WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate is nearing final approval of a sweeping sports bill that would create national standards for name, image and likeness contracts in college sports while also clarifying standards for athletes’ healthcare, academic progress and eligibility.
The Protect College Sports Act has received strong bipartisan support during procedural votes on the Senate floor, enough to avoid a filibuster and well above the majority needed for final approval. But Georgia’s Democratic senators are split on the bill. Jon Ossoff, who is seeking reelection this November, is voicing support for the bill, while Raphael Warnock is opposed.
Warnock and other lawmakers, alongside labor unions and organizations representing college athletes, say the legislation does not do enough for athletes at top schools that rake in the cash.
“I’d like to see a whole lot more protections for these athletes,” Warnock said on Tuesday. “I think the bill does a lot better job protecting the NCAA and others in a very lucrative business, and that wealth has been created on the backs of these athletes.”
He was among 21 senators from both parties who voted no in a procedural vote Tuesday to move the bill forward with revisions. Ossoff voted yes in a bipartisan group of 70.
Ossoff said the package is an improvement over the current situation where policies vary by school or athletic conference. He said he has not made up his mind whether he will continue to vote in favor of the bill as it heads toward final passage.
“There’s room for improvement, and there’s still time for some improvement,” the Atlanta Democrat said. “It’s also clear to me that the bill that came out of the Commerce Committee is in our state’s interest and a clear improvement over the status quo, which is deeply broken.”
The University of Georgia has a dominant football program that competes each year for the national title, and Georgia Tech also has a high-profile team. Top high school athletes from the state are recruited by colleges nationwide.
Dozens of colleges, athletic conferences, professional leagues and professional players organizations are backing the legislation. It also has the support of two organizations that provide scholarships to historically Black college and universities’ students: the United Negro College Fund and the Thurgood Marshall College Fund.
The Protect College Sports Act has undergone recent changes in hopes of boosting support from skeptical Democrats and interest groups. And there are dozens more amendments the Senate will consider in the coming days as the legislation moves toward final passage.
Should it pass the Senate, it would still need approval in the House, which stands adjourned until after the November midterm election.
As it currently stands, the bill increases the cap that schools can pay out in direct payments to players to $49 million a year. And it would implement guardrails intended to prevent schools from arranging endorsement agreements with third parties that essentially serve as payments above the cap without any real use of athletes’ name, image or likeness.
The bill would prohibit athletes who signed onto a pro team from returning to college sports and caps agent fees. And it requires schools to meet minimum standards when it comes to providing healthcare and wellness programs to athletes, plus the package sets new graduation and academic progress targets.
The legislation attempts to slow the consolidation of top-tier teams in “Power Four″ conferences, and it caps fees for agents. It also mirrors new NCAA rules setting five years of eligibility for athletes and allowing them to transfer schools only once.
There is also a provision creating a commission to study whether athletes should have a financial stake in the money their schools receive through media rights and other agreements.
Washington Sen. Maria Cantwell, the lead Democrat negotiating the package, said work on the package continues and she hopes revisions introduced this week get more of her colleagues on board.
“This legislation does try to stabilize the college environment today, as it relates to sports, but it also says we need to have a big discussion about how this continues to play out in the future,” she said.
Critics says the bill needs to allow athletes to reap more of the money that schools make and called for protections from scholarship cuts and collective bargaining rights.
The Congressional Black Caucus and NAACP have lobbied against the bill by making a connection between the powerful sports schools, Black athletes on their rosters and recent attempts to gerrymander districts to reduce the number of Black lawmakers.
In an August letter to lawmakers, the NAACP said the big sports schools are in the same states where the attacks on Black representation are happening.
“Congress should not grant new federal benefits, legal protections, or economic advantages to public institutions and athletic conferences that profit from the talent and labor of Black college athletes while remaining silent as their states dilute Black voting power,” the letter said.
About the Author
Keep Reading
The Latest
Featured
