Congress requests WWE drug testing records

[Jingus]

About the "personal choice" theory: I wouldn't mind a study or reporter to ask some wrestlers about what they felt/knew about steroids right when they first got in the business. How many didn't do them, didn't want to do them, didn't ever expect to do them, but ultimately felt that they needed to in order to pay the bills? Once they were already set in their career of course, complete with lingering injuries and no other job skills.

[sek69]

It is a personal choice, though. I imagine I could make pretty good money performing in gay porn movies, but I don't want to have sex with men, wax my ass, or get hopped up on whatever it is you need to get hopped up on to be a gay porn dude. Vince McMahon is a huge scumbag, but the wrestlers are the ones ultimately doing this stuff.

 

I don't mind Congress looking into this. They look into all sorts of stuff. Some really low-level staffers will spend a day or two Googling up info on this, some people will testify. It's a few hours out of a few congressmen's lives and McMahon will get shook and probably ban drugs for real.

 

The thing is that Vince (and I guess every promoter, but Vince is the best at it) preys on people's vulnerabilities and weaknesses while pushing all the right macho bullshit buttons to get guys to do what they want.

 

Yes when it comes down to it, it's the individual wrestler who pops that pill or plunges that needle, but to act like in every case that decision was made clearly is just asinine. I liken it similar to a military induction. You get told what to think and what to do, and before you know it you're making choices that perhaps aren't in your best personal interest for the good of the corps (or the business).

[Loss]

Let's be realistic here. Congress won't clean up professional wrestling. They'll make a show of things to the point where Vince and Co. revise their steroid policy and that will be it. The general public doesn't care enough for it to go any further.

Over 70% of the public thinks there should be a Congressional investigation according to internet polls. I'm just saying they should keep their minds open. I may be wrong, but you seem awfully against even the notion of wrestling cleaning up with your posts. You speak against it, underplay its impact and defend WWE when there are plenty of clearly presentable facts right there.

 

 

While this needs to be done, why isn't Congress investigating the drug use in the movie industry under the guise of "protecting the nation's youth"?

Because it's not a prerequisite to be successful as an actor that you take drugs.

[Loss]

The complaints over at DVDVR's boards seemed to be more centered on "doesn't the government have more important things to deal with", than the whole "it's there choice" response that some people were shouting a month ago. In this case, regarding Congress intervening, the small net backlash has to do with political beliefs about the role of government rather than whether or not they want the business "cleaned up". I don't think the same people opposed to congressional involvement are pro-steroid or pro-WWE, they're just anti-government involvement and rather the biz police itself without government coercion.

Which is one of my biggest concerns. Congressional action is essentially drug testing employees of a private company. Would any of us be comfortable if the government tested us for drugs at our own workplace?

 

If you have nothing to hide, there's no reason to be uncomfortable. If the government wanted to drug test me today, they could feel free.

 

Wrestling has proven that it can not police itself. So there are two options:

 

(1) Get it regulated by the government.

(2) Ban it completely because history has shown pro wrestling can not exist safely and under any form of ethical guidelines whatsoever.

[Loss]

I can understand how anti-government people would be upset at this, but then they should stop and think how we got to this point.

Agreed. Ideally, wrestling would police itself.

 

Wrestling has proven that it is incapable of doing so.

[Loss]

Daniel Benoit was killed by his pro wrestler dad.

 

Personal choice is officially out of the equation, because the kid didn't make a choice.

[kjh]

So...

 

Will WWE rack up lots of overtime with the shredder, or is it pointless to do so unless Aegis Labs does the same?

I'd imagine there are plenty of incriminating documents that WWE could shred that have nothing to do with Aegis Labs, especially as the scope of the investigation is far wider than simply their most recent drug testing policy. For example, I'm sure Congress would be interested to see the memo WWE was supposed to have sent their wrestlers after Brian Pillman died telling them to stop seeing the mark doctor Pillman used to get his drugs from, Dr Joel Hackett, because he was hot and the feds were on to him.

[Bix]

I hadn't thought about it that way, but you're right.

[Dylan Waco]

Daniel Benoit was killed by his pro wrestler dad.

 

Personal choice is officially out of the equation, because the kid didn't make a choice.

Kind of a worthless argument, unless Congress is planning to investigate an awful lot more than steroids. One would guess that all things considered the amount of steroid abuse in other sports would have caused more steroid related deaths by now if wrestlings deaths were primarily steroid related which is the explicit purpose of this probe. The fact that it hasn't tends to indicate that those that point to the totality of the wrestling lifestyle are headed down the right track..and frankly I don't see how Congress could regulate "seasons" onto the industry, or anything else of that ilk.

