The NCAA News -- January 1, 2001
Federal relations summary
Following is a summary of legislative highlights
from January through December 2000 prepared by the NCAA federal relations
office. Copies of all documents, bills and correspondence in this report are
available from the federal relations office, One Dupont Circle, N.W., Suite 310,
Washington, D.C. 20036; telephone 202/293-3050.
Gender-equity issues
Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act
(EADA).
In August, the U.S. Department of Education
announced it would not collect 1999 EADA data as was required by the Higher
Education Act amendments of 1998.
In September, a Web-based collection system was
implemented by the U.S. Department of Education to collect the 2000 EADA data.
All coeducational postsecondary institutions with athletics programs were
required to submit the data by October 30, 2000.
The department plans to provide public access
to each institution's data over the Internet later this year or early next year.
In addition, the department will be compiling the data into a report that tracks
trends in gender participation, which will be submitted to Congress
General Accounting Office study on Title
IX.
On May 18, the NCAA met with the General
Accounting Office (GAO) to discuss a Title IX study that is underway. The study
is mandated in part by the Higher Education Act of 1998. In late May, a survey
was sent to all NCAA and NAIA institutions requesting information on any sports
team roster reductions or discontinuation of teams at that institution over the
past five years. A final report will be submitted to Congress in March
2001.
U.S. Department of Justice investigation -- Equal Pay
Act violations.
The U.S. Department of Justice is nearing
completion of the review of EADA forms to identify institutions that may be in
noncompliance with the Equal Pay Act. Department officials are expected to begin
contacting institutions in early 2001. If a violation of the Equal Pay Act is
substantiated, the institution will be asked to enter into negotiations with the
department to remedy the situation.
Republican platform includes language on Title
IX.
In July, the Republican Party platform
adopted at the Republican National Convention included language on Title IX
related to the discontinuation of men's teams as opportunities for women are
expanded.
Lawsuits and federal actions.
On January 27, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled that Louisiana State University athletics programs intentionally violated
Title IX (Pederson v. Louisiana State University).
On February 23, the U.S. Supreme Court remanded
back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit the Smith v. NCAA lawsuit
that attempted to establish the NCAA as a recipient of federal funds for
purposes of application of federal anti-discrimination laws.
The California State University System released
a report on its institutions' compliance with the terms of a 1993 gender-equity
legal settlement. A lawsuit originally was brought by the National Organization
for Women, which alleged that the CSU system had not complied with a state law
that provided for equal opportunities for women athletes. Under the terms of the
1993 legal settlement, the CSU system agreed to improve participation, funding
and scholarships for women's sports. The recent CSU system report found that
schools had increased opportunities by 250 percent over a 13-year period.
In an April 11 letter to the Minnesota State
High School League, the U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights
(OCR) provided a definition of sport for Title IX purposes. The OCR clarified
through the letter that cheerleading does not meet the criteria for a sport.
On June 29, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to
review a case bought by former students of Illinois State University who had
claimed that their rights under Title IX had been violated when the institution
discontinued the sports team in which they competed.
A divided U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals let
stand a lower court decision that denied a monetary award to a female Kentucky
high-school student who had brought a Title IX claim against the Kentucky High
School Athletic Association in 1992. The lawsuit claimed that Kentucky violated
Title IX when it denied the student-athlete the opportunity to participate in
fast-pitch softball before 1992. The circuit court decision was appealed to the
Supreme Court but the Court announced in October that it would not hear the
case. The Supreme Court's decision not to hear the appeal allows the lower court
ruling to stand and validates the circuit court's opinion that plaintiffs in
Title IX cases must show that educational institutions intentionally
discriminated against them to win money damages under the law.
On July 20, a federal court ruled that the
Virginia High School League had discriminated against female athletes when it
scheduled sports events for girls' sports in different seasons depending on the
size of the school. The court awarded $187,000 in damages (Alston v. Virginia
High School League).
In late summer, the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of
Appeals asked for briefs from the parties of the Smith v. NCAA lawsuit. The case
had been remanded back from the U.S. Supreme Court in February. The plaintiffs
in the case are seeking to establish the NCAA as a recipient of federal funds
for purposes of applying federal anti-discrimination laws.
