Proposals prompt more questions than answers, By: Bill Begley

May 11, 2007

The problem is, it sounds so good.

And, in fact, it isn’t a bad idea.

Testing for steroids would add another layer of protection, another buffer, another filter to ensure the safety of young athletes all across the state.

Certainly, by now, every high school athlete in Texas should know the risks that come with using performance enhancing drugs.

The long-term consequences, when steroids are used and abused, are legion: heart attacks, strokes, liver tumors, kidney failure and serious psychiatric problems.

Who wouldn’t be against that?

No one. Which is why it is such an attractive cause for politicians to champion — and brings us back to Problem No. 1.

But, it’s not No. 1 that makes the whole idea of state-funded testing a campaign-friendly farce.

It’s the myriad problems that aren’t being addressed.

Who will administer the tests?

The UIL? No doubt, Texas’ public school athletics body will do what it generally does — fob off oversight on the school districts. That translates into trickle-down management, meaning overseeing the actual testing will eventually wind up in the laps of already overworked and underpaid coaches.

Will these coaches get trained? In time for the program to begin in the fall, which could happen if either proposal passes?

Who gets tested?

The proposal in the Senate calls for 22,000 of the more than 730,000 student athletes — about 3 percent — to be tested from a pool of schools that would equal no less than 30 percent of the public schools in the state.

Nice wide net, there.

The House proposal — which includes a 25-cent charge added to ticket prices for school sporting events to cover the cost of testing — starts at a 3-percent sampling that can grow or shrink, depending on funding. Shouldn’t the X-factor be the number of positive tests?

Has there been an increase in the number of positive tests, enough to warrant legislative action?

Actually, a Texas A&M study reported recently steroid use by athletes in grades 7 through 12 dropped from 2 percent in 2004 to 1.5 percent in 2006.

What substances will be targeted?

According to UIL figures, 127 schools in the state already test for steroids — at an average cost of $150 per cupful — and more than 400 already test for recreational drug use. The current proposals address only steroid use, which seems shortsighted with the ever-growing menu of illicit substances available, and does not address the issue of the increasing prevalence of human growth hormone.

What’s the cost?

Between $2 and $4 million annually — which would actually put a dent in a number of statewide educational issues, like funding for tutoring or the increasing need for English-as-a-second-language programs.

Ironic, isn’t it, that while the state House wrestles with a proposal to offer tax relief — but only if teachers get a much-deserved and talent-enticing $6,000 raise across the board — the spotlight is on funding a program that pertains to less than 2 percent of student-athletes, and probably a lower percentage of overall students.

Steroids is an issue. It is an issue that can be — and should be — addressed through aggressive education and active community parenting, not legislative interference.

If testing has to begin anywhere, it sounds like there could be a few worthy candidates in Austin.