NCAA GOVERNMENT RELATIONS REPORT

[Detailed Report, March 2004]

1. Congressional Overview

With the general presidential election scheduled for November 2, 2004, Congressional campaign schedules and increasing political activity will likely influence the pace of the business in the second session of the 108^th Congress. Typically, election-year sessions produce fewer legislative breakthroughs as a result of partisan pressure to vote along party lines. With the November 2004 election currently polling as close as the 2000 election, political compromise will likely be a scarce commodity.

This summer’s Republican National Convention and Democratic National Convention will also place time constraints on legislative initiatives during the second session of the 108^th Congress. The Democrats will hold their convention in Boston on July 26-29 and the Republicans will convene in New York from August 30 until September 2.

Notwithstanding the impediments to the legislative progress, Congress will likely focus on several key issues during the second session including some legislation held over from its first session. Such legislative proposals will likely include a highway and transit bill, tort reform, an update of the 1996 welfare law, a revised energy policy and further considerations of whether to renew the federal assault-weapons ban. Republicans will likely advocate for extending President Bush’s tax cuts, a position that will undoubtedly encounter strong opposition from the Democrats as the federal deficit will remain a prominent issue in the presidential campaign. In conjunction with campaign criticism over prescription drug prices, Democrats will likely attempt to reform the Medicare prescription-drug bill passed in the first session of the 108^th Congress. Congress will also continue to discuss the use of steroids in sports which President Bush mentioned in his State of the Union address. Additionally, Congress will continue to address ever present issues concerning homeland security, the war in Iraq and judicial nominations.

2. State and Federal Regulation of Athlete Agents.

a. State Efforts: The NCAA government relations staff has focused much of its attention on efforts to properly address the harm caused by the unscrupulous acts of athlete agents. The NCAA, in conjunction with the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL), has continued to seek passage of the Uniform Athlete Agent Act (UAAA) as a way to remedy the negative impact that improper athlete agent activity can have on student athletes and institutions of higher education. The UAAA establishes uniform athlete agent registration procedures and imposes criminal, civil and/or administrative penalties against unscrupulous agents.

To date, twenty-eight jurisdictions have passed the UAAA. Currently the UAAA is being actively considered in five state legislatures (Wisconsin, Illinois, Connecticut, Missouri and South Carolina). NCAA staff has revised and updated its Athlete Agent webpage in an effort to accurately track UAAA legislation and simplify the search process for visitors seeking information on the UAAA.

Plan of Action: The NCAA has worked with NCCUSL to develop a state-by-state strategy for passage of the UAAA. NCAA staff will continue to work to get the UAAA passed in remaining states.

b. Federal Efforts: In another attempt to address concerns with unscrupulous athlete agents, Representative Bart Gordon (D-TN) introduced the Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act (SPARTA). H.R. 361 serves as a “federal backstop” in those states that have not yet passed the state model law. SPARTA prohibits athlete agents from attempting to lure student-athletes into signing representation contracts by making false promises or misleading statements and from providing anything of value to the athlete. The bill includes a “Sense of Congress” section which lends its support to passage of the important registration requirements in the UAAA and does not preempt or conflict with the UAAA.

H.R. 361 was passed by the House of Representatives on June 4, 2003. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced a similar bill in the Senate on June 3, 2003. S. 1170 has been referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.

Plan of Action: NCAA staff will continue to educate federal legislators on the importance of passage of athlete agent registration legislation.

3. Internet Gambling.

Gambling on amateur athletics in any form threatens to undermine the integrity of intercollegiate athletics. However, gambling on the Internet is especially troubling due to the unique aspects of this medium which allows gamblers and gambling entities to circumvent United States laws. As a result, the NCAA has continued to support legislative efforts that would address the increasing problem of Internet gambling on amateur athletics.

Representative Spencer Bachus (R-AL) introduced the Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act, which was passed by the House on June 10, 2003. The legislation (H.R. 2143) will require designated payment systems to establish policies and procedures to identify Internet gambling transactions and prevent the acceptance of credit cards or other bank instruments by the online gambling entity.

Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) sponsored a similar version of the legislation (S. 627), which contains the civil and criminal penalties. S. 627 was unanimously approved by the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs on July 31, 2003. The bill has yet to be considered by the full Senate.

Plan of Action: The NCAA and a large coalition that includes professional sports leagues, family values associations, law enforcement, the financial services industry and others will advocate passage of the strongest legislation combating the problem of Internet gambling.

