U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

21–484 PDF 2005

STEROID USE IN SPORTS PART III: EXAMINING

THE NATIONAL BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION’S

STEROID TESTING PROGRAM

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT REFORM

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

MAY 19, 2005

Serial No. 109–28

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house

http://www.house.gov/reform

(II)

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM

TOM DAVIS, Virginia, Chairman

CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut

DAN BURTON, Indiana

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota

MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania

CHRIS CANNON, Utah

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio

DARRELL E. ISSA, California

GINNY BROWN-WAITE, Florida

JON C. PORTER, Nevada

KENNY MARCHANT, Texas

LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina

CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania

VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina

——— ———

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California

TOM LANTOS, California

MAJOR R. OWENS, New York

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York

PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland

DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri

DIANE E. WATSON, California

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland

LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California

C.A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of

Columbia

———

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont

(Independent)

MELISSA WOJCIAK, Staff Director

DAVID MARIN, Deputy Staff Director/Communications Director

ROB BORDEN, Parliamentarian

TERESA AUSTIN, Chief Clerk

PHIL BARNETT, Minority Chief of Staff/Chief Counsel

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Hearing held on May 19, 2005 ............................................................................... 1

Statement of:

Stern, David J., commissioner, National Basketball Association; Richard

W. Buchanan, senior vice president and general counsel, National Basketball Association; G. William Hunter, executive director, National

Basketball Players Association; Keith Jones, athletic trainer, Houston

Rockets; and Juan Dixon, player, Washington Wizards ............................ 28

Buchanan, Richard W. .............................................................................. 41

Dixon, Juan ................................................................................................ 58

Hunter, G. William .................................................................................... 42

Jones, Keith ............................................................................................... 53

Stern, David J. ........................................................................................... 28

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:

Cummings, Hon. Elijah E., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Maryland, prepared statement of ............................................................ 18

Davis, Chairman Tom, a Representative in Congress from the State of

Virginia:

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 5

Prepared statement of Dr. Lloyd Baccus, medical director, NBA ......... 23

Dixon, Juan, player, Washington Wizards, prepared statement of .............. 59

Gutknecht, Hon. Gil, a Representative in Congress from the State of

Minnesota, basketball statistics .................................................................. 65

Hunter, G. William, executive director, National Basketball Players Association, prepared statement of ..................................................................... 45

Jones, Keith, athletic trainer, Houston Rockets, prepared statement of ..... 55

Maloney, Hon. Carolyn B., a Representative in Congress from the State

of New York, prepared statement of ........................................................... 89

Porter, Hon. Jon C., a Representative in Congress from the State of

Nevada, prepared statement of .................................................................... 92

Ruppersberger, Hon. C.A. Dutch, a Representative in Congress from the

State of Maryland, prepared statement of .................................................. 74

Stern, David J., commissioner, National Basketball Association, prepared

statement of ................................................................................................... 30

Watson, Hon. Diane E., a Representative in Congress from the State

of California, prepared statement of ........................................................... 87

Waxman, Hon. Henry A., a Representative in Congress from the State

of California, prepared statement of ........................................................... 11

(1)

STEROID USE IN SPORTS PART III: EXAMINING THE NATIONAL BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION’S STEROID TESTING PROGRAM

THURSDAY, MAY 19, 2005

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM,

Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:39 a.m., in room

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Tom Davis (chairman

of the committee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Davis of Virginia, Gutknecht, Souder,

Issa, Brown-Waite, Porter, Marchant, McHenry, Dent, Waxman,

Sanders, Maloney, Cummings, Kucinich, Clay, Lynch, Van Hollen,

Sanchez, Ruppersberger, and Higgins.

Staff present: Melissa Wojciak, staff director; David Marin, deputy staff director/communications director; Keith Ausbrook, chief

counsel; Ellen Brown, legislative director and senior policy counsel;

Jennifer Safavian, chief counsel for oversight and investigations;

Anne Marie Turner, counsel; Robert Borden, counsel/parliamentarian; Rob White, press secretary; Drew Crockett, deputy director

of communications; Susie Schulte, professional staff member; Teresa Austin, chief clerk; Sarah D’Orsie, deputy clerk; Corinne

Zaccagnini, chief information officer; Phil Schiliro, minority chief of

staff; Phil Barnett, minority staff director/chief counsel; Kristin

Amerling, minority deputy chief counsel; Karen Lightfoot, minority

communications director/senior policy advisor; Earley Green, minority chief clerk; Jean Gosa, minority assistant clerk; and Cecilia

Morton, minority office manager.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Good morning. The committee will come

to order. We want to welcome everybody to today’s hearing on the

National Basketball Association and the use of performance-enhancing drugs. The purpose of this hearing is to consider the NBA’s

drug policy, how the testing policy is implemented, how effectively

it addresses the use of prohibited drugs by players, and the larger

societal and public health ramifications of steroid use.

Fourteen years ago, anabolic steroids were added to the Controlled Substance Act as a Schedule III drug, making it illegal to

possess or sell them without a valid prescription. Today, however,

evidence strongly suggests that steroid use among teenagers, especially aspiring athletes, is a larger and growing problem.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tells us that

more than 500,000 high school students have tried steroids, nearly

triple the number just 10 years ago. A second national survey, conVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:31 Jul 18, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\21484.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
2

ducted last year by the University of Michigan, found that over 40

percent of the 12th graders described steroids as ‘‘fairly easy’’ or

‘‘very easy’’ to get, and the perception among high school students

that steroids are harmful has dropped from 71 percent in 1992 to

56 percent in 2004.

Against this alarming backdrop, the committee launched an investigation into steroid use in professional, amateur, collegiate, and

high school athletics. In March the committee held its first hearing,

focused on Major League Baseball’s steroid testing policy and their

efforts to combat steroid use. We followed up last month with a

hearing on the National Football League and the changes the

League and the NFL Players Association agreed on to strengthen

their testing policy. In addition, the committee has received detailed information on the drug testing policies of the National

Hockey League, Major League Soccer, U.S. Soccer Federation, USA

Cycling, USA Track & Field, and the Association of Tennis Professionals.

Today’s hearing is based on information provided by the NBA on

its steroid testing program. As was the case with the NFL and the

NFLPA and the NBA and the National Basketball Players Association, they have all been helpful in educating us about their policy,

and we very much appreciate your cooperation.

Today, league management and the union should be prepared to

answer serious questions about their steroid testing policy. In some

ways, today’s hearing stands in stark contrast to previous ones.

On the one hand, we have heard from top league officials, players and trainers that steroid use is not ‘‘an issue’’ in the NBA, since

steroids don’t increase the endurance and agility needed to excel on

the court. Perhaps that is true. Certainly, the NBA is not suffering

under the same cloud of steroid use suspicion that has been hovering over other professional sports.

But we are still left with some questions, given the fact that

NBA’s testing program has some ‘‘Shaq-sized’’ holes in it: How do

we know for sure there is no steroid problem if testing policies

aren’t that strong? If there is little or no upside to using steroids

in basketball, shouldn’t the NBA then have the strongest of all the

sports?

I am willing to accept that steroids won’t make your cross-over

dribble smoother, or move the three-point line closer to the hoop.

What we are trying to understand is a policy that tests all nonrookies just once a year, and not at all during the regular season;

trying to understand the policy under which a first steroids offense

results in a mere five-game suspension, the equivalent of 6 percent

of the regular NBA season. Compare that to the NFL, where the

first offense is punished by a suspension of four games, or 25 percent of the regular season. This is a difference in the impact on a

player’s pocketbook, where it probably hurts the most and has the

most enforcement.

I am encouraged by Commissioner Stern’s written testimony that

the NBA has asked the union to increase the amount of random

testing per season for veteran players, to subject players to off-season testing, and to increase the penalties for violators. However, we

are concerned by the response. While Mr. Hunter explains in his

written statement that basketball ‘‘can’t tolerate even the percepVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:31 Jul 18, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\21484.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
3

tion that the integrity of our contests is at issue,’’ he also says the

current program ‘‘strikes the appropriate balance with regard to

the issues of testing and discipline.’’

How do we realistically argue that testing the vast majority of

professional basketball players once a year, during the preseason,

is an appropriate balance?

Yesterday, a spokesman for the Players Association reportedly

said, ‘‘Over the last 7 years, of the approximately 400 rookies who

have been tested randomly, not one of them has violated the steroid policy—zero for 400. One could argue that there is no evidence

of any kind of use of steroids by NBA players.’’

I suppose one could argue that, but it wouldn’t be very compelling, because we already know there are a handful of players who

have tested positive for steroid use since the league implemented

its testing policy. Taking testing results from rookie players and

extrapolating the results to reflect on the entire league doesn’t cut

it. If there were no testing, there would be no evidence of use either. What does that mean, we don’t have any testing?

Data from the World Anti-Doping Agency on testing of international basketball players suggests at least some believe there is

a competitive advantage to be found in steroids. In 2004, 26 players

tested positive. We know that basketball players somewhere in the

world are using steroids, and the number is increasing.

Since our Major League Baseball hearing, there have been a

large number of public statements from NBA personnel and players

on the lack of steroid use in professional basketball, and the responsibility of NBA players to discourage youth from using

steroids. In advance of today’s hearing, the committee invited players who have been outspoken on this issue to testify and use this

as a platform to express to young players that steroid use is not

only physically harmful, but also a form of cheating.

We are fortunate that one player answered the call, Juan Dixon.

Juan is a local hero here, playing for the Wizards, played for Maryland, and has a very compelling story. We just very much appreciate your coming forward today.

By the time he was 16 years old, Juan had lost both of his parents to illness within a year of each other. Division I college recruiters told Juan he was too small and lacked the talent to play

college hoops, but that didn’t deter him.

He worked hard, on the court and off, not only convincing the

University of Maryland that he deserved a scholarship, but also

achieving the SAT scores necessary to play college basketball. In

2002, Juan proved to every young athlete the benefits of hard work

and perseverence when he led the Terps to their first-ever NCAA

championship.

Later that year, Juan was drafted 17th overall in the NBA draft.

Over the past three seasons, he has continued to prove the college

recruiters wrong, as he has helped breathe new life into our resurgent Washington Wizards.

As I have often said over the past 2 months, we are here because

more than half a million high school students have tried steroids,

and the number is increasing every day. If our goal is to stem that

tide, nothing is more effective than hearing from people like Juan

Dixon; role models, stars. Young athletes will listen to him far

4

more attentively than they will listen to the rest of us. We hope

that other NBA players will follow your lead in speaking out to

kids in public forums about the dangers of steroids and how there

is no place for these drugs in organized sports.

Our investigation has already spawned results, evidenced most

profoundly by Major League Baseball’s about-face on the need for

more stringent testing.

Our inquiry has also led me and Mr. Waxman and Senator John

McCain to draft legislation creating a uniform testing standard for

the NBA, Major League Baseball, NFL, and the National Hockey

League. We are still dotting some I’s and crossing some T’s, but the

legislation—which, frankly, will have more teeth than other bills

introduced—will be ready for introduction early next week.

With our oversight and legislation, we are hoping to send a clear

message to young people in search of their own ‘‘Hoop Dreams.’’

Steroid use is harmful, even deadly. Steroid use is cheating. Steroid use will be punished.