On October 11, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the
Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary Schools Athletic Association case. The
case examines whether the high-school athletics association is considered to be
a state actor under the Equal Protection Clause and is thus subject to federal
laws, including Title IX.
A federal judge granted class-action
certification to a group of parents suing the Boone County School District in
Kentucky under Title IX. The parents allege that the school district failed to
provide female students with the same athletics opportunities as male students
including unequal funding, access to travel, equipment, coaching scheduling,
training and publicity. The judge's decision to allow all female students who
had ever attended Boone County Schools to participate in the lawsuit greatly
expands the numbers of students who may join in the claim of discrimination. The
families are seeking a court order to prohibit the district from future
discriminatory practices, as well as attorneys' fees and an admission of
guilt.
On October 12, a federal court ordered Duke
University to pay $2 million in punitive damages and $1 million in compensatory
damages to a former female placekicker on the Duke football team. The
student-athlete alleged that Duke violated Title IX when it cut her from the
football team in 1994. She maintained that the head football coach dismissed her
from the team because of her gender. Duke claimed that the student-athlete's
gender did not influence the decision to cut her from the team but instead the
decision was made based on her skill level. On October 26, Duke filed post-trial
motions to appeal the ruling.
Higher education issues
Fair labor practices in the manufacturing of
licensed apparel.
On February 15, a sit-in at the University of
Pennsylvania ended as students protested their institution's affiliation with
the Fair Labor Association (FLA), an organization composed of manufacturing
companies and the federal government. The students were demanding better working
conditions in factories that produce licensed apparel bearing the names of
colleges and universities and did not believe the FLA went far enough to ensure
protections for workers.
On February 16, University of Michigan students
occupied a dean's office as part of an effort to focus attention on their
efforts to combat the issue of unfair labor practices in manufacturing of
college-licensed apparel.
American Council on Education President Stan
Ikenberry sent a letter to the CEOs of its 1,800 member institutions asking for
their support of the Fair Labor Association.
On March 6, Duke University announced that it
had withdrawn licensing rights from 28 companies that produce university apparel
because the companies would not disclose the locations of their
factories.
On April 5, students were arrested during a
sit-in at the University of Kentucky's administration building. The students
were protesting the institution's affiliation with the Fair Labor Association
and urged that it alternatively join the Worker's Rights Consortium
instead.
On April 7, a newly formed student-backed
organization called the Workers Rights Consortium held its first meeting to
discuss issues related to sweatshop labor to produce college apparel
items.
In April, Nike Chairman Phil Knight withdrew
financial backing for the University of Oregon's planned renovation of the
athletics stadium. Knight reportedly based his action in part on the
university's decision to join the Workers Rights Consortium. Later, Nike
discontinued corporate sponsorship agreements with the University of Michigan
and Brown University.
On June 20, university members of the Fair
Labor Association requested that the locations of factories of the 11 apparel
manufacturing members be disclosed to the public.
In July, the Fair Labor Association announced
that it would begin monitoring factories in foreign countries where goods and
apparel are manufactured for American Markets.
In early September, 200 academicians issued a
letter criticizing universities that had joined two anti-sweatshop groups, the
Fair Labor Association and the Worker Rights Consortium, without first
consulting with experts who have studied such issues as wages and the cultural
mores of other countries. The letter charged that universities had joined the
groups in response to student concerns and did not take into consideration
international aspects of the problem.
In late September, a report focusing on the
working conditions of factories that produce apparel for several universities
was released. The report, commissioned in summer 1999, was sponsored jointly by
Harvard University; Ohio State University; the University of California,
Berkeley; the University of Michigan; and the University of Notre Dame and
examined the working conditions in seven countries, including the United States.
PricewaterhouseCoopers conducted the site visits that led to the report's
conclusions. The report found that while some factories employed good practices,
the majority operated under abusive conditions and did not honor the codes of
conducts established by the universities.
Student Right-to-Know Act/graduation data.
The NCAA released its 2000 Graduation-Rates
Report for the membership in mid-November. For the first time, the reports were
made available on a CD-ROM. The U.S. Department of Education approved the use of
the computer disc in a June 2000 letter to the NCAA. The CD-ROM was mailed to
all NCAA member institutions, as well as all high schools and junior colleges in
the country. It addition, it was be sent to the media and the U.S. Department of
Education. This mailing satisfies NCAA member institutions' requirement under
the federal Student Right-to-Know Act to provide this data to the high-school
coaches and guidance counselors of recruited student-athletes. If schools are
unable to use the CD-ROM, a paper version of the report will be made available.
