Congress likely to issue subpoenas for MLB players

noel · Post by **noel** » March 9, 2005, 4:49 pm

Current and former players are likely to receive subpoenas to testify under oath in front of congress.

Former Oakland Athletics sluggers Jose Canseco, Mark McGwire and Jason Giambi were among seven current and former baseball stars that a congressional committee plans to subpoena as soon as Wednesday to testify about steroids.

Curt Schilling, Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro and Frank Thomas also were asked last week to testify. Thus far, only Canseco and Thomas have said they were willing to appear.

Mark McGwire sent a letter that "respectfully declined" an invitation to testify before Congress, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported in Thursday's editions.

That was before the decision to issue subpoenas to McGwire and other current and former players.

Marc Altieri, McGwire's representative, told the paper he had not heard of any summons.

Thoughts?

Personally, I think it will hurt Baseball somewhat initially, but could go a long way to presenting a better product down the road...

Reference:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2008206
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2008742

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » March 9, 2005, 4:51 pm

Someone can decline a subpoena? Doesn't that defeat the purpose

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » March 9, 2005, 4:57 pm

He declined the "invitation" to speak and then was hit with the summons. I think it's awesome. Clearly some of these guys misinterpreted "invitation."

And props to Frank Thomas for accepting the invitation.

Shanter · Post by **Shanter** » March 9, 2005, 5:29 pm

It's about time some truth came out of these players.

noel · Post by **noel** » March 9, 2005, 5:33 pm

My understanding is that the original 'request' came in the form of an 'invitation'. Then when it became apparent that the invitations might not be accepted, the invitations became subpoenas.

The sad part in all of this is that I think some of the congressmen are just doing it for the juice, but at least baseball fans might get to hear a little truth.

Kluden · Post by **Kluden** » March 9, 2005, 5:41 pm

Can someone explain to me why my tax dollars are being used in this way? What does congress have to do with baseball?

noel · Post by **noel** » March 9, 2005, 5:48 pm

That's a reasonable question which I plan to research after posting the following:

It can be argued that if baseball players are using steroids, they're cheating.

It can be argued that if players are cheating, they're defrauding the public.

It can be argued that one of the roles of our congressmen is to represent the public interest.

It can be argued that the public is interested in knowing whether or not there are players hurting the integrity of what has been called 'our national pasttime'.

Edit: ESPN asked the question the following way with the following choices:
6) Are these hearings a good use of Congress' time and resources?

54.0% No -- Congress is grandstanding on a hot-button issue.
46.0% Yes -- It's a major health issue that impacts not only a major industry, but also America's youth.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 9, 2005, 5:53 pm

Kluden wrote:Can someone explain to me why my tax dollars are being used in this way? What does congress have to do with baseball?

Congress has given Major League Baseball an Anti-Trust exemption to operate its business in the manner that it does. Therefore, it is not unreasonable for MLB to have to account for some of its business practices to Congress.

Sheryl · Post by **Sheryl** » March 9, 2005, 6:09 pm

i believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing artificial turf and the designated hitter

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 9, 2005, 6:16 pm

i'm with you Crash

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » March 9, 2005, 6:29 pm

Sheryl wrote:i believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing artificial turf and the designated hitter

Sheryl! Out of the blue with some heavy sports issues! How's soccor going? : )

I agree with removing artificial turf the way it's currently designed.

Here's some good news:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/09/sport ... grass.html

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » March 9, 2005, 7:05 pm

Frank Thomas has always been a major voice against the use of steroids. He's been "campaigning" for years for a tougher testing policy. I'm not at all surpised he accepted the invitation.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 9, 2005, 8:31 pm

Although I agree with harder regulations for stereoids, I fail to see why Congress would waste their busy time eating donuts on this.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » March 10, 2005, 10:37 am

I didn't know congress could compel people to testify about non-govermental issues.

there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing artificial turf and the designated hitter

Seconded

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » March 10, 2005, 10:41 am

Vetiria wrote:Frank Thomas has always been a major voice against the use of steroids. He's been "campaigning" for years for a tougher testing policy. I'm not at all surpised he accepted the invitation.

