The Last Word: Chapter 6 Quest Monday

1. FrontPage: Have your OL 6.2 on your desk…turn in your FP to the back box. Take a new FP from front…What is the difference between Congressional investigations and oversight? …phew… The Last Word: Chapter 6 Quest Monday

2. Chapter 6, Section 2 Honors American Government Congressional Investigations and Oversight

3. Congressional Powers • As mentioned yesterday, Congress’ powers can be described differently. • Some are legislative, some are non-legislative • Taxing/spending, or approving treaties • Legislative powers can be either expressed(declaring war, commerce), or implied (with the N+P clause, setting a minimum wage) • **FYI - All non-legislative powers are expressed • The powers of investigation and oversight are not expressed powers… • They’ve come about because of Congress’ need to find out information in order to create good laws and monitor how laws are carried out… • And Congress doesn’t need to make laws to exercise these powers… • So they are “non-legislative”… • This means they are probably best referred to as “Implied Non-Legislative” powers

4. Congressional Oversight • Which group in government does Congress “look over”? • Why do you think they’d want or need to do that? • What constitutional principle is this a good example of ? • Why?

5. Congressional Investigations • Power neither granted nor denied • Not expressed, but implied; non-legislative in a sense, but usually related to lawmaking. • Why would Congress conduct an investigation? • What type of Congressional committees conduct investigations? • During an investigation, what types of activities may occur? • What might be one result of an investigation?

6. Steroids In Baseball… • In 2008, Congress held an investigation to find out if steroids were being used by major league baseball players. • Generally, who might they call in to testify about this issue?

7. Clemens 'Ready' For His HearingWednesday, February 13, 2008 • One of the greatest pitchers of all time, Roger Clemens, has been named by a former trainer as a steroid user in testimony to congressional lawyers. He has defended himself on his Web site, in a television interview, during a news conference in Houston and in one-on-one meetings with members of the House of Representatives. • But the most significant moment for Clemens, comes today, when he will sit in a hearing room on Capitol Hill and face questions under oath about his involvement with performance-enhancing drugs. • In a hearing this morning before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Clemens could be confronted with testimony from Andy Pettitte, long perceived as a friend and confidante, that he discussed use of HGH in 1999 or 2000. • There is still some question, barring a recommendation to the Justice Department, as to where the committee's investigation will go from here.

8. Clemens Before Committee

9. HR 3084Drug Free Sports Act – • Directs the Secretary of the Department of Commerce to issue regulations requiring professional sports associations to adopt and enforce for the random testing of athletes for the use of performance-enhancing substances. • Requires that each athlete be tested five times each year at random intervals during both the season of play and the off-season and without advance notification of the athlete or coaching and training staffs. • Requires the Secretary to prescribe the substances for which each athlete is to be tested, • Directs that the penalty for a positive test result is suspension without pay for one-half of the season of play for the first violation, for one full season of play for the second violation, and permanently for a third violation. • Requires disclosure to the public of the name of any athlete who tests positive. Provides for an opportunity for a prompt hearing and an appeal before an arbiter. • Requires the Secretary to report to the appropriate congressional committees on the effectiveness of, and compliance with, regulations prescribed under this Act.