...Congress is spending our money on whether Roger Clemens took steroids because we all know that if he did and we find out about it all of our problems will be solved and the world will be a better place because Roger Clemens steroid use or non use makes a huge difference to us because it fucking matters.

/rant off

I didn't want to derail the other thread, so making a different post. I think its probably a huge misunderstanding about how our government works to think like this.

How much of "our money" was spent on the steroids issue, in total? Probably the tiniest of fractions of our commerce budget. How much was spent on this recent Roger Clemens issue, probably the tiniest of fractions of the ammount spent on the steroids issue in total.

For those unfamiliar with what happened, in late 2004 there was a noticable increase in children in middle school and highschool dying of steroid use. A federal grand jury in San Francisco implicated a number of former baseball playes and the company BALCO in what was titled the "BALCO Investigation". Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va) of the House Government Reform Committee put pressure on Baseball first (but eventually all sports) to clean up their acts and invited a bunch of players to Capitol Hill to testify feeling that the laws. That hearing on March 17th the players put blame on the owners wanting them to succeed, and Congress felt that the sports should have policed themselves - but since it was in their favor to continue steroid use (more home runs and excitement at the parks in a post-strike low attendance era) that the lawmakers needed to step in. They did, and low and behold 4 years later steroids are very taboo and testing has increased dramatically.

The depositions this week leading up to yesterday's hearing were due to ex-Senator George Mitchell, director of the Boston Red Sox, friend of Commissioner Bud Selig was tasked by Congress to raft a report on Major League Baseball's dime to give from March 29th, 2006 to December 13th 2007. This report implicated 78 former and current players including Roger Clemens as well as Andy Pettitte (who gave testimony against Clemens two days ago), Denny Neagle (who gave testimony against Clemens three days ago), Barry Bonds, Miguel Tejada, and many others.

Clemens was the the main one to really dispute the findings. Thus the Government Oversight and Reform committee had to ultimately police the Government's findings. Hence the hearings.

So, the way the past two weeks went was Clemens came in and gave a sworn in deposition for about 5 hours. While this was behind closed doors, the members were seen entering and leaving the room to ask questions. At any given moment at most there were 3 or 4 members (out of 40) present. So 4 members for 5 hours is 20 Representative man hours. McNamee testifieid under oath for another 4 hours, so thats 16 man hours total. Then the actual hearing was 4 hours but more Representatives were in attendance at any given time (say up to 7 or 8 were in the room at most) so thats 72 man hours total of our elected officials. Sure there was plenty of staff, the stenographer, and so forth, but its not like it ate up *that* much time.

The House has 25 committees. Condoleza Rice was in a committee with one just accross the hall all day. Representatives come in and ask their 3-4 questions, then they go on to do their next meeting. It isn't like all 40 members of the Oversight and Reform comittee sit around the entire day staring at Roger Clemens. If you watched the video you would have seen most of the seats empty and people shuffling about the whole time.

Long story short, as far as committee hearings go this one was one of the shortest I've reported on. Would you prefer our lawmakers didn't research the topics they were creating laws on in order to spend less of your money? Or if they hear that thousands of kids are dying and hundreds of thousands of kids are taking steroids in this country that maybe they should try and at least research if there is anything they can do to fix it. And since they started researching it, if there was a major discrepency in their report - maybe, just maybe, they should try and figure out if thats true or not - or would we'd prefer they just did their research half assed to save our tax dollars (our personal contribution to all of the steroids hearings is probably around $0.25)

I dunno, what ever happened to parents taking care of kids.....?

doesnt congress get to intervene in these matters due to the anti-trust excemption the leagues get?

Sixee you're correct. We should make parents take care of their children. Its silly to have laws when you have parents to shoulder that responsibility. Why have a drinking age when parents can choose when their kids drink, why have a driving age when parents can choose when their kids drive, why have gun laws when a parent can decide if their kids can shoot or not, why have laws against murder when a parent can certainly punish their child if they do something like that.

ATM, i'd certainly support a repealment of the confinement/imprisonment laws regarding children. I'd love nothing more than to be able to legally handcuff my teenage daughter to her bedroom wall!!!!

ATM, i'd certainly support a repealment of the confinement/imprisonment laws regarding children. I'd love nothing more than to be able to legally handcuff my teenage daughter to her bedroom wall!!!!Uhhh, sure...if that's what you're into...

