PDA

View Full Version : John McCain, our hero!


DumpJerry
12-04-2004, 06:40 PM
Senator John McCain today told MLB that if they don't crack down on steroid use, he will propose legislation in January banning the junk.:smile:

Does this mean Scammy is looking at 20-30 years of splitting rocks?

Kogs35
12-04-2004, 06:44 PM
Senator John McCain today told MLB that if they don't crack down on steroid use, he will propose legislation in January banning the junk.:smile:

Does this mean Scammy is looking at 20-30 years of splitting rocks?
he wanted to do this last year, and he knows fehr and co will not give in so he and the pres will police the game which i have no problem with. i hope john mcain and other shut down baseball until its cleaned up.

MRKARNO
12-04-2004, 07:46 PM
I'm really glad that our politcal leaders are spending time on the steroid issue when there are many other far more important issues at hand.

jackbrohamer
12-04-2004, 08:37 PM
Somehow I don't think increased government regulation is gonna get baseball out of the woods on this one...

DumpJerry
12-04-2004, 08:47 PM
I'm really glad that our politcal leaders are spending time on the steroid issue when there are many other far more important issues at hand.I think it is important to show impressionable kids that this is wrong and you're considered a cheater. Right now, we're raising a generation that says it is ok ot cheat or cut corners to achieve rather than doing it with skill and hard work (not to mention the health ramifications of steroid use, esp. on teenagers).

FarWestChicago
12-04-2004, 09:30 PM
I think it is important to show impressionable kids that this is wrong and you're considered a cheater. Right now, we're raising a generation that says it is ok ot cheat or cut corners to achieve rather than doing it with skill and hard work (not to mention the health ramifications of steroid use, esp. on teenagers).Judging from some of the posts on this board I believe it may be too late already. http://www.flyingsock.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

JKryl
12-05-2004, 12:07 AM
Senator John McCain today told MLB that if they don't crack down on steroid use, he will propose legislation in January banning the junk.:smile:

Does this mean Scammy is looking at 20-30 years of splitting rocks?
Not rocks, SUGAR CANE! Go McCain.

MRKARNO
12-05-2004, 12:38 AM
I think it is important to show impressionable kids that this is wrong and you're considered a cheater. Right now, we're raising a generation that says it is ok ot cheat or cut corners to achieve rather than doing it with skill and hard work (not to mention the health ramifications of steroid use, esp. on teenagers).
I'm not sure that congress can even do anything here, unless it wants to get into the business of amending collective bargaining agreements between unions and corporations, something I'm not sure that the Supreme Court would approve of. If Congress wanted to pass a joint resolution condemning the policy of the MLB, that might be a good way to go about things because then it would just make the MLB look bad without congress overstepping its boundaries. The fact is that Fehr and Selig need to get the players to somehow amend the current CBA to make the minor league policy one that is applied around baseball or look at the NFL model.

I wouldnt be surprised if we see baseball come to a halt again when the next CBA is up over this steroids issue and many many other pressing issues in baseball.

Nellie_Fox
12-05-2004, 03:24 AM
There is no federal issue here that I can think of.

TornLabrum
12-05-2004, 09:05 AM
There is no federal issue here that I can think of.There is one. Congress can say, "Clean up your act or you lose your anti-trust exemption." That's a HUGE Federal issue as far as MLB is concerned. And don't forget, those things are prescription drugs, and not one of them was issued as a prescription. The was at least inplicit complicity among the players, owners, and dealers that ignored or even encouraged steroid use. Hard to prove in a court of law, but enough to maybe get the MLBPA and owners to come up with a real policy for handling the issue.

munchman33
12-05-2004, 10:31 AM
It's official. I'm on board. McCain 2008!!!

Ol' No. 2
12-05-2004, 11:23 AM
Hold it. Let's keep this in perspective. This is baseball. It's a game. And while it's tremendously important to us, in the grand scheme of things, it's not really that important. We're not talking about people getting killed, or their livelihoods being taken away. The federal government already has laws on the books regulating steroid use. What's next, federal regulation of lip-synching?

TornLabrum
12-05-2004, 11:33 AM
Hold it. Let's keep this in perspective. This is baseball. It's a game. And while it's tremendously important to us, in the grand scheme of things, it's not really that important. We're not talking about people getting killed, or their livelihoods being taken away. The federal government already has laws on the books regulating steroid use. What's next, federal regulation of lip-synching?
I doubt that, but they do regulate payola.

HomeFish
12-05-2004, 12:07 PM
This isn't opprotunism by McCain either. He was pushing for reform with drug testing and MLB last session, before all of this was made public. If you recall, Selig and Fehr testified before his committee.