 

The reality is that Congress intervening isn't likely to do much of anything without significant outside preasure and some sort of represenation for the wrestlers themselves whether it is called a union or not. The liklihood of that happening is slim to none..so really the Congressional card is pretty much a joke..

[sek69]

So we end up at the same point a lot of political debates end at, the idea that nothing will change so why bother even trying.

[Al]

Over 70% of the public thinks there should be a Congressional investigation according to internet polls. I'm just saying they should keep their minds open. I may be wrong, but you seem awfully against even the notion of wrestling cleaning up with your posts. You speak against it, underplay its impact and defend WWE when there are plenty of clearly presentable facts right there.

My opinion on the matter of Congress is based on my studies and the manner Congress handled the steroid issue in Major League Baseball. I just don't see Congress passing meaningful legislation, and if they do I can't see it passing muster. The only thing Congress can do really is set up a National Athletic Commission, something they declined to do many times with boxing.

 

As far as the wrestling business goes, I am of the opinion that a large part of the problem is due to rampant recreational drug use. Other sports have not had high death rates despite also carrying quite a few steroid users in their ranks. I think WWE has taken positive steps, something they have greater ability to accomplish since there is no strong second promotion competing for talent. The problem is that the death rate we see is largely a product of the wrestling scene in the 1990s. If WWE's policies work, we will not know for another decade.

 

If you have nothing to hide, there's no reason to be uncomfortable. If the government wanted to drug test me today, they could feel free.

 

Wrestling has proven that it can not police itself. So there are two options:

 

(1) Get it regulated by the government.

(2) Ban it completely because history has shown pro wrestling can not exist safely and under any form of ethical guidelines whatsoever.

They could test me as well, but I would not at all be comfortable with the government, or individuals within the government, knowing the contents of my blood stream.

 

As for policing itself, that's a standard carried by no other company in the country. Why not carry the same measure to beer companies? The government certainly shows no interest in regulating other companies who commit serious ethics violations, coercing their employees to work unpaid overtime, cutting benefits through loopholes, and other matters. I realize it's getting into a political debate in which I have little interest in participating. I can't see it leading to positive changes in the sport.

[CodySave]

So we end up at the same point a lot of political debates end at, the idea that nothing will change so why bother even trying.

Here's what I posted on the DVDVR board in response to the "Why bother trying" attitude, which I hate when used with anything in life:

 

Much of this thread can be summarized as the following:

 

"Congress probably won't fix anything, so why bother trying?"

 

Great attitude, guys. I guess the 1980 U.S. Hockey shouldn't have taken the ice against the USSR team when no one thought they could win. Hell, I'm sure most of you have accomplished something that no one else thought you could.

 

Seriously, I can't believe the posters who would rather have wrestling exactly how it is, with an uneccessary amount of deaths, than have anyone, even if it is Congress, try to change things how they are now. Wrestling clearly isn't fixing itself, and some of you have the gall to bitch about a couple senators that want to make something positive happen?

 

I mean, my god, you spend countless dollars to watch the WWE as it is now, but you complain about the goverment using a few tax dollars to possibly make the WWE healthier? I'm at a loss to understand this type of thinking.

[Guest KCook]

You're confusing "won't" and "can't." Congress isn't God and they can't just make bad things go away by wishing really hard.

[Loss]

My opinion on the matter of Congress is based on my studies and the manner Congress handled the steroid issue in Major League Baseball. I just don't see Congress passing meaningful legislation, and if they do I can't see it passing muster. The only thing Congress can do really is set up a National Athletic Commission, something they declined to do many times with boxing.

I do agree with you that it probably won't work, but I do think it's better to try something that has a small chance of accomplishing something worthwhile than not trying anything at all.

 

As far as the wrestling business goes, I am of the opinion that a large part of the problem is due to rampant recreational drug use. Other sports have not had high death rates despite also carrying quite a few steroid users in their ranks. I think WWE has taken positive steps, something they have greater ability to accomplish since there is no strong second promotion competing for talent. The problem is that the death rate we see is largely a product of the wrestling scene in the 1990s. If WWE's policies work, we will not know for another decade.

WWE has taken steps in the right direction, but it's obvious not enough has been done when Lashley is still a top guy and has absolutely nothing to offer except his physique. Not to totally parrot Meltzer, but hiring, firing and pushing based on physique is as much of the problem as testing.

 

Eddy Guerrero was clean of recreational drugs, but was still using painkillers and steroids up until the time of his death, according to his toxicology report. There have also been known drug problems with somas with Rene Dupree and Nick Dinsmore, two new school guys.