Fiscal-year 2001 funding -- Pell Grants increased in
2001-02.
In the waning hours of the 106th Congress,
appropriators came to an agreement to fund the fiscal-year 2001 Labor, Health
and Human Services Education funding measure. The final conference agreement
included an increase in the maximum Pell Grant award from $3,300 to
$3,750.
U.S. Supreme Court rules on high-school football
prayer.
On June 19, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that
public schools may not begin football games with organized prayer, even when
recited by a student.
Gambling issues
Internet Gambling Prohibition Act.
On March 9, the House Judiciary Committee on
Crime conducted a hearing on the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1999 (H.R.
3125). Similar legislation (S. 692) was adopted by a unanimous vote in the full
Senate in November 1999.
On April 6, the House Judiciary Committee
passed H.R. 3125, as amended, by a vote of 21-8.
On June 25, the House Commerce Subcommittee on
Telecommunications, Trade and Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 3125.
The Commerce Committee was granted joint referral but did not act on the
legislation.
On June 20, the House Banking Committee held a
hearing on H.R. 4419, the Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act. If adopted,
the legislation would prohibit the use of credit cards and other electronic
banking instruments in placing bets over the Internet.
On June 28, the House Banking Committee
approved H.R. 4419. However, no further action was taken during the 106th
Congress.
On July 17, the House voted, 245-159, in
support of H.R. 3125, the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act. Despite garnering
the majority of votes (61 percent), the bill was defeated since it failed to
obtain the two-thirds support required by a special voting rule that was invoked
in hopes of expediting the legislation's passage.
On July 27, House Judiciary Committee Chairman
John Conyers, D-Michigan, introduced H.R. 5020, the Comprehensive Internet
Gambling Prohibition Act of 2000. This legislation, supported by the U.S
Department of Justice, was introduced as an alternative to H.R. 3125. No action
was taken on this bill by the 106th Congress.
Federal legislation to ban all legal gambling on
amateur and college sports.
On February 1, a press conference was held on
Capitol Hill to announce the introduction of federal legislation to ban all
betting on college sporting events in every state (S. 2021 and H.R. 3575 both
with Judiciary Committee jurisdiction). Lead sponsors of S. 2021 were Sens. Sam
Brownback, R-Kansas, and Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont. Lead sponsors of the House
legislation were Reps. Lindsay Graham, R-South Carolina, and Dan Roemer,
D-Indiana. An existing federal law in place since 1992 (P.L. 102-559) prohibits
gambling on professional and amateur sporting events in the U.S. except in those
states that allowed it before enactment. Nevada is the only state that allows
gambling on college sports.
On February 11, the NCAA sent a letter to the
Nevada Gaming Control Board asking that NCAA members institutions individually
be allowed to petition to have their institution's names removed from the
gambling boards in Nevada's sports books. On March 20, a response was received
denying the request.
On March 1, legislation was introduced in the
House and Senate (S. 2050 and H.R. 3800) by members of the Nevada congressional
delegation. The legislation called for the study of the illegal gambling on
college sports. The legislation was seen as a diversionary tactic to deflect
attention away from legal sports gambling in Nevada.
On March 10, a letter was sent to all members
of the House and Senate from 70 coaches at NCAA member institutions endorsing S.
2021 and H.R. 3575. Another letter signed by 40 NCAA affiliated organizations
and other groups was sent to Capitol Hill March 3.
On March 29, a hearing was held on gambling on
amateur sporting events by the Senate Commerce Committee. The NCAA was
represented by Charles Wethington, president of the University of
Kentucky.
On April 3, the Amateur Sports Integrity Act
(S. 2340) was introduced to redirect the college sports gambling legislation
under the jurisdiction of the Senate Commerce Committee.
On April 13, the Senate Commerce Committee
adopted S. 2340, as amended, by a vote of 18-2.
On June 13, the House Judiciary Committee
conducted a hearing on H.R. 3575. The NCAA was represented by Graham B. Spanier,
president of Pennsylvania State University.
