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.
