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

Congressional Investigations and Oversight

Chapter 6, Section 2Honors American Government

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

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?

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?

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?

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.

Clemens Before Committee

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.