM
Maybe Senator Tom Coburn (Republican/OK) likes a little cockfight once in a while? Then let him attach razors to his own hands to fight someone his own size. That should make him feel as if he a man or a cock. His identity crisis lets innocent animals suffer. Animal abuse is unacceptable in the United States of America.
Posted by: Gloria Picchetti | Mar 29, 2007 12:37:32 PM
Let's hope that Mr. Coburns constituents register the degree of their approval of the Senator's "patriotic" stand on this issue at the ballot box.
Posted by: Cob | Mar 29, 2007 8:46:17 PM
Thank you Mr. Coburn! I support my state's (Tennessee's) ban on cock fighting, but I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Coburn's belief in STATE RIGHTS! People in Oklahoma have the right to establish their own laws without some redneck from Tennessee, some blue-blood from Massachusetts, or some tree-hugger from California dictating every facet of their life!
Posted by: Steve | Mar 30, 2007 6:20:53 AM
The Senator knew what was next and that was to end the steroid "mushbrain" wrestling industry, so he had to step in and do this dirty deed...
Posted by: daddy | Mar 30, 2007 4:14:13 PM
It is well within Congress' rights (and fully outside any state's rights) to regulate interstate commerce. States rights are important, but Congress' power comes from regulating that which crosses borders.
Posted by: Perm Dude | Apr 3, 2007 7:15:11 PM
Thanks, Zach, for providing "some light in place of heat". This California/Massachusetts animal loving liberal is appalled at the growth of a meddling federal govenment. All these little usurpations of our original laws are going to come back and bite us in the foot eventually. I grow weary of legislators on both sides of the aisle grandstanding on issues designed to curry support from the more emotional voters in this country. On this particular issue, I find myself reciting more and more, "The only thing wrong with Liberalism is us liberals". :(
Posted by: goodkid | Apr 4, 2007 3:19:25 PM
Iran is threatening nuclear war, Afghanistan's Taliban resistance is growing, the Iraq war is not going well, millions of illegal persons are pouring over our borders, violent crime is up in most major cities and the dollar is weaker than almost every other major currency. I am very glad that the Senate of the United States has nothing better to do than debate the death of poultry. Our country has definitely lost all touch with reality.
Posted by: Cabin Boy | Apr 9, 2007 5:52:10 PM
Please remember that Congress has no "rights" only powers. Those powers were granted by the people as outlined in the Constitution. Just because a law is a good idea doesn't mean that Congress has the authority to enact it. The Constitution is not a mysterious or dificult document to understand. Anyone with a junior high education can read and understand it. Take a look at this law and then try to find the grant of power in the Constitution that supports it. Please don't tell me that banning cock fighting is authorized by the clause that simply states that Congress has the power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."
Posted by: founding fathers | Apr 9, 2007 5:56:34 PM
It would appear that the last state in the Union to ban cockfighting will be Louisiana.
Keep Federal Laws where they belong, in DC. I am sure that a lot of legislators could benefit (their constituency anyway) from real enforcement of laws already on the books.
Coburn is right! Deal with it.
Posted by: Kermit | Apr 9, 2007 6:52:19 PM
The only state were cockfighting is legal is Louisiana. So why does the Federal Government need to get involved??
Posted by: dlbygel | Apr 9, 2007 7:09:15 PM
As a retired Law Enforcement Officer I've been on a number of cockfighting raids and I despise the people that profit from any sort of animal cruelty. That said; this is an issue that is in the realm of States' Rights to regulate and to enforce laws against. The federal goverment needs to attend to the areas that they have been constionally charged with; such as maintaining our borders.
Posted by: Duke | Apr 9, 2007 7:34:39 PM
Well it could be worse -
Posted by: MrZ | Apr 11, 2007 4:50:27 PM
You've got to be kidding me. At a time that we are in a war where we are losing more soldiers every day, this is what we are worried about! I think the federal government needs to worry more on getting our troops home safely than to worry about someone taking a chicken across a state line. Wake up America!!!!!
Posted by: Jeff | Apr 12, 2007 3:07:59 AM
"STATE RIGHTS!" Have you people forgotten about each individual state having their own rights? Just because these special interest groups (HSUS, PETA, etc.) wants this law pass, you want our government to do so? These guys give a little support and money to the politicians and "WHAM" a new law is passed! By the way, so many AMERICANS are too stupid and noisy these days to be butting into other people's business when it doesn't even affect them!
UNDERSTAND that there are more IMPORTANT issues out there that OUR tax dollars need to be spent on! Stupid crap like this should be handled by individual states, not the federal government! Do you know how much it costs the government to trial somebody if busted? Do you know where that money is coming from? YES, US!!!! Leave this crap to the STATES to take care of and focus on health care, OUR troops, and more important issues PLEASE!
Posted by: Jefferson | Apr 23, 2007 12:01:07 AM
Its like taking candy away from a child without any reason other than being plain ugly and a mean person! To fight chickens is a human’s right! FREEDOM. You don’t like it, go back to where you CAME from!!!
No one should go to jail for cockfighting!...the law is so contradictive if it allows the FBI to order USDA to slaughter the animals…what is the purpose of protecting the animals…KEEP THIS LONG ENJOYED SPORTS LEGAL…BRING BACK COCKFIGHTING TO SAVE ‘ENDANGERED SPECIES’. There is not any proven facts of Avian Flu that exists from this sport, and researcher are working on a cure in case some fool gets on a plane!!!
http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/may2007/niaid-28.htm
Your law enforcement is too busy chasing chickens, they let a man travel with TB that is fatal! Let them chase real criminals and protect US from threaten issues beside a chicken fight or supporter.
Here is a person for human rights:
Senate Passes Cockfighting Bill 05.20.04
wav / mp3 (Sen. Frank Shurden says SB 835 will give Oklahomans another chance to vote on the cockfighting issue.)
Cockfighting has been around long before your existence and should remain a choice of the cockfighters who enjoy this sport, not those that don’t even attend--like YOU:
Posted by: Peach | Jun 1, 2007 12:06:09 PM
Back in 2004, when Coburn was first running for Senate, fiscal prudence wasn’t supposed to be his issue. In fact, the last thing anybody expected him to become was a voice of restraint in a body of excess. If anything, Coburn was the one known for his excesses, for making pronouncements so outrageous, so far from the mainstream, that at times he seemed like a cartoon of the fanatical right—declaring his own Senate race “the battle of good versus evil,” calling for “the death penalty for abortionists,” and suggesting that the country was under attack by a secret gay conspiracy that had “infiltrated the very centers of power in every area across this country.” Back in 2004, Tom Coburn was the last man anybody expected to rise above politics and try to lead us back to common sense.
Posted by: herbaljohn | Jun 20, 2007 9:31:15 AM
Wow, don't we have more important things for our federal government to do than protect chickens. How about terrorists, the economy, and civil liberties? Next thing the feds will be doing is investigating ball players using steroids. Nah, that's too far out.
Posted by: donford | Jan 9, 2008 10:13:50 PM
there is a diferent in dogs and chickens game cock are well taken care of do you ever eat chicken shame on you that is stupid to bother cock fighting if animal rights people didnt give you money you would have no opinion fight for something useful if you people in congress dodnt get paid off you wouldnt be so dumb
Posted by: john hargrove | Feb 15, 2008 6:43:57 AM
Post a comment