*backs away slowly*

Been gone all day, regardless of the percentage of the nations expenditure that is being spent on this, it is plainly ridiculious.

Question: Mr Clemens, have you ever been a vegan?

Answer: I...I'm not sure what that is.


Oh good...now we know...



The whole thing is pure bullshit and is a local or at the most state law enforcement issue and does not warrant a congressional investigation.

The whole thing has as much validity as the whole flag burning amendment that crops up every few years.

How about the senator that asked him during the procedings which hat he would wear when elected to the hall of fame? That was relevant to these procedings :rolleyes:

Sixee you're correct. We should make parents take care of their children.

That part of your statement was fine with me. However you start to drop off into looniness after that.

As far as I knew, parents were responsible for the actions of their children, legal and illegal, untill the age of emancipation.

If a child kills someone, and they are under the age of 18, then the parents get some of the punishment, as well, do they not?

If a child drinks under the age of 18, and is caught, doesn't the parent get in trouble, as well? I would theink the incentive there is for the parent to remain vigilant in the child's actions, untill the age of 18.

So if a child is taking steroids, and is found out, then the parent should be held responsible.

So make random drug tests as part of the school athletic program, just as they do in pro sports.
It'll seem "cool" to the kids, because it'll be just like they do in the pros, and they'll be able to emulate their heros, even more....

If a child kills someone, and they are under the age of 18, then the parents get some of the punishment, as well, do they not?

That would depend on whether the child was tried as an adult, or if the parent could have been reasonably aware of the actions of the child at the time of the crime. If restitution is ordered, and the child wasn't tried as an adult, then yes the parent would be in charge of that payment.


If a child drinks under the age of 18, and is caught, doesn't the parent get in trouble, as well? I would theink the incentive there is for the parent to remain vigilant in the child's actions, untill the age of 18.

This would depend too. If another child's parent supplies the child with alcohol, than no, the child's parent wouldn't be found liable.


So if a child is taking steroids, and is found out, then the parent should be held responsible.

Again, this would probably depend upon how the child acquired the steroids, or if there were reason for their parent to be aware of the situation. If a coach supplies the child, it's hard to blame the parent.

So make random drug tests as part of the school athletic program, just as they do in pro sports.


Some schools do test for drugs in their athletes, though just like in the pros, there's no reliable test for HGH.

I was a college athlete. I played volleyball and basketball on scholarsip and we were tested regularly (all sports men and women) several times a season. If someone reported you were doing drugs you tested more frequently. These are NCAA regulations, I was never tested in high school but support it. Catch this shit early and often I say :)

I'm not one to applaud congress at every turn but when they're actually doing their job they shouldn't be chastised for it. These hearings were Government Oversight. There was a discrepancy in a report, they HAD to figure out why. That's what they do on that Committee.

Sixee: "So make random drug tests as part of the school athletic program, just as they do in pro sports."
Taleren: "Some schools do test for drugs in their athletes, though just like in the pros, there's no reliable test for HGH."
Fildien: "These are NCAA regulations, I was never tested in high school but support it. Catch this shit early and often I say"

Isn't it Congress's ONLY job to research issues and make laws regarding them? They had medical doctors in there 3 days ago discussing how there are no tests for HGH, as Taleren pointed out, and discussing the actual medical dangers children in high school are facing if they take these drugs. They had someone from the education department discussing how much it would cost for regular testing of all students. And then they had the oversight: Mr. Clemens and his accusers as a small part of it. Just because it wasn't carried live on ESPN doesn't mean it didn't happen. Its obvious by the comments above that a need for testing in high school exists; in order to do that Congress needs to pass a law. Laws don't make themselves, perhaps some folks have missed too many episodes of School House Rocks. If you don't want them to do their ONLY job, what is it you do want them to do? Or do you want them to take the Sixee solution: make laws without researching or thinking about them first?

Now if you want to harp on Arlen Specter wasting time as an Eagle's fan investigating the Patriots cheating in the 2000 Superbowl, thats a valid point. But if this went unheard that would have been the real tragedy. Lets not forget it was Congress's interference in the issue at the start which led to Baseball (as well as Football, Basketball, and to a lesser extent Hockey) cleaning themselves up in the first place.