the big asterisk

[fox]

Up-front disclosure: I am intrigued to check out the Mitchell Report. I have entertained the thought of trying to pick the winners, as though the list of 50 or more steroid-using baseball players were an Oscar ballot. (The report comes out the same day as the Golden Globe nominations. Don't tell me that's purely coincidental. ;-) )

But -- forgive me for asking -- why the hell is the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in on this thing? This report was called for by the Commissioner of Baseball, which is exactly right; but I've been baffled for a long time now about why Congress is involved. I know we call it America's Pastime, but really, baseball isn't their business, is it? I mean, the drugs are illegal, which is their business; but nobody is disputing that the drugs are illegal. And if there's funny business going on in baseball, it's the baseball commissioner's office's job to deal with it, right? I really cannot comprehend how it's a federal legislative matter.

Anyone?

Comments

[jgesteve.livejournal.com]

That seems to jive with what I recall... the major pro sports leagues are exempted from anti-trust laws and as such are subject to government oversight. Similar to how most states/cities have Sports Commissions who govern things like arenas, stadiums, and licensing (for instance boxers have to be licensed to fight in the place that the fight is taking place).

Add into the above the illegal drug aspect and it basically becomes is the Federal Government giving legislative breaks to what is essentially an illegal drug ring? And while that may not be exactly "law" it certainly is "politics."

[darthfox.livejournal.com]

See, I knew there had to be an explanation. I just didn't know what it was. :-)

[abka.livejournal.com]

oh icon love, do you mind if I steal it?

[jgesteve.livejournal.com]

Go right ahead! cmshaw made it for me, and I doubt she'd mind.