The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Why the Government Prosecution of Athletes Who Cheat?

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Why the Government Prosecution of Athletes Who Cheat?

By Doug Bandow on 7.4.11 @ 5:57AM

Some people may be shocked, shocked!, to learn that there are athletes who cheat--taking steroids or other substances to bulk up. It may violate the rules, devalue their accomplishments, and disappoint starry-eyed fans. But why is it a political and criminal issue?

I'll admit that sports have never much interested me. Tennis is about the only one I've followed, and I share Aaron's sentiment that Novak Djokovic's rise is good for the sport. But organized team sports never have grabbed me.

I find the campaign to prosecute sleazy athletes to be far more bizarre, however. I don't purport to know the truth regarding Roger Clemens and Lance Armstrong, but Jonathan Mahler of the New York Times gets it right:

A Georgia congressman, Jack Kingston, has asked the F.D.A. for a financial accounting of the globe-trotting Armstrong investigation. Whatever we have spent to date, it will rise exponentially if a prosecution goes forward. As we saw with the trial of Bonds, the last object of Novitzky's obsession, there is no guarantee that it will result in a conviction that justifies the investment. How much is it going to cost us to add Lance Armstrong to our list of compromised heroes, when, let's face it, in the court of public opinion he's already there?

The real moral of Novitzky's taxpayer-financed crusade may be that it's time to put sports back in their proper place. Our nation's values are not at stake, as Ashcroft once had us believe. But that doesn't mean we can't all still hope to witness some truly inspiring sports moments in our lifetime that aren't ultimately tainted by P.E.D.s.

While we're at it, it may be time to look differently at the tainted performers themselves, not as heroes or villains but as human beings who existed in the context of their dirty games, who did some impressive things on the field and some deplorable things off it. Their falls from grace may have something to teach us not only about their hubris but also our own misplaced desire for transcendent athletes. Those are lessons that go beyond sports, and we can learn them without the help of a modern-day Eliot Ness.

The investigations have done what presumably is most important, assuming the allegations are true: sullied the reputations of one-time sporting icons. Turning their misbehavior into criminal prosecutions and potential jail time serves no purpose.

View all comments (17) | Leave a comment

alice moore| 7.4.11 @ 8:32AM

Diug Bandow, I agree with you. It is sufficient that the athlete's sporting federation drum them out, strip them of any titles obtained by enhanced means and be done with it.

I couldn't help noticing that these clowns in Congress really seemed to be on a power trip. They, the untalented, seemed to exult in the fact that they could summon a Barry Bonds for an afternoon of castigation. Don't these guys have more important things to do?

Stan REdmond| 7.4.11 @ 9:20AM

You really need to ask? What grabs more headlines? "Lance Armstrong doping scandal"

Or... "Another unconstitutional law passed by congressional thugs"

David W| 7.4.11 @ 10:37AM

Or which is easier - going after an athlete and being able to bloviate in front cameras or actually doing their job? After watching the "do nothings" in the Senate you know what the answer is.

albert constantine jr.| 7.4.11 @ 9:43AM

A year or so ago I was at a Philadelphia Phillies game, and remarked to my associate that I was glad that star 2nd baseman Chase Utley had decided to channel his talents into the pursuit of baseball excellence, instead of following in the overcrowded professional footsteps of his father, an attorney. The lawyers sitting on the other side of me were less amused with my assessment, but I think much less damage is done in the world by any athlete (naturally talented or cheating with P.E.D.) than the average law school graduate.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.4.11 @ 10:10AM

When you have a collectivist society, individual effort can no longer stand on its own nor can it be tolerated.

It must be open to circumspect by the political ruling class because individualism must be crushed where ever and when ever it arises.

There is no greater testament to individualism than sports. Therefore the athlete who rises above the rest must be bought down to earth and grounded and reminded that despite their athletic prowess they are still subject to the whims of the political class.

There is no equality in greatness, only equality in treatment. That's the essence of collectivism pure and simple.

The irony of all this is that the political ruling class does not hold themselves to the same standards, only calling for pained resignations as opposed to criminal prosecutions when politicians go awry.

Bob K.| 7.4.11 @ 10:59AM

Why aren't we concerned with the botoxed, blowdried, surgically tweaked celebrities we elect to represent us because they look good on Television? Aren't they using artificial means and substances to "excel" in their field of endeavor? And when is the last time you saw a fat and/or old anchorman or anchorwoman leading off the network news?

Is there any rule that says because one is slim (or anorexic?) enough to look good on Television one is also smart enough to rule the country or lecture the populace on the biggest issues of the day?

Meanwhile Chris Christie has no chance because he can't win the women's vote. He's too fat!

It is a good thing that World War II happened 70 years ago before our age of publicity and celebrity because Churchill, Roosevelt and Truman would never have been elected. Chamberlain, however was slim and lean enough to have been elected to lead Britain.

Dollface| 7.4.11 @ 11:05AM

I think it goes to the statist mentality that has infected our society, and government in particular. Today's government likes to be seen doing something, whether its appropriate or not. Thus we see the inordinate effort to criminalize the trivial and this includes not only sports, but also politics, entertainment and business.