We look forward to the testimony today. We thank our witnesses

for being here.

[The prepared statement of Chairman Tom Davis follows:]

5

6

7

8

9

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Mr. Waxman.

Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This is our third hearing on the performance-enhancing drug

policies of major league sports, and with each sport we found a different set of issues. Today we turn to basketball.

In preparation for this hearing, we had an opportunity to review

the NBA drug policy, and with all due respect, the NBA policy on

steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs is simply inadequate. Indeed, of the professional sports policies this committee

has reviewed, the NBA policy appears to be the weakest.

Under the NBA policy, NBA players face no random testing at

all once they complete their rookie year. They are only tested once

each year, during their 1-month training camp.

The policy also fails to cover a vast number of drugs. There are

literally dozens of steroids and stimulants that are outlawed in

Olympic competition that are still legal for use in the NBA. The

policy fails to cover performance enhancers such as human growth

hormone or EPO, and it fails to cover designer steroids.

And the NBA penalties are not strong enough to provide a significant deterrent. Penalties call for only a five-game suspension for

a first violation, and only 10 games for a second violation. Even for

a fourth or fifth violation, players are only subject to a 25-game

violation.

These penalties stand in stark contrast to the NBA penalties for

street drugs, which call for a 2-year ban for the first offense for a

veteran player. Since use of steroids is both illegal and cheating,

this disparity in penalties makes little sense.

It is pretty easy to look at the NBA policy and determine how

weak it is, but we also have to ask what is the impact of this weakness. Are NBA players using steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs?

There are two answers here. The first is based on perception, and

the answer is no. The second is based on reality, and the answer

is we really don’t know for sure.

The NBA’s remarkably weak steroid program makes it impossible to know whether there is a problem. We do know that only

a handful of players tested positive for steroids in the last 5 years.

But we also know loopholes undermine the effectiveness of the

league’s steroid program. One NBA trainer has told us that ‘‘basketball is not immune’’ to the problem of performance-enhancing

drugs. Another former NBA trainer told us that because of the lack

of testing, ‘‘even if we did have a problem, it would be hard to pick

up.’’

Many NBA insiders—players, trainers, even the commissioner,

Mr. Stern—have indicated that the NBA has few problems with

steroids because they just don’t apply to the skill set needed to play

basketball. They say that basketball is about quickness and touch

and stamina, not about brute strength. And they assume that

steroids and other performance-enhancers don’t provide any advantage to basketball players.

This may be true. But the New York Times yesterday reported

on a surprising finding from Major League Baseball’s steroid testing program. For years, experts said that only the game’s sluggers

would use steroids, not pitchers: that pitching was about ‘‘proper

10

mechanics and natural ability,’’ and that bulking up on steroids

would hurt pitchers.

Well, it turns out that assumption was wrong. So far, almost half

of the players caught in the Major League Baseball testing have

been pitchers. And now experts are acknowledging that there are

uses of steroids they hadn’t thought of: that steroids help pitchers

throw the ball faster; that they speed recovery times between outings and help pitchers maintain strength throughout the season;

and even that steroids help players gain a mental edge.

The baseball results tell us that we need to guard against relying

on assumption. We really don’t know what is going on in the NBA

until the league implements an effective steroid testing policy.

I know that the league and the union are entering negotiations

for a new collective bargaining agreement. Mr. Stern, the league

commissioner, has shared his proposals for the new policy with this

committee, and Mr. Hunter, the head of the players’ union, has indicated some support for a tougher policy on the steroid issue.

These proposals are not perfect—I am particularly concerned that

punishments will still be weak—but they will be a significant improvement over the current policy.

In the meantime, Congress stands ready to act. I will soon join

Chairman Davis and Senator John McCain in introducing bipartisan legislation that will ensure that all major professional sports

have strong performance-enhancing drug policies that are consistent with the Olympic standard. The bill would require leagues to

test for a broad range of performance-enhancing drugs; it would

have true random testing; and it would have tough penalties—2

years for a first offense and a lifetime ban for a second—that would

make athletes think twice before resorting to cheating.

Ultimately, I believe this is the direction we must take if we

want to set an example for young athletes and rid all professional

sports of performance-enhancing drugs.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for calling the meeting. I look forward to the testimony from the witnesses that are here today and

learning what we can from all of them.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Henry A. Waxman follows:]

11

12

13

14

15

16

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you.

Mr. Souder will make no opening statement.

Mr. Cummings, did you want to say anything?

Mr. CUMMINGS. I have a brief statement.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. And then other Members will have 7 days

to submit opening statements or can make their statements during

their questions.

Yes, sir.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I truly

thank you for holding this hearing today, examining the use of

steroids in the National Basketball Association and the effectiveness of the NBA’s steroid testing policy.

Today’s hearing represents a growing awareness that steroid

abuse in professional sports is no game. Such abuse undermines

the credibility of the sports, sends a dangerous message to our

young people, contributes to a growing public health crisis, and violates the sanctity of our laws.

Fortunately, sports can represent so much more. At their best,

sports can embody the virtues of teamwork, hard work, and integrity. Regrettably, as our hearings with Major League Baseball demonstrated, some professional athletic leagues have failed to embrace this recognition.

I regularly work on issues related to U.S. drug control policy and

public health in my role as a ranking minority member of the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources. Although the primary focus of our oversight is Schedule I

substances, the dangers associated with steroid abuse should not

be underestimated.

While steroids can have legitimate medical use, the abuse of

steroids by those seeking a competitive advantage through enhanced athletic performance can cause adverse health effects.

These problems range from early cardiovascular disease to serious

psychiatric side effects, including acute depression and even suicide.

With this in mind, Congress added certain anabolic steroids to

Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. Individuals possessing such drugs without a valid prescription are liable for a misdemeanor, while persons convicted of distributing, dispensing or

selling these drugs are subject to a 5-year sentence for a first time

offense. In clear and plain terms, illegitimate steroid use is a crime.

The ripple effect caused by steroid abuse extends beyond the individual user. Steroid use by professional athletes in defiance of the

law perpetuates the myth that steroids are not only acceptable, but

are also safe. Unfortunately, these destructive messages resonate

most with our young people.

Consider the loss of the Garibaldi and the Hooten families who

testified before this committee just recently. Their children committed suicide after using steroids, a tragedy they attributed to the

negative examples set by professional athletes.

Steroid use has become more pervasive among high schools, with

the Centers for Disease Control reporting that 1 in 45 high school

students reported using steroids in 1993. By 2003, the figure was

1 in 16.

17

In light of these figures, I am disturbed by the fact that the NBA

steroid testing policy is weaker than that of the NFL or the MLB’s.

While only three NBA players have been suspended for steroid

abuse, the absence of a strong testing policy makes it very difficult

to undermine the scope of performance-enhancing drug usage in

the NBA. Specifically, the NBA’s policy fails to randomly test veteran players, fails to sufficiently penalize players who test positive,

and maintains significant gaps in coverage by not banning a variety of performance-enhancing drugs.

As the old adage goes, it is wrong to hope when you can have.

If ever there was a time to have an effective steroid testing policy

in sports, it is now. We must continue to push for a performanceenhancing drug testing policy in the NBA that is robust and one

of zero tolerance.

I am very pleased that Juan Dixon is here from my alma mater,

the University of Maryland, and I want to make it very clear, Mr.

Chairman—because I have been asked about this so many times on

radio shows here recently, whether Juan Dixon was subpoenaed. I

want to make it very clear that he came here to send a message

voluntarily.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Absolutely.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Voluntarily, Mr. Chairman. He wanted to send

a message that steroid use should not be a part of the NBA.

And I want to thank you, and better luck next time in the playoffs; I hope you move up a little further.

I am encouraged by Commissioner Stern’s announcement of a

proposal for a tougher testing policy in the NBA. League officials

seem to now understand we owe nothing less to our children and

to our fans. It is my hope that the players will recognize the urgent

need to adopt the recommended changes as well.

So, Mr. Chairman, with that, I look forward to the testimony and

I yield back.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Elijah E. Cummings follows:]

18

19

20

21

22

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Yes, let me just say again Mr. Dixon is appearing voluntarily. He

is above reproach on this. He is a leader on this.

And we are just, again, honored to have you here, to have you

step forward. I hope there is no misunderstanding on this. We are

very pleased to have you.

Members will have 7 days to submit opening statements and,

again, during your 5 minutes you are welcome to use it.

Nobody has been subpoenaed for this hearing, everybody is appearing voluntarily.

We have Mr. David Stern in our first panel, the Commissioner

of the National Basketball Association; Mr. Richard Buchanan, the

senior vice president and general counsel of the National Basketball Association; Mr. William Hunter, the executive director of the

National Basketball Players Association.

We have Mr. Keith Jones, the vice president of basketball operations and athletic trainer for the Houston Rockets. Mr. Jones, who

just completed his 16th year in professional basketball, is well respected within the professional basketball community. At 28, he became the first African-American and the youngest trainer in NBA

history. In 2001, Mr. Jones’ peers voted him NBA Trainer of the

Year. We look forward to your testimony, and thank you for being

here.

And Mr. Juan Dixon from the Washington Wizards. As I mentioned, Mr. Dixon is a former National Champion at the University

of Maryland. He is the only player in NCAA history to accumulate

over 2,000 points, 300 steals, and 200 three-point field goals. He is

the Terps’ career scoring leader, was named Most Outstanding

Player of the 2002 NCAA Final Four, and was an AP First Team

All American. Most recently, he helped lead the Wizards to the second round of the Playoffs.

It is our policy that all witnesses be sworn before you testify, so

if you would rise with me and raise your right hands.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Dr. Lloyd Baccus, who is the medical director of the NBA, was invited to testify at today’s hearing, and he

wanted to be here, but for understandable reasons he couldn’t attend, but he did submit written testimony, and I think the NBA

believes that Mr. Buchanan should be able to address the Members’ questions regarding the logistics of the NBA steering testimony.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Baccus follows:]

23

24

25

26

27

28

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Commissioner Stern, we will start with

you, and we will move straight on down the line. Thank you for

being with us.

STATEMENTS OF DAVID J. STERN, COMMISSIONER, NATIONAL

BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION; RICHARD W. BUCHANAN, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL COUNSEL, NATIONAL

BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION; G. WILLIAM HUNTER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL BASKETBALL PLAYERS ASSOCIATION; KEITH JONES, ATHLETIC TRAINER, HOUSTON

ROCKETS; AND JUAN DIXON, PLAYER, WASHINGTON WIZARDS

STATEMENT OF DAVID J. STERN

Mr. STERN. Chairman Davis, Congressman Waxman, members of

the committee, I am honored to be here, and I applaud the work

of the committee, its seriousness of purpose and what it has done

to raise the awareness of steroid use in sports and amongst the Nation’s youth.

We subscribe to the notionality that steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs have no place in the NBA. They are not good

for our competition, they are not good for the health of our players,

and they are bad for our young fans, because many millions of

young fans look up to our NBA players.

I would just say that we have been dealing with the subject of

drugs since 1983, when the NBA was first involved in allegations

about drug use, and our attention had focused initially on drugs

like heroin and cocaine, and we worked with then-President

Reagan and the White House Conference for a Drug-Free America,

of which I was a member, to deal seriously with that subject.