This is why he was/is my favorite player since he first started. Not because he can hit 40+ HRs, but all the charity work he does off the field and how much he promotes fair play.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » March 10, 2005, 10:48 am

Stanley Brand, a lawyer for the baseball commissioner’s office, said the committee had no jurisdiction, was trying to violate baseball’s first amendment privacy rights, and was attempting to “satisfy their prurient interest into who may and may not have engaged in this activity.”

Government Reform Committee? What do they have to do with sports or illegal drug use?

Someone seems to be impressed with themself. House rules? What about the law...

David Marin said: “Mr. Brand has his facts wrong. He failed to recognize that House rules give this committee the authority to investigate any matter at any time, and we are authorized to request or compel testimony and document production related to any investigation. It’s a shame that Major League Baseball has resorted to hiding behind ‘legalese’ — and inaccurate ‘legalese’ at that.”

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 10, 2005, 10:59 am

Kelshara wrote:Although I agree with harder regulations for stereoids, I fail to see why Congress would waste their busy time eating donuts on this.

That is because you do not read or comprehend. Read Voro's explaination a few posts before yours and you will understand. /boggle

noel · Post by **noel** » March 10, 2005, 11:20 am

Aabidano wrote:
Stanley Brand, a lawyer for the baseball commissioner’s office, said the committee had no jurisdiction, was trying to violate baseball’s first amendment privacy rights, and was attempting to “satisfy their prurient interest into who may and may not have engaged in this activity.”
Government Reform Committee? What do they have to do with sports or illegal drug use?

Someone seems to be impressed with themself. House rules? What about the law...
David Marin said: “Mr. Brand has his facts wrong. He failed to recognize that House rules give this committee the authority to investigate any matter at any time, and we are authorized to request or compel testimony and document production related to any investigation. It’s a shame that Major League Baseball has resorted to hiding behind ‘legalese’ — and inaccurate ‘legalese’ at that.”

At least now it's interesting. Incidentally, the angle they're working is that it's a health issue.

I'm actually glad they're doing this. I mean they did such a stellar job with all the other illegal drugs...

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » March 10, 2005, 11:20 am

I think it's interesting that they brought forward Schilling who loves to hear his own voice and Thomas who has been outspoken for a long time about this topic.
I also find it interesting that they didn't call Sheffield and Bonds. I wonder if people who testify gain immunity?

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » March 10, 2005, 12:07 pm

They say they didn't call Bonds because they didn't want this to be a show about him, which it undoubtedly would be. They can always invite other players, so Bonds and Sheffield being called isn't out of the question yet.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 10, 2005, 2:40 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Kelshara wrote:Although I agree with harder regulations for stereoids, I fail to see why Congress would waste their busy time eating donuts on this.
That is because you do not read or comprehend. Read Voro's explaination a few posts before yours and you will understand. /boggle

I read it and understood it just fine. I still consider it bullshit. You see, I don't agree with everything the government does like a lapdog like you do.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 10, 2005, 2:59 pm

Kelshara wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Kelshara wrote:Although I agree with harder regulations for stereoids, I fail to see why Congress would waste their busy time eating donuts on this.
That is because you do not read or comprehend. Read Voro's explaination a few posts before yours and you will understand. /boggle
I read it and understood it just fine. I still consider it bullshit. You see, I don't agree with everything the government does like a lapdog like you do.

lol

It has nothing to do with believing the government you tool. Voro's explaination of why the government has a right to be involved is a very sound logical and factual statement.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 10, 2005, 3:02 pm

plus there are public health ramifications.

Kids are less likely to do steroids if the athletes who do them are publically shamed. High school atheletes do use these types of chemicals, and it can have serious adverse health effects.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 10, 2005, 3:09 pm

yup yup

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » March 10, 2005, 7:26 pm

Voronwe, supported by Midnyte, has proved the legitimacy of the inquiry beyond doubt.