4. Controlled Substances

Steroid precursors and products containing ephedrine pose a grave health risk and eligibility concerns for student-athletes. The NCAA has continued to address concerns with the health and safety of student-athletes by supporting legislative efforts aimed at preventing the sale and consumption of harmful dietary substances.

New legislation which would include steroid precursors within the definition of illegal anabolic steroids has been introduced in the United States House of Representatives and Senate. On March 1, 2004, Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Rep. John Sweeney (R-NY), Rep. Tom Osborne (R-NE) and Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA) partnered to introduce the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004. In addition to updating the list of illegal dangerous substances being marketed as performance “enhancers” the legislation would increase the potential penalties for individuals who traffic them within 1000 feet of any sports facility. H.R. 3866 has been referred to the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Committee on the Judiciary.

This new legislation replaces the focus on a similar bill, H.R. 207, the Anabolic Steroid Precursor Control and Health Education Act. H.R. 207 has been referred to several committees and is currently under consideration in the Subcommittee on Education Reform. On the Senate side, Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) introduced S. 1780, the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2003, which has been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

NCAA government relations staff has worked closely with the Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports, and several other organizations, on legislative efforts intended to classify products containing ephedrine as unsafe and remove dietary supplements containing ephedrine from the market. The staff was very pleased that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a consumer alert, advising consumers to immediately stop buying and using ephedra products. The FDA has published a final rule which declares that dietary supplements containing ephedrine alkaloids present an unreasonable risk of illness or injury. This final rule which will become effective April 16, 2004, will ban the sale of these products.

Plan of Action: NCAA staff will continue to provide relevant information on the negative consequences associated with the use of steroid precursors. The staff anticipates an active role in further promoting the passage of current legislation relating to steroid precursors.

5. Bowl Championship Series

NCAA President Myles Brand testified before the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on the antitrust implications of the college football Bowl Championship Series in September and October 2003. Both committees promised to remain watchful of discussions between the BCS and coalition member institutions. On February 29, 2004, the two groups agreed in principle to changes which will include adding a fifth bowl game.

Plan of Action: NCAA staff will continue to act as an information resource for Members of Congress and their staffs regarding the role of the National Office in these discussions and the recent changes to the post-season football system.

6. Recruiting Practices

On March 11, 2004, the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection held a hearing on recruiting practices nationwide following the recent allegations of improper recruiting practices and criminal violations involving members of the University of Colorado football team. The subcommittee examined this issue despite attempts by Colorado lawmakers to educate Members of Congress about the potential ramifications of Congressional intervention. David Berst, Vice President for Division I and Chair of the NCAA Task Force on Recruiting represented the NCAA on the panel. Other witnesses included: Elizabeth Hoffman, President of University of Colorado, David Williams II, Vice Chancellor of Vanderbilt University, Representative Tom Osborne (R-NE), and Don McPherson, Executive Director, Sports Leadership Institute.

Plan of Action: NCAA staff will provide information to Members of Congress and their staffs regarding NCAA bylaws addressing recruiting guidelines and updates on the newly appointed task force and its recommendations.

7. Other State Issues

California: In February 2003, State Senator Kevin Murray (D-Los Angeles) introduced the Student-Athletes’ Bill of Rights, which would bar in-state colleges and universities from abiding by the NCAA’s rules on scholarships, health insurance coverage and agent relationships and would effectively pull all California colleges and universities out of the NCAA. The California Senate passed SB 193 on May 29, 2003. The Assembly’s Higher Education Committee held a hearing on SB 193 on July 8, 2003 and committee members decided to hold the legislation in their committee and seek additional information.

NCAA staff, California member institutions and associated organizations have collectively opposed SB 193 and have worked to educate California legislators about NCAA rules, the NCAA rulemaking process and potential consequences from passage of this legislation. Members of this coalition conducted personal visits with California legislators and participated in an informational summit hosted by the Pac-10 in October 2003. Through these opportunities the NCAA national office and its coalition members have been very proactive in challenging SB 193.

NCAA proposals addressing provisions of SB 193 were initially approved by the Management Council at its January meeting. These proposals address expanded medical insurance coverage and increased financial aid limits. The Assembly Higher Education Committee will likely await outcome of the April meeting before resuming consideration of SB 193.

Plan of Action: The national office will continue to be very proactive in its efforts to defeat SB 193. We will continue to work with membership to educate California legislators on the potential harms of this legislation and update them on NCAA legislative activity.