We learned a little bit about steroids along the way, and in 1999

we added steroids to our policy. Not because we believed that there

was steroid use, but we sensed that something was happening in

America that required us to begin to deal with steroids. We didn’t

think we had a problem, but we did want to stay ahead of the

curve.

The details of the 1999 policy are in my written statement. We

believe it was a good start, but we know now that it can be improved dramatically. We are currently negotiating a new collective

bargaining agreement with the players, and we have proposed, as

the chairman and Mr. Waxman noted in their opening statements,

random tests for all players each season, four of them, one random

test for each player off-season, the first penalty, 10 games suspension—and, by the way, at the average salary, that would be a half

a million dollar penalty to our players—25 games for the second;

and dismissal for the third. You will pardon my changing sports,

but the policy that we propose is three strikes and you are out.

We have a prohibited substances committee, which consists of a

representative of each of the league and the union and three independent drug experts in testing, two of whom oversee Olympic testing in laboratories. And they add, at their own instance or at one

of the parties, additional substances to the list over time, and we

have added a number of substances.

29

And I might add, with respect to Congressman Waxman’s opening statement, that some of those substances are substances that

we have added that Congress has not yet seen to declare illegal,

and I would urge you to consider declaring them illegal, because

that is a very important subject for us, and we added andro and

ephedra and others at a time when this body and the Senate chose

not to act on it, and we would use the occasion of our being here

to urge you to look at that subject again.

We also recognize that with respect to public education we have

a huge role to play, and I commit to you that whatever we do now,

we will redouble our efforts with respect to programs reaching out

to kids. We do an international basketball without borders program, where we do clinics and the like, and we will be reaching out

there.

We do a Read to Achieve program across America, where we

have opened up 100 reading and learning centers, and we will be

strengthening our anti-steroid message there. We do a Junior NBA

and Junior WNBA, which, likewise, will have strong anti-steroid

messages. And our public service announcements, both on broadcast and on NBA.com, will be strengthened as we have learned

more through these hearings about the use of steroids amongst our

Nation’s youth.

So I thank you again for bringing ours and the public’s attention

to this very important subject, and I have finished with 18 seconds

to go.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Stern follows:]

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you very much. It is a great precedent here.

Mr. Buchanan, thank you for being with us.

STATEMENT OF RICHARD W. BUCHANAN

Mr. BUCHANAN. Chairman Davis, Congressman Waxman, members of the committee, thank you very much for the opportunity to

be here today. My name is Rick Buchanan, and I am the senior

vice president and general counsel of the National Basketball Association. Among other duties at the NBA, I am the person who is

responsible for the development, implementation, and administration of our drug program. I am directly involved with my counterparts at the union, Players Association in negotiating the terms of

the policy.

I also work with the union to select the medical director and the

other experts that we use to oversee the program. Those medical

experts, of course, are the individuals that we rely on to administer

and oversee our program on a day-to-day basis. The top of the list

of the individuals that we have selected is Dr. Lloyd Baccus, who

is our medical director. Dr. Baccus is responsible for reviewing and

confirming positive laboratory results, for evaluating and treating

players who have entered the program, and for educating NBA

players about the dangers of substance abuse. He has also assembled a nationwide network of drug counselors and medical professionals to assist players with substance abuse issues in their home

cities.

Dr. Baccus has served as medical director of the NBA’s drug program for the past 16 years. The players know him and they trust

him, and he is available to them on a 24/7 basis.

The NBA and the Players Association has also created a Prohibited Substances Committee, which Commissioner Stern just mentioned, and that is a committee that has a representative of both

the union and the league and three independent drug testing experts. This is the committee that reviews our list of banned drugs

and makes recommendations to add additional substances. We did

that on three separate occasions since 1999. We banned

androstenedione, DHEA, and similar substances in one traunch of

drugs; we banned ephedra and related products in another; and,

most recently, we banned several new designer steroids.

Members of that committee include, among others, Dr. Barry

Sample, who was the director of the Anti-Doping Laboratory for the

1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta; and Dr. Doug Rollins, who is

the medical director of the Doping Control Program for the 2002

Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

The NBA and the Players Association also rely on our independent drug testing laboratory, Quest Diagnostics, and on a periodic

basis we seek technical advice from Dr. Gary Wadler, who is a

leading expert in the field of steroids and performance-enhancing

drugs and who has appeared before this committee on two prior occasions.

The NBA takes very seriously its obligation to maintain an impartial, fair, and effective drug program. We fully recognize the importance of this endeavor to the health and well-being of our athletes, the integrity of our games, and the example we set for young

42

fans. Because of the medical staff we have assembled, because of

the care we take in our processes and methods, because we have

been drug testing our players since 1983 and so we have over 20

years of experience in this area, and because we have always managed to work cooperatively with the Players Association once we

have negotiated our policy, we are very confident in our ability to

do this job well.

As Commissioner Stern has noted, we believe that the NBA and

the Players Association took a good first step with respect to

steroids and performance-enhancing drugs when we added these

substances to our program in 1999, and we are committed to having an even stronger and more effective policy when our current

round of bargaining is concluded with the players.

In addition to the changes mentioned by the commissioner, the

NBA would also intend to make other technical adjustments to the

program, such as re-evaluating with our committee whether we

should move to a 4-to–1 ratio for testosterone testing, better protecting against newly designed steroids by banning any substance

with the same chemical structure or biological effect as a currently

prohibited drug, and taking a hard look at our list of banned stimulants to ensure that it is sufficiently broad and current.

The NBA’s drug policy has been and remains a dynamic one, and

we are constantly striving to find ways to make it better. The committee’s attention to this matter has been very helpful to the NBA,

as we explore potential changes to our program. And I would be

very happy to answer any further questions that you have.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. Hunter.

STATEMENT OF G. WILLIAM HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Waxman, my name is

G. William Hunter, and I am the executive director of the National

Basketball Players Association, the labor union that represents all

NBA players in collective bargaining. I am also an attorney, a

former professional athlete, and I was honored to serve as the U.S.

Attorney for the northern district of California under Presidents

Carter and Reagan.

My first round of collective bargaining with the NBA took place

in 1998. During those negotiations, the NBA owners suggested that

we amend our anti-drug policy by adding steroids to our list of prohibited substances. Despite the fact that we were not perceived to

have any problem with steroid use in the NBA, the players did not

hesitate to put in place a comprehensive program and policy that

provides for education, testing, and discipline with regard to the

use of steroids. We were glad to get out in front of this issue long

before it generated the national interest that exists today, and declare to the world that there is no place for steroids in professional

basketball.

That collective bargaining agreement is set to expire next month,

and we now find ourselves in a similar place to where we were

when the agreement was negotiated in 1998–1999. That is, we still

are not perceived to have a steroids problem in the NBA, but we

again are offered an opportunity to get out in front of this now increasingly public issue and send a message to young people around

43

the world that our players do not condone or tolerate the use of

steroids. As we did in 1999, we will again do our part to deliver

this important message.

We have already advised the commissioner and the NBA owners

he represents, and we state here publicly today, that beginning

next season, our players will agree to even more frequent testing

and harsher penalties for steroid use, regardless of whether the results of our testing over the past 7 years mandate that such

changes be made. To be clear, with only three confirmed positive

results in over 4,200 tests over the past 7 years, we believe that

steroids are not an issue in the NBA. Nonetheless, we have pledged

to amend our policy.

We have done so for a variety of reasons. First and foremost,

whether or not steroids will in fact enhance the performance of a

basketball player, there is little doubt that the use of such substances will create a perception in the minds of our consumers that

a player has an unfair advantage. We cannot tolerate even the perception that the integrity of our contest is at issue. More so than

an entertainment, the product we offer to the consumer is competition, and the purity of that competition cannot be compromised. If

nothing else, for business reasons alone, to ensure the continued

success of our enterprise, we must effectively police ourselves.

Our players have not hesitated to take the lead and speak out

publicly on this point. Among the various players who have been

quoted by the media, I cite the example of five-time All-Star and

former Olympian Ray Allen of the Seattle Sonics, a former member

of our union’s Executive Committee, who said that we need ‘‘to create a level playing field and make sure nobody’s cheating.’’

Another well known player, Jalen Rose of the Toronto Raptors,

also spoke eloquently to this point in a recent article: ‘‘People have

to understand the basics of athletics is fair play. That’s why we

shake hands after every event. I line up against you, whether it’s

middle school, high school, college, pro, and I try to beat you. But

when it’s all over, I understand that you did not necessarily have

an unfair advantage over me.’’

Aside from the importance of protecting our business, the players

will agree to amend our policy so that we can send a firm message

on this important societal issue. Though the players and I do not

profess to have medical expertise, there is little doubt that the use

of steroids will cause a wide range of serious health problems.

As stated by our union’s first vice president Antonio Davis of the

Chicago Bulls in an interview last month, ‘‘I think we have a responsibility to high school kids, junior high kids, college kids, whoever, to show them it’s hard work that’s going to get them there,

not cheating and tearing up your body.’’ Derek Fisher of the Golden

State Warriors, another member of our union’s Executive Committee, echoed that theme during an interview last month on performance enhancers, stating that ‘‘we always have to be mindful of the

fact that something is really prevalent in our country or in professional sports. I don’t think we can be blind to the fact, because it’s

a very sensitive issue right now, particularly with the effect it’s

having on high school kids.’’

While I understand that this committee is considering enacting

legislation regarding steroid policies in professional sports leagues,

44

I would respectfully urge the committee to stay its hand. Collective

bargaining is the appropriate forum for consideration and resolution of these issues. The agreements we forget are respected by the

parties and will endure, and we have already shown that the parties can work successfully on this issue. Our bargaining to date has

resulted in an effective policy that justifiably has kept NBA players

out of the steroid discussion, and we have pledged to do even more

in our current negotiations to make sure that in the future we are

not pulled in.

Finally, the league and players have an extremely strong incentive to police ourselves on these issues. Under our revenue sharing

arrangement with the NBA, the players receive a significant portion of the billions of dollars in revenues generated each year by

their performance in NBA games. If we detect a problem developing that will threaten our livelihood, we will of course take action.

We acted in a decisive manner by imposing a meaningful policy in

1999, and we intend to do even more in the coming months.

I thank you for this opportunity.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hunter follows:]

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. Jones, thanks for being with us.

STATEMENT OF KEITH JONES

Mr. JONES. Chairman Davis and members of the committee, Mr.

Waxman, my name is Keith Jones, and I first want to thank you

for allowing me to appear here before you today.

I am the vice president of Basketball Operations and the head

athletic trainer for the Houston Rockets of the National Basketball

Association, and have served as head athletic trainer for the Rockets since 1996. Prior to that, I spent six seasons as head athletic

trainer for the Los Angeles Clippers, one season assistant athletic

trainer for the Orlando Magic, and several seasons working as an

athletic trainer with football teams in the National Football

League, the U.S. Football League, and the NCAA.

I also worked as an athletic trainer for the gold medal-winning

U.S. Senior Mens National Basketball Team during the 2000 Summer Olympics in Sydney, Australia, and in the same capacity for

the 1998 World Championship of Basketball in Athens, Greece, and

the 1999 Tournament of the Americas in Puerto Rico.