I don't think that Kelshara disputes the legitimacy of the investigation, I think he questions the value. That is to say "there are a number of legitimate things that the government can do with it's time. It does not have time to do every legitimate thing, but must create priorities and choose those that have the most value. Steroids should be so low on the priority list as to not merit the time of Congress."

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 10, 2005, 7:53 pm

Exactly. And I don't buy the whole "Save the youth" thing, I believe that the stereoid problem in high school and college has it's base in the glorification top atheletes at this stage gets. Not as much what pro athletes do. How many kids are pushed by their parents to succeed? How many kids are going crazy over trying to get a scholarship?

Sorry, to me congress has a hell of a lot more important things than this. Let baseball show they can clean themself up, they seem to be moving in the right direction.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 10, 2005, 8:14 pm

Kelshara wrote:Exactly. And I don't buy the whole "Save the youth" thing, I believe that the stereoid problem in high school and college has it's base in the glorification top atheletes at this stage gets. Not as much what pro athletes do. How many kids are pushed by their parents to succeed? How many kids are going crazy over trying to get a scholarship?

Sorry, to me congress has a hell of a lot more important things than this. Let baseball show they can clean themself up, they seem to be moving in the right direction.

Some stories are beginning to come out and it seems that steroids are a much bigger problem in high athletics than anyone thought. We shall see.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » March 10, 2005, 8:22 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote: Some stories are beginning to come out and it seems that steroids are a much bigger problem in high athletics than anyone thought. We shall see.

High Athletics? Does pot increase the potential harm of steroids or something? : )

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 10, 2005, 8:26 pm

I know there is a big problem with high school athletes. I said their problem is not due to pro athletes using it.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 10, 2005, 9:27 pm

Kelshara wrote:I know there is a big problem with high school athletes. I said their problem is not due to pro athletes using it.

/sigh

If it is banned in all pro athletics, there would be no need for them do it in high school.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 10, 2005, 9:54 pm

Yeah because.. no teens push the limits to get into a good school on a scholarship! That never happens! And no college kid will do it to become a pro!

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 10, 2005, 11:41 pm

Kelshara wrote:Yeah because.. no teens push the limits to get into a good school on a scholarship! That never happens! And no college kid will do it to become a pro!

If testing in enforced on all levels, they will not get away with it. They will know by doing it they will lose everything.

Try and think, just a little bit.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » March 11, 2005, 12:16 am

FFS Mid, can you post just once in a thread without insulting someone?

Kel makes some good arguments. I do think that parents pushing their kids IS a factor too, and that IS a valid argument. That is however on a non-profesional level though, but I think he said that.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 11, 2005, 12:23 am

For a kid out of a poor family taking the risk will be more than worth it to get a shot at a scholarship. Has nothing to do with what a pro uses.

And before you tell me to think at least read the posts, hum?

Truant · Post by **Truant** » March 11, 2005, 3:15 am

In all honesty, I don't think anything that happens at the pro level will affect the use of steroids in High School athletes.

High School athletes, regardless of the sport, that are commited to playing in college and going pro know that everything is based on small chances and big opportunities. They have to really stand out against their competition at a high school level to get the attention of the scouts and the offers they want from school. Then, leaving college and going pro, it's an even bigger bottleneck. The further they go, the smaller their chances.

While in highschool they can take advantage of steroids and other performance enhancers. There is no system set up to test at the high school level, so the young athletes use this period of time to really bulk up and to try and get an edge on their competition, because once they leave high school, there is really no opportunity to do this anymore. Testing at college and pro levels has been in place, and getting stricter, so if an athlete is going to try and get an edge, they have to do it at the high school level, there is no other opportunity.

I don't know if any of you watch Outside the Lines, on ESPN, but they did a show on both steroids in high school, and high school students undergoing Tommy John surgery. These kids were voluntarily undergoing Tommy John surgery with no injury, just to increase their pitching velocity to get that edge for college scouts.

These kids know their chances are slim, and they're willing to do whatever it takes to get ahead in the competition.

I think getting stricter with testing and punishment in our professional sports. But I don't think doing so, or this hearing will help any of the problems at the high school level. The kids KNOW the risk, they're willing to take it for one shot at big time.