.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Miscellaneous thoughts and ramblings
Sunday, December 05, 2004
 
Is There Still a Tenth Amendment?
Congress to mull mandatory drug tests for baseball: McCain

I'm sure I'll get disagreement from other Coffeehousers, but this further solidifies my dislike of McCain. I've never liked him, for the simple reason that he's not in any way conservative. He's more of a populist. I know lots of Republicans loved him when he was running against Bush in the 2000 primaries, but even then I disliked his support of campaign finance reform, which I see as a limitation on free speech and a huge boon for the unions, which are exempt. Was the 2004 election much better because of the legislation? Was George Soros less able to spend gazillions of dollars to unseat Bush?

Now to baseball. I hope I get smarter commentary from the other contributors, since I'm easily the least interested in sports here, but even if this was a really important issue (and I'm sure for big fans it is), how does it rise to something that deserves Federal attention? Is there anything less worthy of Congressional time than a baseball player using steroids? Are the fans being forced to buy tickets at gunpoint? Can the fans not demand that baseball have stricter testing standards?

I like to read the tenth amendment to the Constitution periodically. It's my favorite.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Very clear, no? Sadly the courts have thoroughly weakened this amendment largely by finding more and more things that Congress can act on because it has something to do (no matter how indirectly) with interstate commerce. And how does McCain justify Congressional action on baseball? He says in the article
Antitrust exemption was granted by Congress to organize baseball, and also it's got to do with interstate commerce. So we do have a role to play.
Great! How 'bout securing the borders? Does Congress have a mandate there, or should we leave that for baseball fans to sort out?
Comments:
Thanks for writing this. You just saved me several minutes from writing essentially the same thing. In context, I'm not even sure that the particular scandal in progress at the moment rises beyond the actions of one man who gave steroids to a few high profile figures. I don't even know if any criminal statutes were violated; the substances are banned from sports, but I don't think they're illegal for usage among citizens.

So, yeah, what the hell is McCain getting his ugly mug involved in this for? Further solidifies my disdain for the guy.
 
McCain or no McCain, I don't see this as a federalism issue. I don't see why the government should be involved in this on any level, national, state, county, municipal, what-have-you. Let the MLB or individual teams or, as you suggested, consumers sort it out. If any of these drugs are illegal, fine, let's prosecute the people using and dealing. But if not, why should the government stop with baseball? Why not test all citizens for substances - illegal ones, that is. Isn't this a privacy issue? I think that's in the constitution somewhere, too. Cocaine is illegal, but we don't submit ourselves to tests for it.

Then again, I'm fairly ignorant on this kinda legal stuff. Plus, I use steroids. Check out my delts!
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

Powered by Blogger