Steroid hearing was good for game, By: Jim Salisbury
March 15, 2006, Inquirer Columnist
CLEARWATER, Fla. - A year ago this week, Congress stuck its nose into baseball's business.
The big hitters from the House Committee on Government Reform demanded that some of the sport's top names, from Selig to Sosa, report to Capitol Hill for a talk (it turned out to be more of a tongue-lashing) on the illegal use of performing-enhancing drugs, particularly steroids, in the game.
From the get-go, some people had problems with the hearing.
It was called a waste of time. A publicity stunt. Political grandstanding.
Randy Wolf heard about the hearing and shook his head.
"Chemical McCarthyism," the Phillies pitcher said.
With a nation at war and a multitude of problems in the country, it was, and still is, understandable that some would oppose the idea of government leaders spending valuable time looking into America's toy chest.
But a year later, you have to give the ol' boys on the Hill their props.
They got something done.
The hearing and the threat of legislation were just the gun to the head that was needed to get those two old warring factions, Major League Baseball and the players' association, to stop bobbing and weaving and hammer out a tough policy against performing-enhancing substances, with more random testing and real penalties for those who still dare to dabble.
When baseball went to the Hill, the penalty for a first positive steroid test was 10 days. Now it's 50 games.
The penalty for a second positive test was 30 days. Now it's 100 games.
When baseball went to the Hill, it took four strikes to be slapped with a year's suspension. Now it's three strikes and you're gone. Forever.
When baseball went to the Hill, there was no testing, nor were there penalties, for amphetamine use. Now there are both, with the penalties including increased random testing for a first positive test and a 25-game suspension for a second positive test.
When baseball went to the Hill, there was no year-round testing for steroids. Now there is.
Baseball's policy against performance-enhancing substances still has holes - players still aren't tested for human growth hormone - but it's a lot better than it was a year ago.
Baseball owes all of this to that congressional hearing a lot of us snickered at a year ago. If it wasn't for that hearing, the attention it drew, and the continued threat of legislation, there is no way the intransigent union, which for so long opposed any kind of testing, would have agreed to a tougher policy in November.
If it wasn't for the hearing, the penalty for a first positive steroid test would still be, as Sen. Jim Bunning of Kentucky said, a "puny" 10-day suspension, enough to get the attention of most players (witness the shrunken bodies and the 8 percent drop in home runs last year), but still small enough that some desperate slugger might reach for the syringe after a homerless month.
"I watched some of the hearings last year," said Phillies pitcher Rheal Cormier, who has never been afraid to speak out against steroid use. "They were long. But we have tougher testing now, and for that reason, I'd say they did good.
"It really doesn't impact me a lot because I'm on my way out. I'm happy for the young guys. I always felt badly for the young guys who felt they had to do that stuff to keep up. And if they did it naturally, they were penalized because the guys who used it would have put up bigger numbers and made more money. People need to play this game naturally, and hopefully, now more are."
Wolf, the author of the most publicized quote condemning the hearing, still doesn't approve of it, and raises some legitimate issues.
"As a citizen of this country, I still think there were a lot more important things going on than talking about a bunch of loaded-up ballplayers," he said.
Wolf also believes that every player called to testify was judged guilty without due process, and whether you're a supporter or detractor of Mark McGwire or anyone else who was subpoenaed, he is right.
Wolf, however, conceded that the endgame - more random testing, tougher penalties - is good for baseball.
"You can say the union definitely bent in the direction of getting tougher penalties," he said. "But it's hard to say if it wasn't heading in that direction anyway, without the hearings. Either way, the way it is now is good for the game."
There's no debate there. Baseball should be cleaner this year because of the increased unannounced testing and the 50-game penalty for a first dirty urine sample. They will be strong deterrents as the sport tries to clean up its problems with steroids and other performance-enhancing substances.
No, it's not a perfect system, and, regrettably, it won't undo the past or revoke the memberships of those who cheated their way into the 500-homer club or other golden fraternities. But baseball's policy against performance-enhancing substances is certainly better than it was a year ago, and you can thank that publicity stunt on Capitol Hill for that.
