Selig tells Congress that Giants should have reported Bonds' trainer

WASHINGTON -- Concerns about Barry Bonds' personal trainer should have been reported by the San Francisco Giants to Major League Baseball, commissioner Bud Selig told Congress on Tuesday during a hearing about the sport's steroids era.

Even though no players were present, unlike the theatrical session in the same wood-paneled room in March 2005, the names of career home run leader Bonds, seven-time Cy Young Award winner Roger Clemens and 2002 AL MVP Miguel Tejada all were raised during the 4-hour, 15-minute proceedings prompted by last month's Mitchell Report.

Selig and union leader Donald Fehr sat side-by-side before a House committee friendlier in tone than three years ago yet still concerned about how serious baseball is treating its doping problem.

Committee chairman Henry Waxman opened by calling on the Justice Department to look into whether Tejada lied to committee staffers when questioned in connection to Rafael Palmeiro's perjury case.

Later, he asked Selig whether the Giants should have reported their concerns about Bonds' trainer, Greg Anderson, and the slugger's alleged steroid use to the commissioner's office.

"Of course," Selig responded.

Pressed by Waxman about whether general manager Brian Sabean violated baseball rules by not doing so, Selig said the matter was under review.

Early in the hearing, Waxman turned the focus to former Senate majority leader George Mitchell's report.

"The illegal use of steroids and performance-enhancing drugs was pervasive for more than a decade, Major League Baseball was slow and ineffective in responding to the scandal, and the use of human growth hormone has been rising," said Waxman, a California Democrat.

"The Mitchell Report also makes it clear that everyone in baseball is responsible: the owners, the commissioner, the union and the players."

After Mitchell's two-hour appearance, Selig and Fehr went before the panel. Maryland Democrat Elijah Cummings asked Selig and Fehr if they accepted responsibility for the scandal and whether it was preventable.

"Did we or did I appreciate the depth of the problem? ... The answer is 'No,"' Fehr replied. "It's a failure that we didn't and it's a failure that I didn't."

Selig then followed:. "Do I wish we could have reacted quicker? Should we have? One could make the case. All of us have to take responsibility, starting with me."