Steroid testing in schools costly, By: Paul Stone

We can all rest a little easier.

Why, you ask?

Earlier this week, the Texas Senate and House separately passed different versions of bills which would mandate random steroid testing for the state’s public school athletes at an estimated cost of $4 million per year (although some knowledgeable sorts say this estimate is on the low side).

A conference committee comprised of members of both the Senate and House will next sit down and attempt to hash out differences between the bills. While the Senate bill calls for the state to pick up the seven-digit pricetag, the House version calls for the cost to be passed down to mom and dad in the form of an additional fee on sports tickets.

In either scenario, the taxpayer ultimately foots the bill. Darn, isn't that the way these things always come down?

Now I’ve got to come clean. My “We can all rest a little easier” opener was written tongue in cheek. Firmly in cheek.

Before the labels start getting attached and the name calling begins, let’s be clear. I am not in any form, shape or fashion dismissing or minimizing the damage done by steroids.

High blood pressure, heart disease, liver damage, cancers, stroke and blood clots are just some of the negative side effects seen in steroid users of both sexes. Additionally, male steroid users face a greater risk of impotence, while females should consider the possibility of how they will be perceived with facial hair and a deeper voice.

Steroid use among our nation’s youth is a problem. No ifs, ands or buts. How big a one, however, is a legitimate, reasonable question. Is it so big that we should spend an average of almost $11,000 every day of taxpayer funds?

State studies surveying almost 150,000 Texas students in grades seven through 12 showed that steroid use in that group fell from 2 percent in 2004 to 1.5 percent last year.

Like others, I would suggest that one young Texan using steroids is one too many. But the same goes for a plethora of other serious issues from teenaged drinking and driving to riding ATVs without a helmet to babies having babies to the growing percentage of obese teenagers who are more likely statistically to be firmly gripping a bag of potato chips than an aluminum bat or a 8-iron.

How much money thrown at a somewhat-isolated problem is too much?

Whereas a standard drug test can be performed for around $18 nowadays, a single test for steroids runs anywhere from $110 to $175.

So the question becomes, “Is $4 million to test a small percentage of the state’s 733,000 high school athletes too steep a price, especially since likely only 1 or 2 percent are going to come back positive?”

While big city problems often trickle down to the Palestines, Elkharts and Grapelands of the rural landscape, I would suggest that steroids are much more accessible and, therefore, much more of an issue in the state’s major metropolitan areas.

Fredericksburg, located in the Texas Hill Country, has tested its high school athletes for the past two years.

Their number of positive steroid tests during that span is equal to the number of times I have won the Masters golf tournament. Or the Texas lottery for that matter.

Zero. Zilch. Nada.

If we had an infinite supply of $100s resting in a big hole behind the State Capitol ready to pay for every legitimate need, certainly we should take a bulldozer; scoop up several piles; and test every high school athlete in the state of Texas.

Shoot, we could even line up the teachers in case they’re struggling with the temptation of unnaturally bulking up for the summer beach season.

The harsh reality, however, is there are limited monies to pay for unlimited needs (Of course, we could increase taxes...). Therefore, our lawmakers should assess each need individually and then make non-political decisions prioritizing and arranging all of them within the big (funding) picture.

If the state’s going to pen a check for $4 million, why not use those monies to get the salaries of our public school teachers more in line with the national average? Or if that idea gets nixed, why doesn’t the state instead pay for every high school student's first attempt at the SAT and ACT to help steer every young Texan in the direction of a post-secondary education?

Better qualified teachers, more prepared students or “let’s keep a kid or two off steroids”?

This is reality. If you choose to fund one thing, you are, in essence, choosing not to fund something else when there’s only so big of a pie to go around. Again, we could raise taxes...

Dare I suggest that some of our state’s legislators may be using the issue as somewhat of a “political football” so to speak. I mean, after all, who in their right mind is against testing for steroids?

“Remember, I led the crusade protecting our young people from steroids. I’d appreciate your vote come November.”

Nah, that wouldn’t happen. Guess my cynicism got the best of me again.