In my role as head athletic trainer for the Rockets, and in conjunction with our team physicians, strength and conditioning

coaches, and other staff, I am in charge of our team’s efforts to prevent, evaluate, manage, and rehabilitate injured or ill athletes. I

interact with Rockets players on a daily basis, am present in the

locker room and the training room throughout the season, travel

with the team, and attend all games and practices. It is my job to

be intimately familiar with the health status of every member of

our team and to help them perform at the peak of their physical

and mental abilities.

I have worked as an athletic trainer in the NBA for 17 years,

and have learned a great deal in that period about the physical

abilities of professional basketball players and the physical and

mental objects they face over the course of their careers. I also

worked as an athletic trainer of various professional and college

football teams prior to joining the NBA, and am, therefore, in a position to compare and contrast the physical attributes that allow

players to succeed in basketball and, separately, in football.

During my tenure in the NBA, I have never observed an NBA

player using an anabolic steroid or illicit performance-enhancing

drug. I have never been asked by a player to supply such a substance, nor, of course, would I ever do if asked. In fact, in my experience, steroids and performance-enhancing drugs are not part of

the culture of the NBA. They carry enormous health risks to athletes, they provide no significant advantage to NBA players, and

are banned by the NBA’s drug policy. Any benefit that a player

might receive from using such a substance are greatly outweighed

by their costs.

Even though the NBA does not currently have a problem with

steroids and performance-enhancing drugs, I fully support the

NBA’s inclusion of these substances with its anti-drug policy. If we

want to ensure that these drugs stay out of our game, the best way

to do that is to have a strong and effective testing program.

54

Again, thank you for your time and the privilege to be here

today.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones follows:]

55

56

57

58

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. Dixon, thank you for being with us.

STATEMENT OF JUAN DIXON

Mr. DIXON. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my

name is Juan Dixon, and for the last three seasons I have been a

professional basketball player with the NBA’s Washington Wizards.

Before entering the NBA, I played for 4 years at the University of

Maryland, where I led the school to its first National Championship.

Over my 3 years in the NBA and 4 years of collegiate competition, I have never used steroids. Nor have I ever seen or have

knowledge of any use of steroids by my peers. Though I do not have

a detailed medical knowledge on the impact that steroids have on

the human body, my general understanding is that, in addition to

the well-known health risks inherent to their use, the potential

gains do not translate into success in the game of basketball.

What I do know is what is fair. I know how hard I have worked

to become a professional athlete and believe that maintaining a

level playing field is vital to the integrity of our sport. The steroid

conversation is not just about health risks. It is about ensuring the

public and understanding that I, along with my peers in the NBA,

have achieved success through years of hard work and dedication

to our dreams, not through the use of steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs.

As a professional athlete, I have an obligation to be a role model

that not only influences kids directly about healthy choices and the

dangers of steroid use, but one that contributes to a culture where

hard work is emphasized and cheating is never rewarded.

Thank you for the opportunity.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Dixon follows:]

59

60

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Well, thank you very much. And thank all

of you.

Let me start the questions. We have heard about the specific

changes that Commissioner Stern would like to make to the NBA

steroid testing policy.

Mr. Hunter, let me ask you does the union support these

changes?

Mr. HUNTER. The union supports some changes. I am not at liberty at this moment to indicate to you which changes and to what

extent we do support them. As you are aware, Mr. Chairman, labor

negotiations are ongoing, although they may be stayed for the moment, and I am sure that this is an issue that will be fully addressed and resolved, as Mr. Stern has alluded to, in the course of

those negotiations.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Well, at least here, this morning, we got

you and Mr. Stern back to the table, although maybe on a different

issue. There is no reason to wrap up steroids with the monetary

issues, is there, in negotiations? Can’t we take this apart? This is

an issue that has societal implications. We are hearing that it is

not a huge problem in the NBA. It just ought to be taken off the

table from the other negotiations and put aside. We would really

like to hear you say we think we can work the changes. You understand where I am coming from?

Mr. HUNTER. I clearly understand what you are saying, but, with

all due respect, I don’t know how many labor agreements you have

negotiated. It is a rather complex and difficult process.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. I understand.

Mr. HUNTER. I can assure you that you are not going to be dissatisfied with whatever agreement Mr. Stern and I come to. I can

give you that assurance. But I am not prepared at this time——

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Well, I am not asking you to dot Is and

cross Ts here.

Mr. HUNTER. No, but I am not prepared at this time to separate

it from the negotiations.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Negotiate in public. OK.

Mr. HUNTER. I think that is unfair to me and to Mr. Stern.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. OK. I am just trying to give you our view.

I have actually negotiated a number of labor agreements before I

came to Congress, and I wouldn’t negotiate, I think, on television

either. But I think our point is this is a very important issue, and

if we just get a consensus here this is something that we agree

needs to be revisited and it needs to be toughened up. I think you

basically agree to that.

Mr. HUNTER. I agree. I agree wholeheartedly. I agree with the

philosophy that has been expressed by all the parties at this table.

I agree that there is no place for steroids in professional basketball,

and I know that the players support that position, and I know that

we will not have a problem getting behind this issue and adopting

a policy that both the NBA and the Nation can be proud of.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. I think we all recognize that the current

steroid testing policy is weak on the tests, and we are all concerned

to hear that the NBA announced that no further meetings are

scheduled with you to reach the new collective bargaining agreement at this point.

61

So I will ask both of you how this will affect changes to be made

to the policy? That without a collective bargaining agreement, the

policy isn’t going to change. Is that what I hear you saying?

Mr. STERN. No. I would say to you that our collective bargaining

agreement expires on July 1, and without a new collective bargaining agreement there will not be a season.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. OK.

Mr. STERN. And when we open, whenever that is, there will be

a new anti-drug agreement that reflects the positions that have

been expressed here today.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Is that an accurate statement, Mr.

Hunter?

Mr. HUNTER. Yes, I think that is very accurate.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. OK.

Mr. Dixon, let me just say in my opening statement I spoke

about how you were discouraged by recruiters from playing Division I basketball because they said you were too small.

Mr. DIXON. Right.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. You look pretty big to me, but I know for

basketball at that level what it takes. Could you take me to the

steps you took in high school to earn your scholarship to Maryland

and be drafted? I think it is important for young athletes to hear

about the hard work and commitment it takes to succeed. Some

teenagers take steroids to get bigger and stronger. You didn’t do

that.

Mr. DIXON. Not at all.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Just walk us through it. It can be done,

can’t it?

Mr. DIXON. Well, going through high school, a lot of people always doubted me, so I am a pretty self-motivated individual, but

people told me that I was not going to be able to play on a bigtime Division I level. I used all that to motivate me. And, as you

can see, I am not the biggest guy, so with a lot of hard work in

the gym, lifting as much weights as possible, I tried to develop my

game, and each day got in the gym and worked hard and listened

to people around me. So I never allowed what people said to get

my spirits down; I stayed strong and tried to be the best I could

be.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. You did it the old fashioned way, right?

Mr. DIXON. The old fashioned way.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you.

Mr. Jones, at a recent hearing the committee held on the NFL

steroid policy, it was suggested that veteran NFL players misused

steroids to help recover from injuries more quickly because steroids

help build muscle growth. Do you see any problem with veteran

NBA players misusing steroids for a quicker recovery from an injury?

Mr. JONES. No, I do not.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. How do you know if veteran NBA players

were not tested during the regular season?

Mr. JONES. To my knowledge and my education, it is just to look

for the change in that body type over a short period of time; the

weight gain, the muscle bulk gain, the mass gain. You are looking

for other physical characteristics that come with steroid use. There

62

are changes in the face, in the jaw that are noticeable; sometimes

there is the acne on the face and on the back and other parts of

your skin; and a lot of behavioral changes, some little uptight——

Chairman TOM DAVIS. So you do not see that?

Mr. JONES. I have not seen that, no, sir.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. Waxman.

Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, Mr. Stern, let me compliment you and Mr. Hunter

for your efforts to deal with this issue early on, and to now make

the policy much more aggressive. I think this leadership is important.

A lot of people still worry about steroid use in basketball, even

though we haven’t found any and people don’t believe there is any

use because of the kind of athletics involved. But we really don’t

know, either. And in international play, from the World AntiDoping Agency’s data, they found dozens of players who tested

positive for illegal performance enhancing drugs. So at least in

international competition some basketball players are clearly using

the drugs.

I certainly hope that you will get a stronger testing program,

which is a small reason, but an additional reason, why I hope you

all will reach an agreement before July 1, because we also want a

basketball season. In fact, that makes me want to ask a lot of questions about your negotiations, but it is not my business, so I won’t.

But I do wish you well, though negotiations in any area have their

ups and downs.

The question I want to ask you is even though you are trying to

get a better drug testing policy, many of us think it makes more

sense to have one uniform policy for all the athletic sports, all the

professional sports. Because if we look at what baseball is doing

compared to basketball compared to football, each is handling it

very differently and there is a different approach.

Some people have suggested that we have Federal legislation to

establish a uniform approach for testing for steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs in professional sports. It would be modeled after the Olympic policy and it would make clear that, when

the leagues run their own programs and apply different standards,

that there is that question that always lingers: whether negative

test results mean there is no steroid use or that the league is not

serious about policing itself.

So I want to know your view about the idea of Congress adopting

a tough uniform standard that is administered independently to

answer these questions and put all these doubts to rest.

Mr. STERN. I would like to see what it is, but I would support

such an approach.

Mr. WAXMAN. And how about you, Mr. Hunter, what do you

think about such an approach?

Mr. HUNTER. I would obviously like to see a program that allows

participation from the individual sports. I don’t really know enough

about it, what is being proposed, but just the idea of uniformity

tends to kind of have a chilling effect, because I am not so sure

that there is one applicable standard that should be introduced

63

across the board for basketball, football, baseball, ice hockey, track

and field, etc.

And I am sure that it requires someone with greater expertise

than myself to be able to respond to that, but my gut reaction is

I have a problem with the issue of uniformity, and it is simply because I think we have done—notwithstanding your assessment, I

think we have done an exceptional job in the NBA when it comes

to steroids.

Mr. STERN. As long as your legislation has the appropriate appropriations attached to it that deal with the increased cost for

drugs that testing for which is unnecessary in basketball but is

part of a broader standard, I would have no objection at all to have

a uniform standard so that we can make the statement to our various audiences that we are all complying in a certain way. That is

absolutely fine.

Mr. WAXMAN. I think this will be a topic for further negotiation.

But I understand your point, and I also acknowledge the fact that

you both have not seen a specific proposal, but that we are talking

in a more general way.

I think a lot of people look at, Mr. Hunter, the basketball policy

as not particularly the best, it is awfully weak now, and a lot of

people don’t believe that basketball players do not use steroids.

Jalen Rose spoke to this issue recently and he said performanceenhancing drugs are an issue anywhere there is competition, and

people are willing to do whatever it takes to get an edge.

We have also talked to some of the trainers in the league, and

they have indicated that they have suspected players of steroid use

in the past. They have indicated the NBA is not immune from such

use. And what we are trying to do is to remove the doubt in people’s minds that if there is no positive testing, it is not because the

testing is inadequate or the league isn’t trying to really do the job

of sending a clear signal that steroid use is unacceptable.

Mr. HUNTER. No, you are right. Clearly, the NBA is not a pure

environment. The numbers that I read indicated that we have had

at least 23 tests, of which 3 were clearly positive. Twenty of the

individuals were terminated even before they could make the team.

