Following is a report of federal activities since September 1 affecting the NCAA membership. This report was 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 1998, amendments were adopted to the federal Higher Education Act requiring all coeducational postsecondary institutions that receive federal funds and have athletics programs to report gender-specific data on their athletics programs to the federal government annually on or before October 30. A Web-based system has been implemented by the U.S. Department of Education to collect the data.

Known as the EADA [Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act, section 485 (g) of the Higher Education Act of 1965], the Act first was adopted in 1994 to provide Congress and the public with a snapshot of collegiate athletics participation by gender. Since 1996, the EADA has required that data be reported to the public. In addition to the new requirement that data be reported to the Department of Education by October 30, this year's report also requires for the first time that data on revenues and expenses associated with athletics programs be reported as part of the EADA report.

Once the data are received, the department is charged with providing a report to Congress on aggregate gender trends in intercollegiate athletics based on the reports submitted by individual institutions. The department expects to submit this report to Congress by December 24. The 1998 amendments also require the department to make institutional specific reports available to the public. The department plans to provide public access to each institution's data through the Internet later this year. As in the past, by October 15 of each year, institutions remain responsible for making their own data available to the public, upon request.

Supreme Court hears case involving high-school athletics association's role as state actor and the application of Title IX.

On October 11, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary Schools Athletic Association case. This 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 similar case involving the Michigan High School Athletic Association also has been appealed to the Supreme Court. The Brentwood case involves the recruitment of middle school student-athletes and examines whether the Tennessee Secondary Schools Athletic Association is a private, voluntary membership organization consisting of secondary schools or, as Brentwood Academy alleges, a state regulatory body for the state's secondary schools' athletics programs.

U.S. Supreme Court lets stand lower court Title IX ruling in Kentucky high- school case.

Earlier this year, a divided 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.

Class-action certification granted to female students in Kentucky high- school Title IX case.

A federal judge has 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 that 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.

Court awards former Duke University female place-kicker $3 million in damages in Title IX lawsuit.

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 place-kicker 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 sex. Duke claimed that the student-athlete's gender did not influence the decision to cut her from the team, but that instead the decision was made based on her skill level as compared to the other place-kickers on the team. On October 26, Duke filed posttrial motions to appeal the ruling.

Republican platform includes language on Title IX related to the discontinuation of men's teams as opportunities for women are expanded.

The Republican platform adopted at the Republican National Convention in July included language on Title IX related to the discontinuation of men's teams as opportunities for women are expanded. The precise language is as follows:

"We also support a reasonable approach to Title IX that seeks to expand opportunities for women without adversely affecting men's teams."

U.S. Department of Justice nearing completion of EADA form review.

In spring 1999, the U.S. Department of Justice sent letters to all NCAA Division I institutions asking for a copy of that institution's most recent Equity in Athletics Disclosure form. Since that time, department staff members have been reviewing the forms to determine if the forms suggest that certain institutions are violating the Equal Pay Act through unequal payment of salaries to athletics personnel. Specifically, the department is looking for information on the forms that indicates a discrepancy between salaries paid to men and women holding similar jobs. department staff have notified the NCAA that they are nearing completion of the review of forms and will be making a recommendation to department officials in the upcoming months. Following approval by department officials, institutions will be notified. If an institution is identified as having a possible violation, that institution will be given an opportunity to provide additional data before any formal complaint is made. 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.

Higher education issues

Fair labor practices in manufacturing licensed apparel.

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. It 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.

However, the student-run group, United Students' Against Sweatshops (with chapters on 175 campuses), called for campuses not to determine whether fair labor standards are being met based on monitoring by the Pricewaterhouse firm. The students claim that Pricewaterhouse's assessment of compliance is made largely by interviewing the management staff at the various factories. The students claim the Pricewaterhouse firm overlooked safety and wage violations of the footwear and apparel companies they visited.

In early September, 200 academicians issued a letter criticizing universities who 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.

