[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 6 (Thursday, January 11, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S451-S452]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mr. English, Mr. Specter, Mr. 
        Durbin, Mr. Allard, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Levin, Ms. Collins, Mr. 
        Kyl, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 261. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to strengthen 
prohibitions against animal fighting, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise today to join with my colleagues, 
Senators Specter and Ensign, in reintroducing the Animal Fighting 
Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007. This legislation has won the 
unanimous approval of the Senate several times, but unfortunately has 
not yet reached the finish line. I look forward to working with my 
colleagues to see this important bill finally become the law of the 
land.
  There is no doubt, animal fighting is terribly cruel. Dogs and 
roosters are drugged to make them hyper-aggressive and forced to keep 
fighting even after suffering severe injuries such as punctured eyes 
and pierced lungs.
  It's all done for ``entertainment'' and illegal gambling. Children 
are sometimes brought to these spectacles, and the fights are 
frequently accompanied by illegal drug trafficking and acts of human 
violence. In 2006, nine murders related to animal fighting occurred 
across the country.
  Some dogfighters steal pets to use as bait for training their dogs, 
while others allow trained fighting dogs to roam neighborhoods and 
endanger the public.
  The Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act will strengthen 
current law by making the interstate transport of animals for the 
purpose of fighting a felony and increase the punishment to three years 
of jail time. This is necessary because the current misdemeanor penalty 
has proven ineffective--considered a ``cost of doing business'' by 
those in the animal fighting industry which continues unabated 
nationwide. These enterprises depend on interstate commerce, as I 
evidenced by the animal fighting magazines that advertise and promote 
them.
  Our bill also makes it a felony to move cockfighting implements in 
interstate or foreign commerce. These are razor-sharp knives known as 
``slashers'' and ice pick-like gaffs designed exclusively for 
cockfights and attached to the birds' legs for fighting. Cockfighting 
magazines I and websites contain hundreds of advertisements for mail-
order knives and gaffs, revealing a thriving interstate market for the 
weapons used in cockfights.
  This is long overdue legislation. Both the Senate and House approved 
felony animal fighting provisions in their Farm Bills in 2001, but they 
were stripped out in conference. The Senate included felony animal 
fighting provisions in the 2003 Health Forest Bill, but they were again 
dropped in conference. In September 2004, the Animal Fighting 
Prohibition Enforcement Act was approved by the House Judiciary 
Committee, but did not reach the floor. In April 2005, the Senate 
passed a bill nearly identical to the one we are introducing today, 
when it unanimously approved S. 382. In May 2006, the House Crime, 
Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee held a comprehensive 
hearing on the House companion bill, H.R. 817, which garnered 324 
cosponsors but was not considered on the House floor. The legislative 
history of this animal fighting felony legislation shows it has broad 
bipartisan support of more than half the Senate, and it has won 
unanimous approval on the floor time and time again.
  It's time to get this felony animal fighting language enacted. With 
the bird flu threat looming, we can't afford to wait any longer. The 
economic consequences are staggering--the World Bank projects worldwide 
losses of $1.5 to $2 trillion. We must be able to say we did all we 
could to prevent such a pandemic, and this is an obvious, easy and 
necessary step.
  Interstate and international transport of birds for cockfighting is 
known to have contributed to the spread of avian influenza in Asia and 
poses a threat to poultry and public health in the United States. 
According to the World Health Organization and local news reports, at 
least nine confirmed human fatalities from avian influenza in Thailand 
and Vietnam may have been contracted through cockfighting activity 
since the beginning of 2004. Several children are among those who are 
reported to have died from avian influenza as a result of exposure 
through cockfighting, including 4-year-old, 6-year-old, and 18-year-old 
boys in Thailand and a 6-year-old girl in Vietnam.
  There have been many news stories focusing on the connection between 
bird flu and cockfighting. For example, an MSNBC report headlined, 
``Cock-fights blamed for Thailand bird flu spread.'' A World Health 
Organization Asia regional spokesperson interviewed recently on the CBS 
Evening News described the risk of spreading disease through 
cockfighting with infected animals as a ``total disaster waiting to 
happen.''