On September 13, the House Judiciary Committee
considered H.R. 3575, the College Sports Integrity Act. The bill was reported
favorably by a vote of 19-9, mostly along party lines with Republicans voting in
favor and Democrats opposing the measure.
On October 1, Brian Sandoval, chairman of the
Nevada Gaming Commission, announced proposals for consideration by the
commission that would alter policies regarding sports gambling in Nevada.
Sandoval indicated that the proposals were in response to pressure from Congress
related to sports gambling on amateur sporting events. Public hearings were held
on the proposals in December.
The Senate bill's sponsors continued to work
with Senate leadership to schedule the bill for floor debate up to the final
days of the 106th Congress. However, these attempts proved unsuccessful.
Procedural objections by the Nevada senators derailed these attempts.
In the House, leadership made it clear, upon
the introduction of the legislation, that H.R. 3575 would not be considered
during the 106th Congress. No efforts to schedule the legislation for a floor
vote were made.
On November 2, the NCAA Executive Committee
approved a proposal to renew the Association's efforts to support the adoption
of federal legislation to prohibit gambling on college sports in Nevada with the
commencement of the 107th Congress in January.
National Youth Sports Program Foundation receives
increase in fiscal-year 2001 funding.
In the final hours of the 106th Congress, the
House and Senate approved a fiscal-year 2001 appropriations conference agreement
that provided $16 million in funding for the NYSP Foundation, a $1 million
increase over fiscal-year 2000 funding. The NCAA, along with other corporate
partners, provides funding to this independent foundation that serves youth in a
summer camp environment.
Consumer Product Safety Commission considers review
of baseball bat standards.
On August 7, the NCAA submitted comments to
the Consumer Product Safety Commission related to the commission's consideration
of the issuance of a performance standard for non-wood baseball bats. The
request for comments was triggered by a petition received earlier by the
commission.
The commission received eight responses
(including the one from the NCAA) to its request for comments on whether the
commission should develop a standard of performance for baseball bat safety. The
commission staff will be reviewing the material through February, at which point
they will present their findings to the full commission. The commission will
make a determination on whether to proceed with the development of a bat
standard after the staff presentation.
Athlete-agent issues at the state level.
In 1996, the National Conference of
Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) agreed to form a drafting committee
and begin work on developing a uniform state athlete-agent law. The committee,
consisting of 11 appointed commissioners, met several times a year from 1997-00.
The drafting sessions also were attended by agents, representatives of the
professional players associations, NCAA staff and other interested parties. All
groups were encouraged to provide input.
On August 2, the NCCUSL formally adopted the
Uniform Athlete Agent Act (UAAA), a model state law regulating athlete agents,
after three years of work. In December, the NCAA Executive Committee pledged its
support on behalf of the Association.
In September, the NCAA began coordinating an
extensive effort that will call on each of its member institutions to urge their
state legislators to quickly adopt the UAAA. The NCAA will be working closely
with the NCCUSL to identify sponsors of the legislation and to coordinate an
effective lobbying effort. In early December, a briefing packet was sent to all
chief executive officers of NCAA institutions.
In 2000, three states, Florida, Georgia and
Ohio, amended their existing athlete-agent statutes by adding additional
provisions.
Copyright and trademark issues
Streaming of video programming.
On February 8, U.S. District Court Judge Donald
Ziegler issued a preliminary injunction against iCraveTV prohibiting the Web
site from retransmitting live network broadcasts on the Internet if U.S. viewers
can access the material. The Toronto-based site had been retransmitting 17
network TV broadcast from Toronto and Buffalo over the Internet. The NFL, NBA,
10 programmers, Hollywood movie studios and four networks sued iCraveTV. The
copyright owners argued that iCraveTV was stealing their programming in
violation of U.S. copyright law. Later, the copyright owners agreed to cease
further legal action in return for iCrave's commitment to shut down its TV
over-the-Internet venture.
Copyright owners, including the NCAA, formed a
Washington, D.C.-based coalition called the Copyright Assembly. This group,
composed of organizations from the music, motion picture, broadcast and sports
industries, will focus on ensuring that Congress continues to protect and
provide for owners retaining control of their own copyright in the digital
age.
On February 16, the House Subcommittee on
Telecommunications, Trade and Consumer Protection held a hearing focusing on
video programming "streamed" over the Internet and the recent iCraveTV.com case.