The NCAA will release its 2000 graduation-rates reports for the membership in mid-November. For the first time, the reports will be made available on a CD-ROM rather than in a book. Reports for all three divisions will be contained on a single disc. This report will cover the six-year graduation rates for the general student body and student-athletes who received athletics aid who entered as first-time, full-time freshmen in 1993. The CD-ROM will be mailed to all NCAA member institutions, as well as all high schools and junior colleges in the country. It addition, it will be sent to the media. 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.

In the waning hours of the 106th Congress, appropriators continued to argue over the final agreement to fund the fiscal-year 2001 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education funding measure. The bill is expected to included an increase in the maximum Pell Grant award, but it is not known how great the increase will be until appropriators reach an agreement on the final legislation.

Senate adopts resolution recognizing the accomplishments of the 1951 University of San Francisco football team and acknowledging unfair treatment of the team based on racial prejudices.

On July 27, the Senate approved, by unanimous consent, S. Res. 346. The resolution was introduced by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-California, and acknowledges that the undefeated and untied 1951 University of San Francisco football team suffered a grave injustice by not being invited to any postseason bowl game due to racial prejudices that prevailed at the time. The resolution is intended to provide the appropriate recognition for the surviving members of the team.

According to media reports, Boxer became involved at the urging of Kristine Clark, the author of an upcoming book about the unsung team. After finishing the 1951 season undefeated, San Francisco was not invited to a prestigious bowl game because it had two African-American players. The team was considered by one bowl game but was told that the invitation was contingent on leaving the two African-American players at home. The team declined the offer.

Gambling issues

Internet Gambling Prohibition Act -- last-minute efforts prove unsuccessful -- House and Senate sponsors expected to re-introduce legislation in 2001.

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 failed to obtain the two-thirds support required by a special process that would have expedited the legislation's passage. Efforts by Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Virginia, to bring the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act for a vote on the House floor in the remaining days of Congress were unsuccessful. In November 1999, the Senate unanimously approved a similar bill sponsored by Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Arizona. The adjournment of the 106th Congress means that that the legislation must be re-introduced again in both the Senate and the House in 2001.

The House bill was strongly opposed by a number of special-interest groups, including the Internet gambling industry, Internet lottery proponents, Native American gambling interests, libertarians and those arguing against a provision related to the treatment of parimutuel betting. These groups invested a significant amount of money to fund their lobbying efforts. Some groups even resorted to unethical tactics in their attempts to block the bill. On October 19, 2000, a Florida lobbyist admitted he forged the signature of Gov. Jeb Bush, R-Florida, on a letter urging a vote against a bill to ban online casinos. Under an agreement with prosecutors and the governor's office, the lobbyist agreed to participate in a pre-trial intervention program for first-time offenders under which he will perform community service and be on probation for 18 months.

The NCAA, along with other professional sports leagues, family groups and the National Association of Attorneys General, have strongly supported the passage of Internet gambling legislation for the past three years. While Goodlatte and Kyl have yet to announce their intentions, both are expected to introduce their bills again at the start of the 107th Congress. Meanwhile, the Internet gambling industry continues to grow. In 1997, there were fewer than 50 Internet gambling sites, and just three years later there are more than 800. Also, the legislation may face even greater opposition as it is expected that the casino industry may now be reversing its position and entering the Internet gambling business in order to take advantage of this lucrative market.

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.

A last-minute push by Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nevada, to derail the bill had some impact on the final vote. Berkeley, whose congressional district includes Las Vegas, is embroiled in a tough re-election bid. Further complicating the political dynamics, the balance of power in the House hinges on a few key elections, including Berkley's Nevada seat. Some Democrats who had been vocal in their support for the legislation (including the ranking Democrat, John Conyers, D-Michigan) voted against the bill or left the room during the vote. Three Democrats and all the Republicans on the committee voted in favor. Most claimed that this legislation would not address the real problem of illegal betting.

During the discussion on the bill, two amendments were offered, one to expand the legislation to include the professional sports leagues. This amendment was withdrawn after Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, a strong supporter of the legislation, said she would oppose the bill if the pro sports leagues were added. The second amendment was offered by Conyers to substitute a study for the prohibition language. It failed by a vote of 17-11.