I understand that it is a problem, and I think going forward, what

we have attempted to do since 1983, is on the cutting edge when

it came to adopting and modifying our drug policy.

As Commissioner Stern indicated, it was indicated in 1983, it

was modified in 1999 to incorporate steroids. Here we are in 2005

negotiating a new deal, and we have indicated that if there is a

weakness or gap, it is only because of testing. I am convinced that

once testing is implemented, it is going to confirm—and maybe I

will get a chance to come back a year from now and tell you what

the results of those tests show.

Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you. My time has expired. I appreciate the

answers to the questions.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. Gutknecht.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, Mr. Stern, let me just say that there are a number

of industries that do random drug testing and, to the best of my

64

knowledge, most of them do not require a Federal subsidy to do so.

So we will certainly entertain that when we get to that level.

As Will Rogers said, all I know is what I read in the newspapers.

And the news that we have received here in the last several weeks

is not particularly good.

First of all, let me thank all of you for coming today. You are all

here voluntarily and we do appreciate that.

But some of the news that we have read recently, just back in

my home State of Minnesota, was somewhat disconcerting, because

we had heard earlier from some of the folks in Major League Baseball and others that, for the most part, it wasn’t the pitchers who

were interested in this, because it didn’t really improve their ability to do things. And yet we have read recently that pitchers are

as guilty, if not more guilty, than others, in terms of the testing

that has been done so far.

The other news that we got recently, as another professional athlete, unfortunately, again, in Minnesota was found to have an antidoping kit in his luggage. I wonder if any of you would want to respond to the proliferation of these kits that make it easier to fool

drug tests. And is there anything you can do about it; is there anything we should do about it?

Mr. STERN. I will take the first cut at that, and that is that our

method of testing, without being too graphic for the committee,

would not allow the skirting of the test results that the particular

kit in question would allow. The sample collection that we have in

basketball is quite direct and does not allow for the kind of

shananigans that are suggested by that device. No. 2, our tests include tests for masking substances, which, if found, are treated the

same as a positive test for the drug that is being masked.

And I just would add that I don’t know that those other random

tests that you refer to in the industry were federally mandated.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Jones, are you familiar with these kits and

do you know how they work?

Mr. JONES. Somewhat, yes, sir.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Do they work?

Mr. JONES. I think they do work, but I can say that in our setting, the way that samples are collected, they could not work.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Well, several of you have said that these kinds

of steroids really don’t help basketball players, but I have had distributed to you a copy of a memo that we received yesterday, I

think, from the World Anti-Doping Agency. It is a copy of a report

from World Anti-Doping Agency for International Competition, and

these are basketball players only. Now, we don’t know which teams

they are from, which countries they are from, but I would call to

your attention the fact that in 2003 they found 77 adverse analytical findings for basketball players at the international level, and

in 2004 they found 96.

Now, if it doesn’t improve the ability of basketball players, there

is a disconnect apparently between the players and the reality.

How do we square this number, 96 adverse analytical findings? Incidentally, the number of steroid findings went from 17 to 26. So

somebody in basketball believes it enhances their ability.

[The information referred to follows:]

65

66

Mr. BUCHANAN. Congressman, I think the last point you made I

agree with. Individual players might perceive that something

would help them, and that is the reason, of course, that we want

to have a strong testing program. These numbers, I think you probably know, reflect, for the 2004 year, something a little less than

2 percent of the players that were tested, the basketball players

that were tested turned up with these positives. The 1996 number

represents, I think, 2.03 percent, and that was initial laboratory

positives. So therapeutic use exemptions and other issues would

drive the number down. But your point is well taken. Clearly, there

are some players who believe this helps them.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Well, and I think that is the purpose of these

hearings, to at least get the facts out on the table and, more importantly, to send a message—and I think the chairman has made

very clear—to younger people that, No. 1, it is not worth it and,

No. 2, it probably doesn’t help that much. But somehow we have

to help get that message across, and you can be very helpful in getting that done.

I yield back.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Mr. Lynch.

Mr. LYNCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and ranking member. I

appreciate the work you have done on this. I want to thank the

witnesses for coming to testify.

I had a chance to look over the collective bargaining agreement

between the league and the union, and there are three, I think,

glaring weaknesses. One is, again, we have talked about the substances that are allowed or not prohibited in the agreement. The

fact that the test—Mr. Buchanan, you know, with all due respect,

you said that this is a dynamic test. It is really, in my opinion, pathetic. Last, the penalties, given that we have had these highest

paid athletes in the league in any league, and we have very, very

minor penalties.

I want to go to the issue of the testing itself, though. We have

no random testing in basketball. Basically, every October we tell

players we are going to test you. Most of these steroids are out of

their system in 2 weeks, so basically what we are assuring by the

current test is that for that 2 weeks prior to the test in October

our NBA players have not used steroids.

The other 50 weeks, under this agreement—unless you can show

me a provision that tells me otherwise—based on this agreement

that governs the conduct of the parties here, you have no random

testing; for the other 50 weeks of the year players can be using

steroids. And there is just nothing here. There is nothing here and

it troubles me when you say we have had a dynamic testing policy

in place and we continue to have a dynamic testing process in

place, because I, frankly, don’t see it.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Well, if I could respond. The first issue is that

with respect to the testing we do in the training camp period, the

training camp period is a month-long period that we do the testing

for all players. So just to make that point. And then also we test

our rookies three additional times during the course of the year.

That is first.

Mr. LYNCH. As a rookie, just his rookie year.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Just the rookie, that is correct. You are correct.

67

Second, just to clarify my remark about a dynamic program,

what I meant was we are looking at it, reviewing it, and particularly with respect to our list of substances, with our Prohibited

Substances Committee, trying to keep that current. That is what

I meant by the reference.

Mr. LYNCH. I understand. Just briefly, I think the reason you

don’t have evidence of steroid use is because you don’t have a testing policy here. To give you a comparison, the NFL randomly picks

seven players from each team every week, 200 players a week, and

they find out whether folks are using steroids. This situation, it almost invites steroid abuse because there is no effective testing

going on. It just troubles me greatly that is the condition.

The other aspect of this I guess I would have to go back to the

reasonable cause standard that we have in the agreement that

would allow you to test beyond that October training season. Based

on what the NIDA—and this is an institute that you have used in

the NBA, the National Institute on Drug Abuse—it says that steroid abuse in high doses causes irritability and extreme aggression

in some cases.

Now, I just was wondering. I do know that back on November

19th we had a game between the Pistons and the Pacers, and there

was a brawl in which players actually went up into the stands

after the fans, and it was a very bad situation. I am wondering did

that brawl, in itself, cause—given the connection between aggressive behavior and steroid abuse and your policy—did that altercation cause the reasonable cause requirement to institute any type

of testing of any of the players involved there?

Mr. HUNTER. I think that is a quantum leap, for you to suggest

that because a fight occurred during a game, that it was induced

by steroids.

Mr. LYNCH. Sir, this was more than a fight in a game. This was

not a shoving match.

Mr. HUNTER. Yes, but that it was induced by steroids?

Mr. LYNCH. Excuse me?

Mr. HUNTER. That it was induced by steroids?

Mr. LYNCH. Well, you have a provision here in this agreement

that says reasonable cause. You have another document that is referred to in the agreement that says aggressive behavior is connected to steroid use.

Mr. HUNTER. I don’t——

Mr. LYNCH. Sir, I am not saying that it was caused by steroid

abuse. All I am saying is you don’t. You don’t know. You don’t test

the players.

Mr. STERN. That is correct, Congressman. And the reality is it

worries me greatly if the absence of testing for anybody, including

the Members of Congress, would somehow be used to say, well, if

you don’t have it, that is proof that it must exist; and then referring to a policy as pathetic. On behalf of the players of the National

Basketball Association, I would like to say that the guilt that you

seek to attribute to them on the basis of this policy is ill taken and

very unfair.

Mr. LYNCH. Well, I don’t believe it is unfair. I believe if you are

going to test players, you ought to have something in the agreement that says you are going to test players.

68

Mr. STERN. Well, it is a good country, and I would like to just

disagree with your approach here. That is all.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. The gentleman’s time has expired.

Mr. LYNCH. You are free to do that.

Mr. STERN. Thank you.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. The gentleman’s time has expired.

Mr. Marchant.

Mr. MARCHANT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This question is for Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones, as the trainer for the

Rockets, do you, on a regular basis, have players come to you and

ask you whether they can take certain dietary supplements, or do

they come to you and say I am thinking about taking this, I have

heard about this, is it legal, is it something I can do? Do they come

to you as a reference for that?

Mr. JONES. Yes, sir. And I actually, through the NBA’s policy and

the NBA players’ policy, we have literature and education. I encourage them, if they are going to take something, to come ask me.

And I take it to our team physicians and we look at the ingredients

and where it is from, make sure there are not any banned substances from the list that we have for our drug policy, and we go

from there.

Mr. MARCHANT. Do you, as a trainer, feel like a policy of random

testing would interfere with the job you do as trainer? Do you

think it would give you any additional tools to make sure that the

players are not involved in steroids?

Mr. JONES. I think a stronger policy would help me and it would

help the game.

Mr. MARCHANT. Mr. Chairman, just as a comment, not as a result of these hearings, but as a result of the awareness that has

been raised in part by these hearings, two of the high schools in

my district, just last week, have adopted for the first time a random drug test for all of their varsity athletes, and the local school

board has voted it and the parents were in agreement, the athletes

were in agreement. So I think this is a subject that is not just at

the professional level, but it is beginning to be considered seriously

at home, among parents and coaches and student athletes.

Thank you.

Mr. ISSA. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. MARCHANT. Yes, I will yield my time.

Mr. ISSA. Was that done without a Federal subsidy?

Mr. MARCHANT. It was done by some additional funding through

the local school board budget.

Mr. ISSA. Well, congratulations. Thank you.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Mr. Clay.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for conducting this hearing today.

Let me start with Commissioner Stern. Welcome to the committee today. The primary purpose of these series of hearings is to

demonstrate the dangers of steroids and protect young people who

might be tempted to use performance-enhancing drugs. The NBA’s

current penalties for performance-enhancing drugs are, in my opinion, a joke. No disrespect to you, but I think it is a joke and it is

the weakest among the professional sports. Do you intend to toughVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:31 Jul 18, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\21484.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
69

en them to set the right example for younger Americans, or will

Congress have to act?

Mr. STERN. As we said before you came in, Congressman, our

current proposals to the union call for sharply increased testing

and penalty, and Mr. Hunter has indicated that, although he

doesn’t want it negotiated here, that the union is amenable to increases in both of those categories.

Mr. CLAY. I am glad to hear that.

Mr. STERN. And I must also add that I think that the work that

this committee has done in bringing attention to this subject has

provided an extraordinary public service. It has sharpened our attention, I think, and also changed many minds about the necessity

of setting the example. And I know the committee will be dealing

with what has been described as a Zero Tolerance Committee, and

I just wanted to add that the NBA looks forward to working as constructively as we can with that committee.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that response, commissioner. As a followup, when do you think we may see some movement on the

changing of the rules?

Mr. STERN. Prior to the next season.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you.

