“First, don’t f@*%
with me. I’m a desperate man! And second, I want some fresh coffee. And third, I want a recount! And no matter how it turns out, I want my old
job back!”
—Mark Carlton as defeated Old Detroit
Mayor Ron Miller in Robocop
Unemployment is at 8.2% and expected to climb. Real unemployment is at a
near-Great-Depression-level 14.5% and climbing.
The Eurozone is on the brink of collapse, and there’s no telling to what
extent they’ll drag us down with them.
The Russians are arming the Assad regime in Syria, and providing
materiel for Iran’s oh-so-innocent nascent nuclear program. The New York Times readily and repeatedly obtains—and prints—classified intelligence information, but the United States
Congress can’t get anything out of the Department of Justice beyond name, rank,
and serial number.
So what’s at the top of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s
(D-NV) legislative agenda?
Boxing.
That’s right, the United States Senate hasn’t passed a
single budget proposal in three years on his watch, has taken no action on a
dozen or more jobs bills that have passed the House, and Harry Reid’s concern
is federal regulation of professional boxing.
I’m not even making that up.
I confess I haven’t followed boxing at all since Mike Tyson
bit Evander Holyfield’s ear off back in 1997. For
those of you like me who were still wondering why the sun rose an hour late
last Sunday morning, I now have the answer: apparently Manny Pacquiao lost a controversial split decision to Timothy Bradley for the WBO Welterweight title on Saturday night.
According to many observers, Pacquiao should have been awarded the
decision; it’s all a great travesty, and there are multiple investigations sure
to result in those responsible being sacked.
It doesn’t seem to occur to anyone that this is a problem inherent in
any “sport” in which winners and losers are decided based on a judging panel’s subjective
assessment of the largely aesthetic quality of an athlete’s performance (see gymnastics, figure skating, ice
dancing, diving, synchronized swimming, pretty much any “X-Games” event, and
the BCS football championship).
Based on complaints by others who saw the Pacquiao/Bradley
fight, Reid—who didn’t see the fight himself, but who was an amateur boxer and rumor has it stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night—is renewing calls for a federal
commission to regulate the sport nationally.
Yes, the solution is always some kind of government intervention. In this case, Reid wants to set up a National
Boxing Commission—I prefer “Commission for the Regulation and Administration
of Pugilism”—to establish health and safety regulations, license boxers
and officials, and also regulate the business side. Presumably the notion is that if only there
had been government oversight of these things, the Pacquiao/Bradley result
would have been different. I also
suppose it’s just a coincidence that Manny Pacquiao has been a political
supporter of Reid’s (although I’ve got to think that the Vegas boys who run the casinos that host these fights can’t be happy with their senator inviting federal noses to peek into their operations).
Doesn’t the Senate have anything better to do with its time?
The irony here is that the fight took place in Las Vegas—in
Reid’s own home state—where the Nevada Athletic Commission already has health
and safety regulations for boxing, licenses participants and officials, and
regulates the business. In other words, government
is already doing what Reid wants government to do. So apparently Reid’s position is that the
federal government will do it better. Oh, now I see. And
you know Reid’s right on this, because his co-sponsor on past efforts to pass
this kind of legislation is none other than John McCain (R-AZ), and anything
McCain supports has to be good.
Riiiiight.
This might be different if someone
crossed state lines for a bout—thus implicating interstate commerce—and got
hurt because of inadequate safety measures, although it is worth noting that
the major private boxing authorities—the WBC and IBF at
the time—handled reforms themselves after Duk Koo Kim was killed in a bout with
Ray Mancini in 1982. But that’s not the
issue with Pacquiao/Bradley. The sole
concern in this instance is that some people don’t agree with the outcome of
the contest, and feel that someone other than the one who won should have won. If that is the impetus for regulation,
what Reid is really advocating is that the United States federal government
literally step in and sort out the winners and losers.
Of a game.
A
rough and sometimes brutal combat-oriented game, but a game nonetheless.
This idea that government needs to intervene to correct the
results of sporting events is, in a word, stupid. To begin with, I can’t find anything in the
Constitution that even comes close to suggesting that Congress has any
authority to act in this fashion. Nowhere in the Federalist Papers did Madison, Jay, or Hamilton discuss federal regulation of sports. The Preamble doesn't say "We the People, in order to assure right and just outcomes of athletic contests . . ." There
is no constitutional right to a correct decision in a boxing match—or any other
sporting contest—or even to a fair fight for that matter.
More importantly, where does it end? If Congress is going to regulate the judging
of boxing matches, will it next be setting up commissions to ensure the results
of gymnastics competitions? Is there
going to be a federal panel reviewing ball/strike calls at Fenway? Are we going to have mandatory instant replay
review of every questionable pass completion in the NFL?
Oh, wait. I forgot we
already have that.
And why stop at professional sports, or even organized
athletics? Maybe there should be an
agency in the District to oversee Little League—Alex, who is Danny Almonte?—or a federal bureaucrat to certify
the winner when my six-year-old and her friends play Chutes and Ladders. Hell, maybe we should even consider bringing
in U.N. observers, just to make sure it’s all on the up-and-up.
I love sports, but we’ve got to get ahold of ourselves. At the end of the day sports are just games, and human errors and unlucky breaks are a part of them. Unlike capital punishment, it’s not really that
important in the grand scheme that we move heaven and earth to get it 100%
right whether the ball was in or out.
In golf it’s called “the rub of the green”: sometimes good
shots bounce into bad places. The USSR
gets three cracks with time expired to beat the U.S. to win Olympic basketball
gold in 1972. Mike Renfro is incorrectly
ruled out of bounds, costing the Oilers a game-tying touchdown in the 1979 AFC
championship game against the Steelers.
Colorado scores on fifth down to beat Missouri in 1990. Jeffrey Maier reaches from the seats into the
field of play to steal a home run for the Yankees’ Derek Jeter in the 1996 ALCS
vs. the Orioles. Yankee second baseman
Chuck Knoblauch tags out Boston’s Jose Offerman from several arms’ lengths away
in the 1999 ALCS. That’s just the way it
goes, and life seems to go on, even in Red Sox Nation.
Reagan taught us back in 1960 that “No government ever voluntarily reduces
itself in size. So, governments' programs, once launched, never disappear.” It is the very nature of government agencies
to metastasize, both in size and in jurisdictional reach. Once we start involving government in
regulating the officiating and results of sports, it’s only a matter of time
before it moves beyond simply ensuring that the player who should win in fact
does win, to ensuring overall “fairness.”
In the interest of creating an “even playing field,” regulators will
begin skewing the rules—or selectively applying them—so that better players
don’t have an advantage over inferior players.
Maybe bad golfers will get a federally-mandated bigger hole, or slower
track runners will get a head start enforced by administrative rule. From there, they will seek to eliminate
advantages created by one player having grown up in an environment more
conducive to developing playing skill, and from there move to force-fitting the
win/loss results to some pre-determined distribution reflective of the
demographic cross-section of society regardless of skill level, performance, or effort.
This pathological impulse to resort to government regulation
as the panacea for every perceived societal deficiency has got to stop. More importantly, the pervasive interest of
government at all levels in controlling the minutiae of our lives has
got to stop. Sports. The size of the Coke you get at a
restaurant. Your popcorn at the movie
theater. A glass of milk. Where is the end to what the Statists want to control?
Jefferson wrote that “the policy of the American government
is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their
pursuits.”
He would not recognize this country today.
No comments:
Post a Comment