In 1961, the Chad Mitchell Trio recorded a song they called “Rum By Gum” that had been popular on college campuses for at least ten years as “The Song of the Temperance Union.” Here’s one of its verses: “We never eat cookies because they have yeast, And one little bite turns a man to a beast, Can you imagine a greater disgrace, Than a man in the gutter with crumbs on his face?”
The song is obviously making fun of simple minded people who are paranoid about the effects of alcohol, and it was the first thing that popped into my head as I read about the debate over James Bergeron’s candidacy for City Council in the upcoming municipal election April 7. I have never met Mr. Bergeron, and don’t think I have ever been in either of his two taverns. I guess I’m more of a “take a fifth of scotch into the crawl space” kind of guy. I have talked to some of his former employees, however, as well as other tavern owners who know him.
And I’ve heard nothing but good things about him. He is apparently a well respected businessman with an outstanding reputation as a skilled manager and a community-minded individual. His employees are apparently among the best trained and equipped. His record is exemplary.
In other words, he is exactly the kind of fellow people want to run for council, if only he didn’t make his living by selling Demon Rum. But because he has an interest “in any way, either directly or indirectly, in the manufacture, sale or distribution of alcoholic liquor,” as a 55-year-old city code states, he is not allowed to have a liquor license and be elected or appointed to any office.
Ignoring for a moment the fact that this absurd ordinance could be interpreted to include a bagger at a supermarket, what we are saying is that people may be banned from participating in the democratic process by virtue of their occupation. That’s horrible.
Is there any other vocation that prohibits its practitioners from running for office or being appointed to commissions or boards? Can someone who makes usurious loans to people living on the edge of poverty, or who sells worthless but unregulated medicines to the parents of desperately ill children, run? Sure, no problem.
But isn’t there a conflict of interest, you ask? Not really. It’s basically the same as when a lawyer votes on a new law, when a tradesman votes on a new building code, or when a Realtor votes on a zoning issue.
The difference is that we don’t automatically assume the very worst about those people. In fact, Mr. Bergeron is exactly the kind of guy you’d want on council when debating liquor laws because he would actually know what he was talking about, and there’s not a lot of that going on these days.
Preventing a man from running for office is the same as preventing him from voting. He has a right to run, and that right must not be infringed by those who have already been elected. To do so also violates the rights of voters by arbitrarily limiting their choices.
There are two things that need to happen. The ordinance should immediately be stricken at the next council meeting so that Mr. Bergeron can participate, since his campaign has already been injured. And we need to cure this liquor schizophrenia we have. If we encourage bars for the sake of employment and tax revenue, then we must understand that we’re occasionally going to suffer from the conduct of drunks.
But we can’t regulate everyone’s life as though we’re all drunks. Liquor doesn’t create idiots, it just reveals them. So there’s no need to prohibit fruitcake on the Riverwalk. Yes, it has rum. But unlike what the song says, one little bite doesn’t turn a man to a bum.
Bill Mego is a freelance writer
More Top Picks Wolfbox Megavolt16 Air