Saturday, July 28, 2018

The Overreach Known as the Rodchenkov Act

Congress has done it again.  Instead of actually, you know, running the country, they're busy holding hearings about something that the federal government has no business being involved in.  Specifically, I'm talking about the bipartisan "Rodchenkov Act," which seeks to criminalize doping violations in international sports (but, hey, at least we got them to agree on something!).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to anti-doping measures.  Doping is by far the biggest problem plaguing international sports (at all levels) right now.  But this is an international problem that requires an international solution.  And the Rodchenkov Act (which is obviously inspired by the Russian doping crisis) is most definitely NOT the answer.  In fact, it's a tremendous overreach that has been summarily criticized...and rightfully so!

Sheila Jackson Lee and Michael Burgess (both from Texas) brought the bill, named after Grigory Rodchenkov, the former Russian doping administrator-turned-whistle blower who has been living in the U.S. ever since (there's issue #1 right there), to the Floor with the goal of preventing "international fraud" against American athletes.  The bill's goal is basically to establish criminal penalties for doping at major international events.  The penalties would range from a fine of up to $1 million or jail time, potentially as much as 10 years. 

Here's where it begins to fall apart, though.  According to the bill, the U.S. government should have jurisdiction if "the offense is committed in whole or in part in the United States" or the offense is committed outside the United States and "is committed in relation to a major international competition" or "the offense occurs in or affects the interstate or foreign commerce of the United States."  It also defines "performance-enhancing drugs" as specified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, which isn't necessarily just those on the WADA list of prohibited substances.

So, basically, they're saying that the U.S. government should be in charge of determining doping violations and penalties for any international sporting competition involving American athletes, regardless of the country it takes place in.  If that isn't asinine enough, the bill also self-appoints the U.S. government as the enforcement agency for any doping offense committed by any athlete from any country.  For some reason, they think it's completely reasonable to make athletes from all 206 National Olympic Committees subject to U.S. law.

If the event takes place in the U.S., that's one thing.  But how does a German cyclist doping at the Tour de France have anything to do with the United States?!  Just because Americans are in the field, that somehow gives the U.S. government jurisdiction?  How does that make any sense?

There's already an organization called the World Anti-Doping Agency.  As the name implies, WADA is in charge of anti-doping at international competitions.  And they've already established what the penalties for doping offenses are (as well as establishing an appeals process).  In addition to WADA, the various international federations handle their own anti-doping efforts at single-sport events.  Some sports have better anti-doping records than others, but it's not up to Congress to decide that.

They also mentioned the fact that several other nations have already passed federal anti-doping legislation.  However, in every country except the United States, the Olympic Committee receives funding from the government.  That's a very important difference.  In each of those other countries, the Olympic committee has a certain obligation and the government is entitled to have certain expectations from an organization receiving federal funds.

The USOC receives absolutely no financial support from the federal government.  It's a completely independent organization.  As such, it doesn't answer to Congress the way another country's Olympic committee would to its government.  Which is why it's apples and oranges when trying to compare how international sports are handled in the U.S. as opposed to any other nation.  Bringing up Russia, especially, isn't a like comparison, seeing as that was a state-sponsored doping program, which wouldn't have been possible if the government wasn't so involved in the day-to-day operations of the Olympic team.

In its response to the Rodchenkov Act, one of the things that the IOC pointed out, along with the other concerns I've already mentioned, is that Congress is worried about international sport, but the level of testing in our own domestic professional leagues is "low."  Each league does its own testing, and the USADA (as self-righteous an organization as there is) has no jurisdiction over them.  In fact, the USADA is only responsible for the testing of U.S. Olympic and Paralympic athletes.

Rather than taking on this fight all by itself, the IOC suggested that the United States join the "International Partnership Against Corruption In Sport," where they're working together with governments, international sports federations and international organizations like the United Nations to combat doping.  They also not-so-subtly suggested that the U.S. government and USADA worry about perceived doping issues in the NFL, NBA, NHL, WNBA, MLB and MLS while leaving the international sports to them.

I can't say I disagree with that.  Not to mention the fact that there are a number of loopholes in this plan, in addition to the flaws that exist.  (For example, it would be silly for this to apply only to international sports and not an NFL game that takes place in America!)  Events could limit the number of Americans invited just so they don't meet the threshold.  There's also the potential of it backfiring and countries possibly boycotting events in the United States in protest.  With three major events coming to the U.S. in the next 10 years (the 2021 World Track & Field Championships, 2026 World Cup and 2028 Olympics), that's not a small thing.

Regardless, criminalizing sports doping is a very difficult proposition to begin with.  Take the BALCO scandal.  Victor Conte went to jail for distribution.  But of the athletes they "busted," they were only able to make an obstruction of justice charge against Barry Bonds stick.  Roger Clemens?  Not guilty on all six counts.  A-Rod was never indicted for Biogenesis.  Even Lance Armstrong didn't face federal charges.  And when Marion Jones went to jail, it was for check fraud.

My point is that Congress may be biting off more than it can chew here.  Because there's virtually no way that any sort of federal indictment they made for doping in international sports would stick.  Especially for athletes who aren't U.S. citizens.  Even more so if those charges stemmed from an event that didn't even take place on U.S. soil.  The World Court would have a field day with that!

No comments:

Post a Comment