In fact, at that meeting., Sen. Biden of Delaware said something to the effect of "What we need, sorry Mr. Selig, is a real baseball commissioner" right there in front of Selig, only a few feet away. Nobody on the committee disagreed with the statement, called it harsh or inappropriate. In fact, Selig didn't even contest it!

I was never prouder to be an American.

DumpJerry
12-05-2004, 03:45 PM
There is no federal issue here that I can think of.Actually, there are at least two federal issues here. One is the anti-trust issue which a previous poster mentions and the fact that the Constitution empowers Congress to regulate interstate commerce. MLB is part of interstate commerce, there is no way to argue around that.

There is also the issue of federal regulation of medications and drugs. The FDA approves drugs for specific applications, if a drug is used for an unapproved application, there are penalties available.

white sox bill
12-05-2004, 05:46 PM
No political agendas here!! (anyone know what color sarcastic teal is supposed to be?)

illinibk
12-05-2004, 05:53 PM
In fact, at that meeting., Sen. Biden of Delaware said something to the effect of "What we need, sorry Mr. Selig, is a real baseball commissioner" right there in front of Selig, only a few feet away. Nobody on the committee disagreed with the statement, called it harsh or inappropriate. In fact, Selig didn't even contest it!
Of course Selig didn't respond. JR wasn't there to tell him what to say and how to react.

Nellie_Fox
12-06-2004, 02:21 PM
Actually, there are at least two federal issues here. One is the anti-trust issue which a previous poster mentions and the fact that the Constitution empowers Congress to regulate interstate commerce. MLB is part of interstate commerce, there is no way to argue around that.

There is also the issue of federal regulation of medications and drugs. The FDA approves drugs for specific applications, if a drug is used for an unapproved application, there are penalties available.Throughout the 1800's, it was accepted that the federal government had no right to regulate drugs, and they were a lot closer to the time the Constitution was written. You could buy heroin and the syringe to inject it from the Sears catalog. They got their nose under the tent with tax acts, and slowly grew their criminalization of drug use.

The Interstate Commerce Clause has been stretched so thin you can see through it. They were originally given the power to regulate the actual interstate commerce, not every aspect of any business that engages in interstate commerce. The steroid use has nothing to do with the actual interstate commerce.

Just because the federal government is involved in some aspect of regulation doesn't mean they should be according to the constitution. The "frog" of limited federal government has been slowly boiled to death a long time ago (if you are familiar with that analogy.)

ewokpelts
12-07-2004, 01:05 PM
Senator John McCain today told MLB that if they don't crack down on steroid use, he will propose legislation in January banning the junk.:smile:

Does this mean Scammy is looking at 20-30 years of splitting rocks?i wish mccain was our president AND commisioner of baseball!

ode to veeck
12-07-2004, 01:22 PM
Judging from some of the posts on this board I believe it may be too late already.

sad thing about your post was it's not in teal :(:

ode to veeck
12-07-2004, 01:29 PM
Hold it. Let's keep this in perspective. This is baseball. It's a game. And while it's tremendously important to us, in the grand scheme of things, it's not really that important. We're not talking about people getting killed, or their livelihoods being taken away. The federal government already has laws on the books regulating steroid use. What's next, federal regulation of lip-synching?
Hey, I think the government ought to stay out of lots of things that they shouldn't be in already, but ... in this case, baseball has refused to police itself and the way things are headed, it may only be through such external pressures (e.g. CO gov Owen's threats as well) that they get their act together

DumpJerry
12-07-2004, 01:58 PM
Throughout the 1800's, it was accepted that the federal government had no right to regulate drugs, and they were a lot closer to the time the Constitution was written. You could buy heroin and the syringe to inject it from the Sears catalog. They got their nose under the tent with tax acts, and slowly grew their criminalization of drug use.

The Interstate Commerce Clause has been stretched so thin you can see through it. They were originally given the power to regulate the actual interstate commerce, not every aspect of any business that engages in interstate commerce. The steroid use has nothing to do with the actual interstate commerce.

Just because the federal government is involved in some aspect of regulation doesn't mean they should be according to the constitution. The "frog" of limited federal government has been slowly boiled to death a long time ago (if you are familiar with that analogy.)With all due respect Mr. Fox, that interpretation of the Commerce Clause ended about 80 years ago, so we are stuck with today's interpretation. Now, a few years ago the High Nine struck down a federal law banning guns on school yards because there was no interstate commerce involved, but that was based on the fact that school yards do not travel in interstate commerce.

Even if we say Congress does not have authority to regulate steroids because, for some reason, they are not interstate commerce, MLB is clearly part of interstate commerce. The teams are in several states and two countries, MLB merchandise is manufactured and sold in various states, broadcasters in the various states carry the games (however, an argument can be made that broadcasting an event in one state to another is not interstate commerce).

Let's say that Commerce Clause does not apply at all here. Congress can still jump into the fray using the police powers to protect our youth from getting involved in steroids.