For Mr. Dixon, welcome to the committee and thank you for

being here. As an alum of the University of Maryland, I congratulate you on your success in the NBA and also for bringing a National Championship to the University of Maryland. How rampant

do you believe steroids are in the NBA?

Mr. DIXON. Well, to my knowledge, I haven’t seen or heard anything about steroids in the NBA. I don’t know much about it, but

I am sure the union and Mr. Stern will come up with an agreement

that will penalize players if they use or distribute steroids. So to

tell you the truth, Mr. Clay, I don’t know much about it.

Mr. CLAY. Would you support a more stringent policy?

Mr. DIXON. Excuse me?

Mr. CLAY. Would you support a more stringent uniform drug

testing policy for your sport?

Mr. DIXON. Well, like I said, I am sure they are going to come

up with cost penalties for guys who use steroids. Whatever direction our union goes, that is what I support.

Mr. CLAY. Do you think steroids enhance a basketball player’s

ability?

Mr. DIXON. I don’t see how they could. Usually, when people use

steroids, I guess it is to bulk up, to gain more muscle, power. I

guess you can use power, but for the most part, all I know is that

we use our God-given abilities, and I don’t know of anyone out

there that is using steroids that is in the NBA right now.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that response.

For Mr. Hunter, welcome also.

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you.

Mr. CLAY. Every year in the NBA Draft some of the most talented young athletes in the world, and from the time that they are

drafted to the time that they report, many of the prospects significantly increase their body mass. Are you concerned that players

might be using performance-enhancing drugs to accelerate this

process?

70

Mr. HUNTER. I am not aware of any empirical evidence, any evidence at all, any innuendo or rumor that there is an increase in

body mass of prospective NBA players from the time of the draft

in June to when they show up in October. And I think Mr. Jones,

who is seated to my left, has indicated in his 17 years or so as a

professional trainer in professional basketball and other sports,

specifically as it relates to the NBA, he has seen no evidence of

that. So I am unaware of that. I am going to look for it.

Mr. CLAY. Would you support having an independent agency conduct a drug test for the players? If so, why? If not, why?

Mr. HUNTER. Well, we do. We currently have an independent

group that actually handles the drug testing for our players. It is

a group that is selected by the league and union, and it is independent of us.

Mr. CLAY. It is under contract?

Mr. HUNTER. Oh, yes. Definitely.

Mr. CLAY. OK, thank you for your response.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. Souder.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. I wanted to make a few comments.

First, that while you have a policy, we can only say that apparently

there is not a lot of use. This 2 percent figure internationally, if the

2 percent got caught, it is pretty extraordinary. Those are the people that got caught. And the fact that you don’t test during the season is a big loophole. It doesn’t mean that you would actually catch

anybody, it just means it is a big loophole. Or that you would catch

it.

Also, this 3 years and you get one-third of a year suspension is

just a lot of what we are objecting to, and we have expressed our

concerns about the penalties. Mr. Stern, you have made a stronger

proposal.

When we wind up doing national laws, enforcing drug laws in

the United States really isn’t a labor negotiation question. When

we put drug testing in for truck drivers, the Teamsters didn’t get

to make that decision anymore. Because when policies evolve during the course of congressional hearings—and the initiatives seem

to have a lot in common in all the different sports, a lot because

of the congressional hearings—it causes doubt among the American

people.

Furthermore, we don’t appropriate the funds to enforce the laws

of the United States. And I know it was a casual comment, I know

your frustration because, thus far, you haven’t seen as much as

some of the other sports, but it was illustrated in the high school

question, it is illustrated in the truck driver question. We also,

with all due respect to Mr. Hunter, don’t go down to street kids

and street dealers and say what do you think your penalties ought

to be. We don’t negotiate on drug laws.

We like it to be done first in the private sector, first at the State

and local level. But, ultimately, if we don’t have the confidence, on

behalf of the taxpayers of the United States, we may intervene.

And I would say that is increasingly likely because it is a little too

little and a little too late.

71

And the funding level, increasing numbers of Americans follow

NBA basketball, but many don’t, and they are struggling to pay

their healthcare, and they are not going to take their taxes to make

sure your sport is clean. If we decide that, in fact, Congress has

to intervene, you are probably not going to get the funding question.

I have two technical questions. One is for Mr. Jones. Have you

ever seen amphetamines?

Mr. JONES. Have I ever seen amphetamine use in the NBA?

Mr. SOUDER. You say you haven’t seen steroids. Have you ever

seen any amphetamine use?

Mr. JONES. No, sir.

Mr. SOUDER. Has anybody asked you about them?

Mr. JONES. I have had many players ask just out of curiosity. My

belief is that they were just asking out of curiosity after reading

something or hearing something. But as far as them asking questions where I thought that was something they were thinking of

doing, no.

Mr. SOUDER. Would you recognize somebody’s behavior changes

if they were using amphetamines?

Mr. JONES. Yes, I would. I think I could recognize some of

the——

Mr. SOUDER. And you don’t think you have ever seen any player

using amphetamines?

Mr. JONES. No, sir, not in my years.

Mr. SOUDER. Have you, Mr. Stern or Mr. Hunter, ever thought

about having that included in your testing process? Are you considering that at this point?

Mr. STERN. It actually is included in our testing process and will

be, therefore, included as we increase the penalty and increase the

tests.

And I guess on the subject of the appropriations remarks, I just

would like to clarify a point. That as you go down the lists of drugs

that get added, there are some drugs, like EPO, which are prevalent and I think would be acknowledged in particular sports, not

basketball or any sports that have appeared here could be affected

by it, which are the most expensive drugs for which to test.

And I would just urge that although I would support and be in

favor of Federal legislation here, that it is easy to toss in a list of

drugs and some notionality should exist of where the line gets

drawn in terms of the number of testing and the complication of

testing.

Mr. SOUDER. I have one additional question, but that is a wise

warning, that as we look at particularly as we get a pattern, and

with the changing hormonal growth drugs, that it may vary slightly sport by sport, and we have to figure out how to accommodate

that with the costs and masking agents.

My last question is—and this is once again to Mr. Jones—is it

possible that people can use steroids in the off-season and get it out

of their system by the time you institute testing in pre-season or

during the season?

Mr. JONES. I think you said something as you asked me the

question about masking agents. That is possible. I think the tough

part with steroids, compared to other drugs, the anabolic steroids,

72

those things are oil-based, so they are going to stay in your system

longer, so they are harder to detect and they are harder to mask.

But to say that masking is impossible would be wrong.

Mr. SOUDER. I thank you all. Your answers are helpful.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Mr. Ruppersberger.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. First, Commissioner Stern, I want to acknowledge the fact that, in my opinion, I think you have done a

very good job and you are a strong leader to maintain the integrity

of a game that this country really likes and has a lot of influence

on all generations. There are inconsistencies that I want to deal

with, though. To begin with, you have a testing program that is different between veterans and new players coming in. I think that

program is the veterans are tested, I think, once a year and the

new people coming in. Why the inconsistency in that testing procedure?

Mr. STERN. Well, at the time we put it in, there was little or no

testing in sports on steroids and steroids did not appear to be a

problem, so we added it, we added the once a year, and then to sort

of send a message, we thought the best place to start it was with

random testing on rookies. We now understand, in light of the attention that has been placed on this, that random testing for veterans is something that is a necessity.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Well, I think it is good that you recognize

that. I want to bring up another issue, too, because a lot of what

we deal with in politics and what you deal with is perception, and

we know that.

Mr. STERN. Correct.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Sometimes it is not reality. And you talk

about steroids. Basketball is more a game of quickness and speed

than it is bulk, unless you are going up against Shaq. But basically

the Houston Rockets coach, Van Gundy, I think you fined him

$100,000 and threatened that he be banned for life for the kind of

comments that he made. And that was strong. That showed leadership. You were trying to protect the integrity and that coaches

should not criticize the integrity of the officials, which is an important part of the game.

Don’t you think that as strong as you were with that, that because of the perception that NBA basketball needs to be just as

strong? I mean, you are stronger on street drugs than maybe you

are on steroids. Whether or not steroids are a reality—I don’t think

we have the evidence to say that, but we do know this: that all of

these sports, these professional sports that are very popular,

younger generations are influenced.

Juan Dixon is a star. Younger generations look up to Juan Dixon

and other players. And it seems to me that because of the hearings—which I was concerned about at first, but I think the chairman and Mr. Waxman have done a great job to put this on the

forefront, because it is about the impact with younger generations.

And I think it is the responsibility of Juan’s generation to hold this

game in trust and to do the right thing for these younger kids who

will come forward.

Because of the Van Gundy situation and because of the inconsistency in the testing procedures, because of the fact that steroids

isn’t in the same level as you have the street drugs—and I think

73

street drugs, if you are caught, you are 2 years out right away; and

that is a deterrent. So are you going to consider addressing these

issues?

Mr. STERN. Well, I guess I would say that I agree with your

praise for the committee and what it has focused on this. I would

say to you that the five-game suspension, which is what we have

for steroids on a first offense, for the average NBA player would

be a quarter of a million dollars. So that is somewhat higher than

the $100,000 that Coach Van Gundy was fined.

And with respect to the statement that we should send to kids,

I would tell you that the committee’s hearings have—I had my

doubts at first too, frankly, and I am now persuaded that it is appropriate for an athlete coming into the NBA, in effect, to participate in the statement made by all players, commissioners, unions,

and the like that steroids have no place in sports, period.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. And any use of steroids is cheating. That

is not what we want in our professional sports. And that is why

I would hope that after these hearings that you will get together

with the Players Association.

Mr. Dixon, I am a Terp too. I didn’t realize my friend Mr. Clay

was a Terp from Missouri. I am also from Baltimore, so I have

watched your career, and I know your aunt, who is president of the

city council. I think you have really held yourself in a situation

where you have dignified your profession when you were at the

University of Maryland and now that you are at the Wizards.

Based on the fact that you came from a tough background, you

came from the street, what deterrents do you think that we need

to have so that you can send a good message to kids as it relates

to drugs? Are you concerned that your sport needs to have stricter

penalties, not as much to catch players, but to show that we are

buttoned up and we are not going to be able to tolerate any drugs

because it is going to affect the dignity of our sport?

Mr. DIXON. Well, you know, growing up in Baltimore City I was

surrounded by a lot of drugs, and growing up as a kid you choose

what direction you want to go into, and I chose to go in another

direction, I focused on sports. And, yes, I agree that there should

be stricter penalties. Like I said, I am sure the union and Mr.

Stern and Mr. Hunter will come up with an agreement that will

have harsh penalties if guys use steroids. That is pretty much all

I know and all I am going to answer.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you. The gentleman’s time has expired. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Hon. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger follows:]

74

75

76

77

Ms. Brown-Waite.

Ms. BROWN-WAITE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank the panel for being here. I had read your testimony before I arrived.

Any law enforcement officer will tell you that when they arrest

somebody for a crime, it is usually only 1 percent of those arrested

that this is the first time that crime has ever been committed.

Using that logic, I wonder why, Mr. Stern, a recent newspaper article said that you were willing to introduce another random steroid

testing? Why would you not want to have more than just one other

random drug testing?

Mr. STERN. Actually, you are quite right. In our proposal to the

union is four additional random drug tests and one additional random test out of competition, which is in the off-season. So we are

actually proposing—plus the one in the exhibition season. So we

are actually proposing as many as six.