The committee report (House Report 106-903), along with dissenting views, was filed September 27, 2000.

Floor consideration illusive as Congress adjourns.

Following unanimous approval by the Senate Commerce Committee on April 13, S. 2340, the Amateur Sports Integrity Act, was cleared for Senate floor consideration. Similarly, the House version of the legislation, H.R. 3575, was adopted on September 13 and cleared for action in the House.

The Senate bill's sponsors, John McCain, R-Arizona, and Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, continued to work with Senate leadership to schedule the bill for floor debate up to the final days of the 106th Congress. Several attempts to bring the bill to the floor for a vote in the form of an amendment or a freestanding bill in the six months following adoption by the Commerce Committee proved unsuccessful. Procedural objections by the Nevada senators derailed those attempts.

In the House, leadership made it clear upon introduction of the legislation that H.R. 3575 would not be considered during the 106th Congress. No efforts to schedule the legislation were made.

Nevada Gaming Commission announces proposals to limit sports gambling in Nevada.

On October 1, Brian Sandoval, chair of the Nevada Gaming Commission, announced proposals for consideration by the commission that would alter policies regarding sports gambling. Sandoval indicated that the proposals were in response to pressure from Congress related to sports gambling on amateur sporting events. The proposals if adopted would:

* Eliminate all gambling on high-school and Olympic sporting events.

* Limit gambling on college sporting events to $550 per person, per event.

* Allow gambling on Nevada's college sports teams (previously not allowed).

* Create a "black book" of individuals who would be barred from betting on college sporting events.

* Prohibit betting by student-athletes and coaches on games in which they are participants.

Sandoval admitted that his proposals are intended to protect the Nevada sports books from the federal legislation, which is expected to be adopted next year. The $550 limit, according to Sandoval, would make it more difficult to use the sports books to layoff bets from illegal bookies around the country, resulting in millions laundered through the sports books on an annual basis. In addition, the $550 limit would make the sports books less attractive to individuals who want to use them in point-shaving and game fixing schemes.

On October 12, the NCAA issued a press release stating that the NCAA opposes all gambling on college sports, no matter what the dollar amount. In addition, the press release states although Nevada is making steps in the right direction, it isn't enough. The NCAA is pleased that Nevada recognizes the role they play in promoting illegal activity but it believes their proposals are merely an attempt to derail the federal legislation.

On October 26, the commission announced that the proposals on amateur sports gambling would be considered over the coming months through a series of hearings. Press accounts indicate that the NCAA will be invited to appear before the commission when it meets again November 16. However, no formal invitation has been received.

The sponsors of the federal legislation have publicly stated that they will support renewed efforts next year to adopt the legislation, regardless of any action taken by the Nevada Gaming Commission.

NCAA Executive Committee approves moving forward with legislation during the 107th Congress.

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 when the 107th Congress is convened.

Miscellaneous

Consumer Product Safety Commission considers review of bat standards -- decision on standard to be made in February.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission received eight responses (including one from the NCAA) to its July 2000 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 after the staff presentation.

NCAA prepares for efforts to adopt the Uniform Athlete- Agent Act in all 50 states.

On August 2, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) adopted the Uniform Athlete-Agent Act (UAAA), a model state law regulating athlete agents. In 1996, the 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 and an NCAA staff liaison. All groups were encouraged to provide input.

The UAAA proposes a uniform approach to state regulation of athlete agents, while providing protection and important consumer information for student-athletes and educational institutions. Presently, there are 28 different state laws regulating athlete agents. A number of state statutes are poorly drafted and many state requirements are largely ignored by agents. One of the primary purposes of the UAAA is to ensure that athlete agents register with the states where they conduct business. This is achieved through a reciprocal registration process that is designed to eliminate some of the registration burdens imposed on athlete agents and result in a greater number of registrants in each state.

The NCAA already has begun coordinating an extensive effort that will call on each of its member institutions to urge 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. A briefing packet will be sent to all chief executive officers of NCAA institutions in November.