I think its also a gotcha mentality among those responsible for deciding whom to prosecute. Ordinary norms no longer apply. Scooter Libby was persecuted for a "he said, somebody else said" "lie" , even though Peter Fitzgerald knew from day one of his investigation that no crime had been committed--he had to invent one.

Martha Stewart was convicted of obstruction of justice, but acquitted of the underlying criminal charge. How can you obstruct justice if no crime was committed?

The idea of universal jurisdiction is a travesty, too. The FDA is going after Lance Armstrong. If he did use PED's, didn't he do that in France? The last time I looked, France had their own courts and laws.

I think it is time we stopped unleashing the awesome power of the state on cheating athletes, opposing politicians, celebrities and everyone else with whom we may disagree. Sometimes, social ostracism is enough punishment for bad deeds.

PattyMor| 7.4.11 @ 1:01PM

Its like Mark Levin says, when you breach the walls of the Constitution, just what are the limits.
The sad truth is that there isn't many. So the congress gets involved in lots of things it has no business, but can't seem to control the border even after 9/11. Its all light and sound signifiying nothing, but puts on a good show.

PattyMor| 7.4.11 @ 1:01PM

Cyclist| 7.4.11 @ 4:36PM

It's not just about "persecuting" famous athletes. At least with Armstrong it's mostly about defrauding the Federal Government and the trafficking of of controlled substances. When Armstrong entered into his contract with US Postal and began a systematic use and trafficking of EPO and other PED's he committed fraud among other offenses. It's not just about the use of the drugs. Just like the Clinton impeachment wasn't really about the sex with Monica Lowinski.

J.C.Eaton| 7.4.11 @ 5:32PM

For the sake of argument, I'll stipulate that there's truth in your position. But, and this is a big but; What is more important to the Republic: using scarce prosecutorial resources getting the switch after a bicyclist or using them to convict and punish New Black Panthers votiong thugs? Just askin"

Cyclist| 7.5.11 @ 9:56AM

These are salaried lawyers. They essentially have unlimited resources. Do you just ignore fraud? Do you expect them to ignore fraud perpetrated against the government? It would be no different if it were tax evasion. What difference does it make whether it's a high profile athlete? What amazes me is that people are willing to give the guy a pass because he helped raise a few hundred million for cancer. A crook is a crook. If you start making exceptions, what road does that take us down?

J.C.Eaton| 7.5.11 @ 12:20PM

OK, by your lights we'll prosecute every criminal target we can...no exceptions. Salaries get paid by taxpayers, time is allotted by God. Those are the resources ACE. You missed the whole point, probably my fault. Get off you bike and run a prosecutor's office for six years. I did.

Old MS Miller| 7.5.11 @ 12:19AM

It would be acceptable to have politicians involved in sports behavior and ethics only if our politicians and other public officials all submit to mandatory drug testing and mental exams. This can be implemented along with term limits.

Denver Todd| 7.5.11 @ 8:18AM

Talking about people who use chemicals to support their lifestyles, one has only to look at Chaz Bono, who will always rely on the pharmaceutical industry to get by, for without the drugs, s/he will morph into who knows what.

MikeBee| 7.5.11 @ 11:40AM

O.K. So, Barry Bonds was using steroids. I don't count that against him, as most pitchers he went to bat against were also using them. A man who can only throw an 85 mph fastball takes steroids, so that he can throw 97 mph. Barry pumps up so that he can hit that 97 mph fastball out of the park. Fair game, if you ask me.

Congress has no business calling these guys in for an investigation, and even less business convicting these guys of anything.

We are seeing today the bringing down of all of the "gods" of the past. Sports figures are being prosecuted, priests are being prosecuted. In the past, these people were lionized greatly, far beyond what they deserved. Next up, doctors and entertainers. They seem to be today's "gods." Once it is realized that drugs and surgeries are only a piece of the healthcare pie, and that there are actual cures out there in the world that are not allowed in the U.S. because they do not involve drugs, doctors will cease to be considered "gods."

Entertainers haven't changed much through the centuries. In Shakespeare's time, actors were pretty low class people. In fact, some actresses held night jobs as prostitutes. The only difference today is how much money entertainers receive in the U.S. Many actors/actresses still hold night jobs, working as waiters/waitresses in restaurants, and such, until they can "make it big," which most don't.

Jerry | 7.5.11 @ 3:18PM

It matters because promoting truth telling has HUGE benefits to a society. TRUST is a key issue in interpersonal, and inter-governmental dealings.

I understand all the good that Lance has done raising money for Cancer research and building interest in cycling.

But we teach our kids to do the right thing, to play fair and to tell the unadulterated truth.

Seems like Lance, ever the politician, will take his secret with him to his grave. That is unless some additional "even more credible" sources are forced to turn "state's evidence" and show the films they must surely have taken for their own protection.

It may be time for the Livestrong Foundation, a very good cause that has done nothing but good, to ditch the yellow wristbands, distance themselves from Lance and find a new spokesperson so they don't become a victim of the fallout from the founder's improprieties.

People who are disappointed in Lance have got to go see the LanceLied.com site for an ironic slap on the wrist.