Personally, I think it would be best if the politicians stay out of this and us, the fans, went on strike to force the League and Union to address the issue in a meaningful manner (i.e. photocopy the NFL's policy on steroid use).

Nellie_Fox
12-07-2004, 02:27 PM
Congress can still jump into the fray using the police powers to protect our youth from getting involved in steroids.The police powers are expressly and unambiguously reserved to the states, and the courts have repeatedly held so. Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government given "police powers," and "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution...are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people."

That's why the federal government has to use the "back-door" method of threatening to withhold highway funds to get the states to pass laws they want, because they can't pass them themselves.

Again, just because the Constitution has been so regularly usurped (as we were warned against by Washington in his farewell address) doesn't mean we should just sit back and accept it. The Constitution is a contract between the States and the United States, and if one side can make unilateral changes to the terms of the contract, then it is not a contract at all.

DumpJerry
12-07-2004, 02:52 PM
The police powers are expressly and unambiguously reserved to the states, and the courts have repeatedly held so. Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government given "police powers," and "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution...are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people."You're right, my bad. Law school was a long time ago for me.

However, I am leery of strictly sticking with the Framers' intentions as interpreted by everyone who wishes to interpret them. The Constitution must be flexible to adopt to changing conditions in the world. After all, the document was written in a world that was very, very different from ours. The Industrial Revolution was in the distant future, the rise of democracies around the world was in the future, the advances in technology which have changed the meaning of "borders" was in the future. If we have really gone far afield from the intention of the framers' and for some reason we need to stick with the Framer's intentions, then an Amendment is in order..............

But, I think you and I better be careful, this thread might get thrown out of Talking Baseball. After all, since when do baseball owners and players talk about anything other than $$$$?

ode to veeck
12-07-2004, 03:07 PM
I think saying that baseball is a form of interstate commerce is simple and very valid. It's unfortunate it has to come to this, but what else do you expect from a used car salesman.

Ol' No. 2
12-07-2004, 03:44 PM
While baseball may be very important to us, let's keep in mind that Western Civilization got along quite nicely without it for some time. It's a game. It's entertainment. If the lords of baseball want to turn it into the WWF, that will suck, but Congress should keep their noses out of it. McCain and all these congressmen who are grabbing headlines are just grandstanding. He'd be a lot better off if he spent his time figuring out how to get people decent health care.

Nellie_Fox
12-07-2004, 04:27 PM
The Constitution must be flexible to adopt to changing conditions in the world. After all, the document was written in a world that was very, very different from ours. They foresaw this, and that's why they built in the amendment process, so that both parties to the contract could agree to changes.

To allow changes by "interpretation" to "fit the current times" says that the Constitution has no meaning except that assigned to it by current sitting judges. If that is what we wanted, then we didn't need a Constitution at all. We could operate by judicial fiat, like so many countries in the world do.

The "usurpation" that Washington warned about has happened repeatedly, for exactly the reason he said that it would happen, because they think they are doing good, but the damage done by ignoring the Constitution far outweighs any temporary good done by the usurpation.

I'm not saying that some courts might not buy the "interstate commerce" arguments; they have bought it on flimsier arguments than this. There are plenty of judges who believe that the expansion of federal power is a good thing. I'm just saying that it is not the intent of the authors of the document that every aspect of a business be subject to federal regulation just because some part of their business is interstate. Remember, the intent of the founders was to make a very limited federal government, with the vast majority of the powers reserved to the States and the people.

flo-B-flo
12-07-2004, 09:35 PM
Somehow I don't think increased government regulation is gonna get baseball out of the woods on this one... It's plenty too late. Baseball - finally - comes riding in like the cavalry. Even though they knew about this in the 70's. The supplement industry has probably moved on to new and improved undetectable vitamins.

TheBull19
12-10-2004, 05:04 AM
Remember, the intent of the founders was to make a very limited federal government, with the vast majority of the powers reserved to the States and the people.
In the context of constitutional law, though, "the people" are represented by elected officials, i.e. the congress and the senate.

Nellie_Fox
12-10-2004, 11:24 AM
In the context of constitutional law, though, "the people" are represented by elected officials, i.e. the congress and the senate.So, what's your point?

ode to veeck
12-10-2004, 12:39 PM
Remember, the intent of the founders was to make a very limited federal government, with the vast majority of the powers reserved to the States and the people.
Some of the founders (Jefferson, Madison, etc), but certainly not Alexander Hamilton

Actually Nellie, I agree with you in general. However, in this case, I just don't see baseball cleaning up their act, and myself and a lot of baseball's fans would be happy to have the McCain and co. do it for them. Also given baseball's unique anti-trust exemption, I'm glad to see some committee chair appropriately following up on ridiculous performance by Selig