Michael Phelps sat before a congressional panel on Tuesday, no longer a silent superstar whistling past the Olympics doping problem. For years, the most-decorated Olympian ever seemed content to pretend the controversy swirling in sports was not his problem. Best to duck his head, mumble nothings and dive into the pool.



But the older, wiser Phelps who found his voice in Rio has kept talking into retirement. The sticky subject he always avoided is no longer taboo. He seems to want to be swimming’s elder statesman at 31 and being an elder statesman means taking stands. He is also a first-time father, with a son born last year, and for that reason too he found himself sitting before a house energy and commerce subcommittee demanding real reform in the anti-doping world.

“I don’t know how I would talk to my son about doping in sports,” he told the committee. “For me that’s probably a question I would be asked. I don’t know how I would answer that.”

Phelps’ opening statement to a house energy and commerce subcommittee.

And so Tuesday he asked for change in the way doping is policed. The panel of legislators before him holds little authority over the World Anti-Doping Agency aside from giving it $2m each year. The point of his being there wasn’t to beg for anti-doping laws, but to keep shining a light on the toothless response to doping violations by the IOC and individual sports organizations even in light of damning evidence like last December’s McLaren Report that detailed Russia’s state-sponsored doping program.

“If we allow our confidence in fair play to erode, we will undermine the power of sport and the goals and dreams of future generations,” Phelps said. “The time to act is now.”

These were strong words from a man for whose boldest public declarations have usually been buy Dell or eat Subway or wear Under Armour, and he clearly dazzled the committee members who nodded their heads in a rare show of bipartisan unity. His complaints of constantly being tested by the United States Anti-Doping Agency while some international competitors weren’t held to the same standards in their countries made a connection with his new audience. So too did his declaration that he has never competed “in a level playing field” outside the US.

Phelps is the best person Usada’s chief executive officer Travis Tygart could have dragged to Capitol Hill on his crusade to have severe penalties placed on Russia and to make Wada independent of the IOC. Tygart told congress what he has been saying for some time: as long as the IOC continues to load Wada’s leadership committees with their own members focused on ducking the “bad PR” that comes with positive doping tests or in protecting their own state-sponsored doping programs then Wada will be ineffective.

“It’s the fox guarding the henhouse,” Tygart repeatedly told the subcommittee.

He said the IOC’s failure to ban Russia from the 2016 Rio Games after evidence of their doping program in the London emerged might be the reformers’ best opportunity to bring real authority to anti-doping organizations. By ducking a decision on punishing Russia and asking the 28 individual sports federations to make that call instead, the IOC had exposed just how flawed the system has become.

“This is our moment,” he told congress.

His timing couldn’t be better. While American legislators can’t control the IOC they can wield pressure. On Tuesday the committee members appeared to be well-informed about Russia’s anti-doping program and had pointed questions for the unfortunate IOC official sent by his bosses to defend them. That official, Richard Budgett, the IOC’s medical and science director, wore a black suit jacket with the IOC’s Olympic rings insignia on the left pocket, and tried to placate Tygart, Phelps and the attacking committee members by saying the IOC wants Wada’s testing program to be independent.

Prodded by a skeptical Tygart, the legislators pushed Budgett on whether that meant the IOC would also pull their officials from Wada’s leadership – essentially removing the fox from the henhouse door. His initial stand about the IOC’s independence softened in the face of their questions. After the hearing he told reporters he couldn’t speak for the intentions of his superiors.

But even this slight shift in the IOC’s stance shows the impact of Tygart’s relentless pursuit of change. Tygart later said he believed the committee’s pressure forced the IOC to alter their approach. He clearly made points with the legislators when he pointed out that Wada is severely underfunded with a roughly $30m budget and he had many of the lawmakers nodding when he said the IOC could instantly show a true commitment to anti-doping by taking $100m and setting it in a blind trust for anti-doping efforts.

In the past, Tygart and other reformers might not have had much traction in Washington. Americans only tend to be focused on Olympic sports in the weeks before and during an Olympics. Even after US swimmer Lilly King called out her Russian rival Yulia Efimova for doping in Rio, outrage over Russia’s state program would have been short-lived. But Washington has a keen interest in Russian scandals these days. Evidence of untoward behavior by that country is going to draw strong reactions in a town still skeptical of Russia’s role in the presidential election.

“I’m outraged Russian officials cheated to influence the outcome of the Olympics,” California congressman Raul Ruiz said. “That sounds familiar doesn’t it?”

The IOC has to know it can’t count on the US’s short attention for Olympic sports this time. It’s been six months since the Rio Games ended and a roomful of American legislators want to know why Russia wasn’t banned from those Olympics. Now, with the greatest Olympic champion making his strongest statements yet about testing and punishing dopers, the IOC is facing more heat from the US, just as it looks like Los Angeles will land the 2024 Olympics almost by default.

Tuesday’s Phelps was much like the Rio Phelps, clear-minded in his purpose. He stunned many of the committee members when he said he had to inform testing agencies of his daily schedule in order to be available for surprise, out-of-competition tests. He said he was tested 13 times leading up to Rio and contrasted that with the 1,900 athletes from other countries who Tygart said had no record of tests.

“It’s taken 20 years to get to this point,” he told the subcommittee, referring to the foot-dragging on doping by Olympic organizations. “How long will it take to go forward? This is something that has to happen now.”

Later, Phelps’s longtime coach Bob Bowman tweeted “I have never been prouder of Michael Phelps than I am today. Well done!”

Suddenly the anti-doping movement has an unlikely voice, one so strong he made a room of Republicans and Democrats clap as one. Michael Phelps might have moved congress for a day but will it be enough to mend what one of those congressmen, Oregon’s Greg Walden called “a broken system?”

Or are the cracks too big for even the Olympics biggest winner to fill?