I’m surprised to admit this, but I agree with Barry Bonds’ recent comments.
Let me clarify myself first. A majority of Bonds’ statements to the press appeared to simply deflect the steroid issue. I think the issue itself is worth addressing, but not by the federal government (except for investigating Palmeiro’s potential lies while under oath). According to the ESPN article,
“Several congressional committees have held hearings on drug testing in pro sports, and legislation has been proposed to standardize leagues’ drug policies.”
What gives the federal government the right to legislate the way professional sports governs itself? If anything illegal has occured, then leave it to the courts. However, leave policy surrounding professional sports to these respective leagues.
Tags: [Barry Bonds, Rafael Palmeiro, steroids, baseball, MLB, federal government, Congress, legislation]
Ooh, ooh, I know this one! Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, which gives Congress the power to “regulate commerce … among the several states.” A Giants-Astros game is “interstate commerce” if ever there were such a thing, so it’s well within the purview of Congress.
Now if the question is “Doesn’t Congress have anything better to do,” that’s another matter. But I don’t see any serious Constitutional challenge to Congress’ authority to intervene here.
Thanks for your comment, tgirsch. Perhaps you’re correct, but I’m not sure how regulating drug testing policies among professional sports fits in with commerce.
Why don’t all businesses that participate in interstate or international commerce practices receive the same scrutiny?
I suppose I was both questioning Congress’ right and waste-of-time reasons that you accurately dissected.
The “why” doesn’t really matter. Once an entity engages in interstate commerce, Congress is authorized to make the rules.
If it comes to Congress’ attention that some other not-yet-regulated industry is rife with steroid abuse, don’t think for a second that they wouldn’t jump on that, too. But pro sports gets the attention primarily because it’s high-profile.
Wacko
You are asking two different qestions. Can Congress involvoe itselfin the drug testing polciies of companies that affect interstate commerce? Sure. Should they? Well, thats up for debate. I doubt that Congress should be doing this, but thats a matter of politics and polciy, not of power.
Good points - you can tell that I have not had any law school education
I would then subscribe to the latter question - even if Congress has the right, I agree with Bonds that they should be focusing on more important issues. Why focus on “America’s pasttime” when they can instead focus on more important issues? Leave the policing to the respective professional leagues and illegalities to the courts.
Well, to the extent that professional sports are disproportionately influential on America’s youth, and the pro leagues haven’t adequately policed themselves, I think a good case can be made for Congressional intervention (even though I will concede they’ve got better things to do). At this point, even if Congress does nothing right now, they’ve sent a message: do a better job policing yourselves, or we’re going to do it for you, and you don’t want that.