In addition to the iCraveTV case, the hearing explored the issue of whether
congressional action was necessary to address issues related to video streaming
over the Internet. The NCAA was represented by David Boren, president of the
University of Oklahoma.
In February, copyright owners from the movie,
music and sports industries joined together in sending a letter to Congress
urging legislators to preserve copyright on the Internet. Copyright owners were
concerned that Congress might attempt to pass legislation creating a compulsory
license (payment of a fixed fee for the right to use copyrighted material) for
businesses seeking to retransmit copyrighted programming on the Internet.
On June 15, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on
Courts and Intellectual Property held a hearing to explore Internet broadcasting
of copyrighted programming. Representatives from Major League Baseball and the
Motion Picture Association testified on their efforts to provide consumers with
new video programming options on the Internet while also calling for continued
protection of copyright in cyberspace.
NCAA uses new arbitration process to protect
unauthorized use of trademarks in domain names on the Internet.
The NCAA has begun to use the newly
implemented Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). The UDRP arbitration
process allows for a cost-effective means to the resolution of domain-name
disputes. The NCAA already has had dozens of unauthorized domain names that
included NCAA trademarks transferred back to the Association. The NCAA also has
obtained the voluntary transfer of numerous other domain names containing NCAA
marks through its trademark enforcement efforts.
In the NCAA's most recent case, the
arbitrator issued a confusing decision. In a case brought against a Costa Rican
resident who had used NCAA trademarks in registering 32 domain names, the
arbitrator ordered the transfer of 20 domain names to the NCAA but left 12 of
the domain names in the possession of the registrant.
In the November 28 decision, the arbitrator
recognized that 20 of the domain names had been registered in bad faith and that
the registrant had no rights or legitimate interests to use NCAA trademarks as
part of its domain names. However, the arbitrator ruled that the 12 domain names
that contained both NCAA trademarks and references to gambling were to remain
with the registrant since "providing information or access to gambling on NCAA
games qualifies as the bona fide offering of goods or services and thus
constitutes a legitimate use." This decision conflicts with a number of opinions
issued by other arbitrators. The NCAA is considering taking further legal action
in order to halt the further use of these 12 domain names.
Tax issues -- corporate sponsorship
In 1997, Congress adopted legislation that
provided favorable treatment for nonprofits, including colleges and
universities, regarding the treatment of unrelated business income as it applies
to corporate sponsorship payments. On March 1, 2000, the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) issued proposed regulations related to the passage of the 1997
legislation.
On May 30, the NCAA joined a coalition of NCAA
institutions in submitting detailed comments on the proposed regulations. The
NCAA also sent a separate letter to the IRS outlining its concerns.
On June 21, the IRS held a hearing on the
proposed regulations. A representative from the NCAA coalition testified at the
hearing, along with other representatives of the higher education community. The
higher education community representatives who testified primarily voiced their
opposition to proposed change in the tax treatment of exclusivity sponsorship
agreements (for example, exclusive pouring rights to beverage companies). The
IRS will be reviewing the written testimony submitted and the oral testimony
given at the hearing before issuing the final regulations.
Performance-enhancing drugs in sports
competition
On April 13, the Senate Commerce Committee
approved legislation (S. 2340) that included language authorizing the funding of
grant programs to provide for research on new detection methods for certain
athletic-related performance-enhancing drugs. The legislation would authorize $4
million annually for the development of new detection research on certain
performance enhancing substances banned by the IOC, USOC, NCAA, NFL, NBA and
MLB. In addition, the legislation also provides annually funding for the
development of new sports drug education/prevention programs for use in high
schools and colleges.
Amateurism issues
On March 21, the NCAA received a letter from
Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-New York, expressing concern about the NCAA's
investigation of a St. John's University (New York) basketball player and other
athletes who were investigated this academic year for violation of the NCAA's
amateurism rules. In the letter, Towns indicated that he was troubled by the
NCAA's interpretation of the amateurism bylaws and suggested that federal
intervention may soon be required. The NCAA responded on April 25. No further
action was taken.
On March 29, Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-New York,
introduced the "Collegiate Athletics Due Process Act of 2000," H.R. 4117. The
legislation is intended to provide student-athletes with legal due process in
any NCAA or university investigation when the student-athlete is alleged to have
violated NCAA amateurism rules.