  Because human handling of fighting roosters is a regular occurrence, 
the opportunity of disease transmission from fighting birds to people 
is substantial. Fighting-bird handlers come into frequent, sustained 
contact with their birds during training and during organized fights. 
It is common practice for handlers to suck saliva and blood from 
roosters' beaks to help clear their airways and enable them to keep 
fighting.
  Cockfighters frequently move birds across State and foreign borders, 
bringing them to fight in different locations and risking the spread of 
infectious diseases. Communications in national

[[Page S452]]

cockfighting magazines and websites have shown that U.S. cockfighters 
regularly transport their birds to and from other parts of the world, 
including Asia.
  The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), in endorsing the Animal 
Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act, noted that strengthening current 
Federal law on the inhumane practice of animal fighting would enhance 
the agency's ability to safeguard the health of U.S. poultry against 
deadly diseases such as avian influenza and exotic Newcastle disease 
(END). The USDA has stated that cockfighting was implicated in an 
outbreak of END that spread through California and the Southwest in 
2002 and 2003. That outbreak cost U.S. taxpayers nearly $200 million to 
eradicate and cost the U.S. poultry industry many millions more in lost 
export markets. The costs of an avian influenza outbreak in this 
country could be much higher--with the Congressional Budget Office 
estimating losses between 1.5 and 5 percent of GDP ($185 billion to 
$618 billion).
  The National Chicken Council, which represents 95 percent of all U.S. 
poultry producers and processors, has also endorsed the Animal Fighting 
Prohibition Enforcement Act, expressing concern that avian influenza 
and other diseases can be spread by the movement of game birds and that 
the commercial chicken industry remains under considerable threat 
because it operates amidst a national network of game bird operations.
  Avian influenza has not yet crossed the species barrier in this 
country, as it has in Asia. But we must do all we can to minimize this 
risk. Establishing a more meaningful deterrent to illegal interstate 
and foreign movement of animals for fighting purposes is an obvious 
step we can take to reduce this risk.
  Besides those associated with the poultry industry, this legislation 
has been endorsed by a number of other organization including the 
Humane Society of the United States, the American Veterinary Medical 
Association, the National Coalition Against Gambling Expansion, the 
League of United Latin American Citizens, the National Sheriffs' 
Association, and more than 400 individual sheriffs and police 
departments covering every State in the country. Those law enforcement 
agencies recognize that animal fighting often involves the movement of 
animals across State and foreign borders, so they can't do the job on 
their own. They need the Federal Government to do its part to help curb 
this dangerous activity.
  Our legislation does not expand the federal government's reach into a 
new area, but simply aims to make current law more effective. It is 
explicitly limited to interstate and foreign commerce, so it protects 
States' rights in the two States where cockfighting is still allowed, 
and it protects States' rights the other 48 States--and all 50, for 
dogfighting--where weak Federal law is compromising their ability to 
keep animal fighting outside their borders.
  The bill we introduce today is identical to S. 382, which passed the 
Senate unanimously in the last Congress, except for one change. The new 
bill provides for up to three years' jail time, compared to two in S. 
382, in order to bring this more in line with penalties for other 
federal animal cruelty-related felonies. For example, in 1999, Congress 
authorized imprisonment of up to 5 years for interstate commerce in 
videos depicting animal cruelty, including animal fighting, P.L. 106-
152, and mandatory jail time of up to 10 years for willfully harming or 
killing a federal police dog or horse (P.L. 106-254).
  With every week, there are new reports of animal fighting busts, as 
local and state law enforcement struggle to rein in this thriving 
industry. In my own State of Washington, police arrested 5 people on 
Christmas Day at a cockfight in Brewster, and about 50 people ran off, 
according to recent news accounts. Three days later, six more were 
arrested in Okanogan for promoting cockfighting. And nine people were 
arrested in Tacoma last spring, where investigators seized 
methamphetamines, marijuana, weapons, thousands of dollars, and 
fighting roosters.
  It's time for Congress to strengthen the federal law so that it can 
provide as a meaningful deterrent against animal fighting. State and 
local law enforcement will have a tough law on the books necessary to 
help them crack down on this interstate industry. I thank my colleagues 
for their support, and look forward to working with them to finally 
enacting this common-sense measure into law.
                                 ______