Ms. BROWN-WAITE. That is great. Obviously the newspaper article that I had was incorrect.

Mr. STERN. Correct.

Ms. BROWN-WAITE. And any of us involved in politics knows that

very often it is not always the correct thing that is printed in the

paper.

Mr. STERN. So Will Rogers maybe wasn’t familiar with today’s

newspapers.

Ms. BROWN-WAITE. My next question is for Mr. Jones. As a

former trainer for the Olympic National Basketball Team, obviously, you are familiar with the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency and the

World Anti-Doping Agency’s doping control. Is that correct that you

are familiar with that?

Mr. JONES. Yes, ma’am.

Ms. BROWN-WAITE. How does the NBA’s prohibited substance

use compare to WADA’s prohibited substance list? And the second

question would be does the list include designer steroids, and do

you feel that some substances tested for in Olympic athletes should

also be tested for in NBA players? And I look forward to your response.

Mr. JONES. OK. That is a pretty big question. I am familiar with

the WADA list and the IOC and the USOC lists, and they are very

extensive. I think, for the most part, the NBA list covers a lot of

the banned substances on both ends, whether they are anabolic

steroids or drugs of abuse.

Do I think that the NBA’s list should cover everything that they

have? That would be tough. I think there is a lot of supplements—

call them nutritional supplements, call them vitamins, whatever—

that NBA players—not a lot that they use, but a lot of the same

ones are pretty consistent with it—that I really couldn’t say for

sure if they are on the IOC list or the WADA list.

Ms. BROWN-WAITE. Could you give me an example of some of the

supplements?

Mr. JONES. Well, it is just some of the things the guys take, some

of the drinks that they have, things with creatine and creatine

phosphate. I don’t know what the levels are, if that is a thing with

WADA. Some of the pre-game drinks that they have that have certain substances, I don’t know what the concentration level of

78

WADA is. We have had our physicians look at them, and they have

deemed them safe for our players. And our physicians have that

banned substance list that comes from the NBA, and also for the

Olympics, so we are actually using it.

As far as the Houston Rockets are concerned and NBA trainers,

we are actually using that same list, because we don’t know when

our players are going to get selected for an international competition. Somebody may have made an Olympic team and you have to

get an alternate. Those alternates pop up all the time, so our guys,

we make sure that they stay within the guidelines.

Ms. BROWN-WAITE. Well, I think the basic question is if it is good

enough for the Olympic National Basketball Team, why should this

not be a universal standard?

Mr. JONES. I would agree with you there. I think the banned substances list for both are pretty accurate. I think what the WADA

and the IOC get into are more of the designer steroids and more

of the growth hormones that we have not yet tested for, and, yes,

I do think those should be included.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you.

Ms. Sanchez.

Ms. SANCHEZ. Thank you, Chairman.

I just, in listening to the testimony today, can’t help but find

some artificial distinctions that are troubling to me. And before I

get into those, I do want to ask Commissioner Stern for a little bit

of clarification.

Did you just state that the new proposed policy would have four

additional random drug tests throughout the season, one out of

season and one in the——

Mr. STERN. Actually, I misspoke. It is one random test in training camp, three additional random tests in season, and one out of

season. Mr. Buchanan has corrected me. So it is not six, it is five.

But, yes, we are proposing the opportunity for three additional random tests in season.

Ms. SANCHEZ. OK. And would those random tests apply to veterans and rookies?

Mr. STERN. Correct. To every NBA player.

Ms. SANCHEZ. OK. Because I was finding it a little bit troubling

that there is this artificial distinction between rookie players and

veteran players.

One of the other distinctions that is a little bit troubling to me

is that the current policy right now covers testing for street drugs

and covers testing for steroid use or performance-enhancing drugs,

but the penalties for the street drug use are far stricter. And the

example that I am going to give you is that an NBA veteran who

is caught using cocaine faces a minimum of a 2-year ban from the

league, but the same veteran who uses steroids faces only a fivegame suspension; and even after multiple offenses, the player

would face a 25-game suspension.

That makes no sense to me. Both substances are illegal and one

is actually helping somebody cheat in a sport where you want to

maintain the integrity of the game. So how could you justify having

such a large difference in penalties?

Mr. STERN. Well, actually, let me take you through the history

of it. The cocaine, which has been in effect since 1983, when we

79

dealt exclusively with non-steroidal drugs, recreational drugs, if

you would, that was for for-cause testing when we caught somebody who didn’t come forward into our program. As we came to

learn more about steroids, in the first instance we were concerned

about the fact that there were certain tainted nutritional supplements and that since our policy is absolute, no matter what—if you

are found to have the substance in your system, you were gone, period—the possibility for accidental contamination, which we didn’t

think was the case with cocaine, caused us to move more slowly

with respect to steroids. We are concerned about that because in

addition to wanting to set an example and also wanting to make

our integrity level as high as it can possibly be, we do have concerns for the individual rights of our players.

Ms. SANCHEZ. And I can understand that. But with respect to the

concerns about contamination, if I am not mistaken, the NFL and

the Olympics have a way to deal with that, and I think part of that

is educating players about it and holding them responsible for their

actions.

Mr. STERN. Actually, the way that the Olympics has been doing

it is with a series of modifications that allow you to consider ameliorative conditions, where every player who is found guilty of some

drug use has the opportunity to appeal—not widely reported—and

endless hearings go on with respect to that. In our view, we don’t

even want the discretion. We think it is appropriate for it to be absolute, and we deal with the issue in the penalty phase so that the

penalties get stepped up.

Ms. SANCHEZ. But you don’t think that there is an inherent message that you are sending by saying that for illegal street drugs we

are going to penalize you in a much more severe manner, and with

respect to performance-enhancing drugs—which are not only illegal, mind you, but again undermine the integrity of the sport—we

are going to have stepped up penalties?

Mr. STERN. Actually, I tell you that there may be some inconsistencies, but in 1983, when our NBA players stepped up and said we

think it is most important for us to have this drug policy because

kids in our neighborhoods are using those drugs, and they wanted

to send a strong message. We have been evolving with respect to

steroids, and now we are there, and that is reflected by the conversations that we and the union are now having and the propsals

that I have put before this committee.

Ms. SANCHEZ. Thank you.

Mr. DENT [presiding]. Your time has expired.

Thank you. I have a question for the commissioner, Mr. Stern.

Can you hear me?

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. DENT. A question for Mr. Stern. Following up on Representative Brown-Waite’s comments on supplementals, I know that tainted supplements are a source of concern for the NBA, given the

strict liability of your policy. Have you considered certifying certain

supplements as safe, as the NFL has begun to do?

Mr. STERN. It is on our agenda. It is hard for us to think that

if we certify a company, that puts us into the business of drug

manufacturing and supplement manufacturing, and thereby vouchVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:31 Jul 18, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\21484.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
80

ing for its product; and that at least gave us some pause, Congressman.

Mr. DENT. OK. And just to followup, have you considered using

a USADA certified lab to conduct your steroid testing?

Mr. STERN. Yes. In fact, we do.

Mr. BUCHANAN. At risk of correcting the commissioner, we currently do not use a WADA-certified lab. The lab that we use is certified by the College of American Pathologists and the Substance

Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. There are two

WADA-certified labs in North America, UCLA and Montreal, and

we are currently looking to move our program potentially to one of

those labs starting next season in order to take advantage of the

best science that they have, because there are some substances

that only those labs are able to test for in this country.

Mr. STERN. To help resurrect me, who heads the lab that we currently use?

Mr. BUCHANAN. Who is our director of toxicology?

Mr. STERN. Isn’t he the head of the——

Mr. BUCHANAN. We will just have this conversation.

Mr. STERN [continuing]. Moscow Olympics?

Mr. BUCHANAN. Yes, correct, Victor Uralets is our director of

toxicology at Quest Diagnostics.

Mr. STERN. OK. Thank you.

Mr. DENT. And I guess maybe to Mr. Jones, the NBA currently

has certified drug collectors in half the cities that have professional

basketball teams. Are you familiar with which cities have the ability to collect those drug samples and which cities don’t, and is

Houston one of them?

Mr. JONES. Yes, as far as my knowledge, the NBA has a security

person in every city that is certified to collect those samples, and

I know who our representative is there.

Mr. DENT. Could anybody else comment on that, maybe Mr. Buchanan?

Mr. BUCHANAN. Sure. We have a staff of security representatives

that are employed by the league office. There is a security representative for each of the 30 teams. We have trained a subset of

that group, half, to collect specimens for us in our drug testing in

the pre-season and during the season, and those collectors, we utilize them regionally and throughout the country to get the samples

from the players.

Mr. DENT. OK. The reason I asked is because some of these

steroids might only stay in the body for a few days and they can

cycle it. I have no further questions at this time.

Chairman TOM DAVIS [presiding]. The Chair recognizes Mr.

Cummings.

Mr. CUMMINGS. I missed what you just said about the people who

do the collecting, because, for us, the integrity of the tests are very,

very important. When we examined the baseball folks, we were extremely alarmed that there were so many loopholes in the testing.

And I was just wondering. Tell me who does the testing? Who collects the specimens?

Mr. BUCHANAN. Our drug testing specimens are collected by a

staff of NBA security representatives. These are people who are all

former law enforcement individuals; they work under the direction

81

of our NBA head of security, who is a former official with the FBI.

They are trained in the procedures and the chain of custody that

is required to collect drug samples. All of our samples are collected

under direct observation.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Now, Mr. Stern—and maybe this would also go

to Mr. Hunter—I am sure it has been made clear here—I am sorry

I had to leave; I had to go over to the Senate about this nuclear

option business—but let me ask you this. I notice that you all came

up with the new proposed penalties. Do you think the likelihood of

them going through is pretty good?

And I am wondering—and perhaps this is for you, Mr. Hunter—

we here come from all sides of the country, and I come from the

inner city of Baltimore, where young men are going to jail every

day for Schedule I, II, and III drugs. And they look at this steroid

thing and they say to themselves, well, wait a minute, these guys

are bulking up and I am going to jail; and they are getting paid

a million and I am unemployed.

And then they ask the question what’s up with that? And I am

just wondering if the players understand that the Congress is losing a little patience, and that there is not a lot of sympathy up

here for these millionaire players who may be bulking up and, by

the way, severely damaging the credibility and the integrity of the

game.

And I am just wondering do you think that is getting through,

Mr. Stern, that message?

Mr. STERN. Well——

Mr. CUMMINGS. I mean, in light of the fact that you just came

up with some stricter—and I applaud you for that, by the way.

Mr. STERN. Yes. Well, I would say to you that I would like to

parse your question and say to you that the committee has gotten

our attention, it has done the service, and we want to make clear

that our game is free of that. My concern by you raising the question suggests that NBA players are bulking up, and I am not prepared to acknowledge the truth of that assertion.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Well, let me back up, then. Let us take that way

and let me ask the question another way. First of all, do you think

that if other players are using steroids, do you believe that they believe that is cheating? Do you believe it is cheating?

Mr. STERN. Yes, I do believe it. I believe our players believe it,

and I believe our current drug policy—in its intention if not quite

yet in its fully desired effect—makes that statement forcefully on

behalf of both the union and the league.