 

They could test me as well, but I would not at all be comfortable with the government, or individuals within the government, knowing the contents of my blood stream.

 

As for policing itself, that's a standard carried by no other company in the country. Why not carry the same measure to beer companies? The government certainly shows no interest in regulating other companies who commit serious ethics violations, coercing their employees to work unpaid overtime, cutting benefits through loopholes, and other matters. I realize it's getting into a political debate in which I have little interest in participating. I can't see it leading to positive changes in the sport.

Porn was trusted to police itself for a long time. When there was an AIDS outbreak, they shut things down immediately. I liken this to that.

 

It's not even so much that I strongly favor hearings. I just think that if wrestling can't clean up its drug problem, it should be completely shut down because there's now evidence that the stresses of the lifestyle can result in death/harm to individuals not directly involved. Yes, it's a freak thing, until you hear other cases about domestic abuse and combine that with the staggering number of deaths. I'd rather see hearings tried than see wrestling banned tomorrow.

[CodySave]

You're confusing "won't" and "can't." Congress isn't God and they can't just make bad things go away by wishing really hard.

Even if you switch "won't" with "can't," my statement would be the same. Who's to say they can't change anything if they don't try?

 

I can't stand it when people throw in the towel simply on the assumption they can't change anything. That's a terribly unconfident attitude to live with.

[Al]

I wouldn't mind an open dialogue at all. I think the big problem is that a congressional committee would not be well informed. They would bring in a few parents of teenagers with steroid problems to cover the "think of the children" angle. Then a few sides with self-serving opinions will come in and say their piece. Then we'll get Vince and Co. to answer general questions. A few threats will get thrown in there. I'm sure some of the committee members will refer to the company as the WWF, and we'll get a few Nancy Grace-esqe mistakes. I wish it weren't that way, but that is generally how a congressional committee works. They will not dig to the social roots of the problem.

[Guest KCook]

You're confusing "won't" and "can't." Congress isn't God and they can't just make bad things go away by wishing really hard.

Even if you switch "won't" with "can't," my statement would be the same. Who's to say they can't change anything if they don't try?

 

Anyone with the least familiarity with how Congress works. Al has it pretty much right.

 

I'm in favor of hearings; I don't think they'll take up many resources or do much harm. But Congress simply does not have reality-altering powers. Henry Waxman does not have Hal Jordan's power ring.

[sek69]

I wonder, what would everyone here suggest for ways to fix the business?

[Jingus]

If I had magick genie powers? Create a federal wrestling athletic commission. Put someone like Meltzer in charge of it, someone who knows all the details about all the problems but has no personal stake in the business itself.

 

But... suggesting something more realistic? Hope that Earth enters an alternate-dimensional wormhole where HHH snapped and murdered his family instead of Benoit. (You know that's gotta be what the Scott Keiths of the world dream about these days.)

[Al]

I wonder, what would everyone here suggest for ways to fix the business?

I think a big thing would be some sort of health assistance for wrestlers, post career.

[CodySave]

I think a big thing would be some sort of health assistance for wrestlers, post career.

This, and definitely health insurance during their careers as well. It's ridiculous that wrestlers don't have health insurance when most full-time workers in America get health benefits through their employer. I understand it's much costlier to insure wrestlers, but I'm sure something can be done with the right amount of money and WWE needs to spend as much money as needed.

 

I also want very strict, independently run drug-testing with set punishments that aren't biased towards a wrestler's spot on the card. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't UFC suspend fighters even seperate from the athletic commission suspensions?

 

I wish WWE had a real no-nonsense attitude toward drug use, even to the upper card wrestlers. Admittedly, they've done better in recent years compared to the past, but they could do a hell of a lot better.

 

[EDIT] And I completely forgot to mention an off-season. Take 3-4 months off after Wrestlemania and come back during the summer when all other TV shows are in re-runs. The excitement of the new season would probably help out WWE's ratings quite a bit.

[Dylan Waco]

The only real solution to fix most of the problems associated with wrestling is unionization/some sort of collective bargaining and either a much lighter tour schedule or some sort of "season" like system.

 

Asking dudes to piss in a cup at gunpoint really isn't going to fix alot and that is the only thing Congress has shown any interest in so far.

[Guest KCook]

I agree. The wrestlers need to form a union and negotiate for better working conditions. They also need to stop doing so many drugs they die. The "personal choice" bit is largely a copout because there's blame to be doled out to management as well as labor, but "personal responsibility" isn't a copout.

[Tim Evans]

I'd like to see a off season but the month after Mania, May is a huge month for TV ratings. USA would never allow it.

[Bix]

Sweeps are only for broadcast TV, so it wouldn't affect USA/Raw.