And with respect to your point on criminal enforcement, as far

as I am concerned, we are not law enforcement. And if somebody

is illegally using drugs, wherever they are, including NBA players,

the law enforcement authorities should do what they deem appropriate.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Do you have a response, Mr. Hunter?

Mr. HUNTER. No. I am in agreement with what Mr. Stern is saying relative to his last comment. I was a Federal prosecutor for

about 8 years and a State prosecutor for about 10 or 11 before that.

I served as U.S. attorney for northern California. So I have been

deeply involved in the criminal aspect for a long, long time prior

to coming to the NBA. It is my contention that our players are conVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:31 Jul 18, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\21484.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
82

trolled by the same laws that control everybody else, and I am sure

that whatever we put in place, the message that we intend to deliver will be delivered and the players will conform their conduct

accordingly, assuming there is a problem.

Mr. CUMMINGS. And I take it that, in listening to you, Mr. Stern,

you think that if there is a problem—I am not putting words in

your mouth, I just want you to answer me—just based upon what

you said a few minutes ago, that it is not a major problem in the

NBA, use of steroids?

Mr. STERN. I would say that I have no evidence of it. But I think

we owe it to the public at this point, based upon the concerns that

have been raised by this committee, to demonstrate that what I believe to be the fact is truly the fact, so we don’t have to debate

about bulking up versus speed. If you are an NBA player, you will

be subject to random testing that both protects your health, protects the confidence in the game, and sends the message to kids

that this is something that is not a part of sports.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you very much. We will just go

through a few more questions, then I think we can let you go.

Mr. Hunter, our staff has been in contact with the Players Association regarding the formation of a Zero Tolerance Roundtables to

foster discussions between a wide cross-section of both the professional sports and amateur sports worlds, including medical experts,

high school coaches, anti-drug advocacy organizations, and we are

pleased that the NBA has agreed to participate. But we haven’t

gotten the same commitment from the Players Association. Can we

have that commitment?

Mr. HUNTER. Yes.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. OK. Thank you very much. And we just

need you to work with us to get some players that would be part

of this. They are the real role models. They don’t care what Commissioner Stern or Mr. Waxman or I think about it, they look up

to the Juan Dixons of the world; that is who the kids are idolizing

out there, and it is just important they make those kind of statements.

Juan, that is why we are so pleased to have you here today making your statements.

I have one piece I am trying to followup on. I think we have almost closed on—this is on the NBA current policy on the drug collectors in half of the cities that have teams back and forth. You

admit it is probably not as solid as you would like it, is that fair

to say?

Mr. STERN. We are absolutely quite happy with the collection.

We accept—and you can see from our proposals that additional

penalties and additional random tests and consideration of what,

if any, additional substances should be added are all things that we

should be looking at.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Because of where the collectors are, some

teams could only be tested at away games, so in theory, at least,

it would be easier to game if somebody wanted to do that.

Mr. STERN. I don’t think so. Mr. Buchanan.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. We don’t have any evidence anybody is

gaming yet, but I am just saying——

83

Mr. BUCHANAN. Well, I think, actually, to the contrary, Congressman. Because we use a subset of the full 30 security reps, those

security reps that do our drug collections, they travel. So the players on a given team are not going to know who they are going to

see to do their collections, when they are going to see them. It actually adds, in my opinion, an additional element that is a positive

for our program.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. OK, that clarifies it, as far as I am concerned. I just remember a few years ago, when the Wizards were

building the MCI Center downtown and I had Wes Unseld before

me under oath, and I asked him a question, I said, are the Wizards

going to have a winning team next year. And this was before, of

course, Juan Dixon arrived on the scene.

Mr. STERN. And what did he say?

Chairman TOM DAVIS. He said, I can promise you exciting basketball. That was his answer. So let me just ask this. Commissioner Stern and Mr. Hunter, are we going to be able to work this

out, do you think? Not just on the drug side, but your other issues?

You have millions of fans around the world watching.

Mr. HUNTER. We are going to try.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. You are going to try?

Mr. STERN. We will give it our best shot.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. We are all counting on you. Thank you

very much.

Mr. Waxman.

Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank each of the witnesses that appeared before us

today. You have been here voluntarily and your testimony has been

very forthright and helpful to us, and I very much appreciate it.

I gather that you and I both think that steroids is not a big problem with basketball players, but the truth of the matter is we don’t

know for sure because the testing program that you have in place

now is so weak. That is why I am grateful for your leadership, Mr.

Stern and Mr. Hunter, to negotiate a stronger testing policy.

Mr. Stern, I appreciate your willingness to support the idea of

uniform legislation.

I wanted to point out to Mr. Hunter that when we talk about

uniform legislation, we are talking about a minimum, and the different sports groups can do other things; it is not a one-size-fitsall for everyone. I know details are important, and I just wanted

to point that out to you. We will go over some of the details at another time.

There was a heated exchange with Mr. Lynch. As I heard what

Mr. Lynch was saying earlier, I don’t think he was saying that

steroids caused the brawl, but he was saying, in effect, the brawl

would have triggered the reasonable cause clause. So I just want

to point that out. Not to engage in it any further, but I think there

was a misunderstanding.

Mr. STERN. I was reacting to the difference between some of the

words you used and the word pathetic that Mr. Lynch used.

Mr. WAXMAN. I see. Well, that was your response, but there was

an earlier exchange.

Mr. STERN. No, but I understand. And, actually, we were sufficiently engaged with that event in so many difficult ways—with reVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:31 Jul 18, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\21484.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
84

spect to security, service, crowd control, protection of players, and

protection of fans—that didn’t trigger the issue that you raised, but

I understand the issue well.

Mr. WAXMAN. Well, you certainly were much more involved in it,

but I thought he was being somewhat criticized for an interpretation of what he had to say, which isn’t what I heard him say.

Mr. STERN. I understand.

Mr. WAXMAN. But I can see how you would have that feeling.

Also in the questioning by Mr. Ruppersberger, when he talked

about Van Gundy, I think you answered part of the question when

you talked about the monetary fine being comparable to what monetary fine in other circumstances, but the disparity was that your

first reaction was to ban him from the game, which is a pretty

harsh penalty. It didn’t go that far, but that would have been a

very harsh one, banning him for life. That is a harsh penalty, and

when you think about the kind of penalty for drug use it is a lot

different. So there is a disparity in how strongly you felt about

what might be an appropriate penalty.

Mr. STERN. Well, but I have to delve further into the facts of the

situation with you, and it had to do more with his non-cooperation

in revealing sources. And I have known the House to react strongly

when people appearing before it refuse to either testify or give information. So it was not about simply the criticism of the game, but

it was about his unwillingness to be forthcoming when asked questions that he was required to answer.

Mr. WAXMAN. I wouldn’t want our House ethics policy to be a

model for you.

Mr. STERN. Congressman, I didn’t say that.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. I was going to ask which policy, Henry.

Mr. WAXMAN. But on the other hand, I wouldn’t think that a

House ethics policy ought to call for banning for life for an offense

under one circumstance, but a slap on the wrist for another one if

they both go to the integrity of the game and are very serious problems.

Mr. STERN. Actually, people have come to expect more of our athletes and coaches, unfortunately, than even of commissioners or

Members of Congress. We somehow apply a higher standard. And

in the case of Mr. Dixon, even though I didn’t go to the University

of Maryland, I am proud to be sitting on this panel with him, and

I think he is a great representative of all of our NBA athletes.

Mr. WAXMAN. Well, our goal is, because of the reverence in which

sports are held in this country, that we want the American people

to feel that you are meeting higher standards, even if they look at

politicians and think there might be a higher standard that politicians could achieve. But I am not really asking for a response.

Mr. STERN. We agree, and we are going to make you proud of us,

Congressman.

Mr. WAXMAN. Well, we are going to work together with you, and

I just think that your being here was very helpful. This is the beginning of further discussions that we will all have.

Mr. STERN. Thank you very much.

Mr. WAXMAN. Because we have the same goal in mind.

Mr. STERN. We do.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you.

85

I think, Mr. Souder, do you have one last?

Mr. WAXMAN. Oh, I did want to also thank Keith Jones for his

testimony.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Very helpful. Thank you.

Mr. WAXMAN. And Mr. Dixon. I was told by Karen Nelson, who

is my chief of staff, who is a fanatic Wizards fan, that I should

keep asking questions until she could get back from a doctor’s appointment just so she could see you. So I hope she will arrive in

time. But you have been terrific to be here. Thank you.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. Thank you.

Mr. Souder has one more question.

Mr. SOUDER. I do, by the way, favor drug testing for Congressmen; have done that myself. I believe we should lead by example.

Not that any of us are likely to be seen as steroid users. I think

you can look at the picture of us and see that is probably the case.

I had one particular question. I agree that the testing during the

season, possibly off-season, and the penalties are the biggest questions, and you are attempting to address those. But there is another one that is emerging that the World Anti-Doping Agency, as

you said, is looking at what you test becomes critical, and that is

gene doping. Because what we have been up until now is behind.

In other words, as steroids and human growth and this one isn’t

there, but as it has been in multiple news stories in Seattle and

the AP in the last couple months, steroids are old news for edge

seekers. And the World Anti-Doping and the U.S. Anti-Doping policy says the non-therapeutic use of cells, genes, genetic elements,

or of modification of gene expression having the capacity to enhance athletic performance is prohibited. If that could at least be

part of any policy, I think we are looking at that here because this

would just dramatically alter it in a different way.

Mr. STERN. I couldn’t agree with you more, Congressman. I have

been doing some reading on that in line with some other work I

do at the university level. The potential for genetic therapy which

will arguably corrupt athletic competition is out there. Whether we

can stay ahead of the curve I think is going to be a real issue, but

we are committed to, with other sports and with this committee,

to attempt to do that.

Mr. SOUDER. And my last is a question, but first I want to say

thanks for working with Partnership for Drug-Free America. You

used several examples in your testimony of a number of you doing

local efforts. But the NBA is a little unusual compared to the other

sports, in that you take kids straight out of high school, which has,

for example, tremendously helped the Indiana Pacers, for which we

are very appreciative. But are you also doing directed high school

outreach, where you have such a huge impact, even more probably

than other sports?

Mr. STERN. You know, we are. We go, for example, to the places

like the McDonald’s All American Tournament, where we bring in

representatives to talk to the kids who have been identified as likely pro prospects, and with our Junior NBA and Junior WNBA,

which go younger, we are going to increase that. But I must tell

you that if we can find a way together to get the kids at a younger

age than when they are high school players, that, to me, would be

the most important thing to do. And it has to be more than just

86

public service announcements. There has to be a complete cultural

shift on the entire subject.

In the mid-1980’s, when Mrs. Reagan was deeply involved with

Just Say No, I am pleased to say that the NBA was deeply involved

with that effort. And despite my initial skepticism, there actually

was a change in the way kids behaved vis-a-vis drugs, and I think

it had something to do with her efforts. And if we could somehow

recreate that collectively, I think it would be terrific.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you very much.

Chairman TOM DAVIS. I want to thank all of you. This has been

a great panel. It will help us. As we move our legislation forward,

Commissioner Stern, Mr. Hunter, we will share with you our

thoughts as the process moves forward.

The hearing is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 11:36 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]

[The prepared statement of Hon. Diane E. Watson, Hon. Carolyn

B. Maloney, and Hon. Jon C. Porter follow:]

87

88

89

90

91

92

Æ