[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 30 (Thursday, March 17, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 17, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
       THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE'S INQUIRY INTO PROFESSIONAL SPORTS

  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, on Monday, March 21, 1994, Senator 
Metzenbaum will open the Judiciary Committee's broad inquiry into 
professional sports when he convenes a field hearing in Tampa Bay, FL. 
Professional sports leagues in the United States are accorded special 
treatment--a treatment that is not necessarily undeserved. Spectator 
sports have provided fans with entertainment for the family, role 
models for the children, and symbols around which to rally civic 
spirit. I know from my own personal experience with the Wilmington Blue 
Rocks Single-A baseball team that cities and towns with a sports team 
are all the wealthier for having a place to come together as a 
community to pull for the home team. In exchange, the fans not only 
have paid admission to attend the games, but have provided various 
other financial and legal incentives not normally available to other 
businesses.
  Regrettably, Mr. President, the owners and players of professional 
sports today have forgotten that in return for the special status they 
have been accorded, they have obligations to their communities that are 
more than making a profit or signing a multi-million dollar contract. 
The fans are owed more because the fans have been asked to do more.
  ``Fans as taxpayers'' provide their financial support for the often 
massive infrastructure that is needed by a professional team--which can 
include the construction and maintenance of a stadium, parking lots, 
roads, sewers, utilities, and public transportation.
  ``Fans as voters'' provide exemptions and exceptions in their laws, 
municipal regulations and zoning requirements that relate to television 
contract rights, neighborhood curfews, and variances.
  ``Fans as fans,'' after providing support as taxpayers and voters, 
are required to pay more for parking, pay more for tickets, pay more 
for hot dogs and pretzels, pay more to watch their favorite team on pay 
television, and even then, after ``paying,'' are sometimes faced with 
threats by their team that it will move to another city.
  Mr. President, clearly, the present state of affairs must change. The 
question is how. Senator Metzenbaum's focus in the past has been 
baseball's antitrust exemption. He introduced a bill a year ago that 
would repeal major league baseball's antitrust exemption. Last fall, I, 
along with many of the other members of the Judiciary Committee, asked 
him to conduct a broader examination of professional sports. The 
complaints often directed at major league baseball's antitrust 
exemption related to stadium financing, league expansion, franchise 
movement, television rights and salaries have also occurred or 
presently exist in professional sports that do not enjoy an antitrust 
exemption.
  The Judiciary Committee's examination of professional sports will 
proceed along two tracks to determine the proper extent of 
congressional involvement. First, the committee needs to determine the 
role Congress should take to deal with the complaints from the public 
involving stadium financing, broadcasting rights, the move to pay 
television, and owner and player conduct. Conflicts in these areas have 
raised issues as to the ``public mindedness'' and responsibilities of 
professional sports leagues and teams to local communities. Second, the 
committee needs to consider a set of graduated steps--other than simply 
eliminating baseball's antitrust exemption--that Congress might take to 
guarantee that all professional sports meet their obligations to fans 
and taxpayers.
  Because Senator Metzenbaum's hearing will take place during major 
league baseball's spring training, I have no doubt that ample attention 
will be given to the issues involving the antitrust exemption and the 
recent restructuring of the still vacant commissioner's office. As I 
pointed out last fall, I certainly do not dispute that major league 
baseball receives special treatment under the antitrust laws, and I 
think the assertion of some people, including that of former 
Commissioner Fay Vincent from the September 26, 1993, New York Times, 
that ``baseball deserves its immunity from the antitrust laws'' should 
be reconsidered in light of recent events. These events suggest that 
the Judiciary Committee examine the legal and financial advantages 
bestowed upon baseball and other professional sports by the citizens of 
this country.
  The failure of the owners to hire a commissioner is disappointing. In 
the past, an independent baseball commissioner has maintained the 
health and integrity of the sport by balancing the interests of the 
fans with the concerns of the players and the owners. The owners' 
omission is exacerbated by the fact that a commissioner, the fans' 
representative, will not be available to help resolve the remaining and 
potentially contentious labor issues over which the Major League 
Baseball Players Association has threatened a strike later this summer.
  These issues are important and I look forward to reviewing the 
hearing record. As the committee carries out this examination, the 
focus must be on the issues that affect the fans. I am specifically 
concerned about the potential effect the proposed repeal of baseball's 
antitrust exemption on minor league baseball, and issues that exist 
regardless of the antitrust exemption related to league expansion and 
franchise movement, taxpayer financed stadiums, television rights, and 
salary caps, revenue sharing and player salaries.
  The dependence of minor league baseball on major league baseball's 
antitrust exemption needs to be ascertained. Minor league teams exist 
in more than 150 communities across the country, including Wilmington, 
DE, the home of the Blue Rocks. As many of us are aware, on March 3, 
1994, the National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues held a 
``Congressional Education Day'' that brought representatives from more 
than 100 minor league baseball teams to Capitol Hill offices. These 
minor league teams oppose repealing the exemption because they contend 
that most minor league clubs do not have the financial resources to 
identify players and negotiate salaries. Presently, major league 
baseball provides the players and pays all the salaries for minor 
league clubs, in addition to paying expenses for uniforms, equipment, 
and travel. The importance of the minor leagues to the more than 30 
million fans that attended games last year is undoubted. Before taking 
steps to repeal the exemption, the Judiciary Committee needs to explore 
the historical relationship between major league baseball and the minor 
leagues to determine whether alternatives exist to support minor league 
baseball from the largest to the smallest communities.
  Issues with regard to league expansion and franchise movement exist 
in all professional sports leagues. Increasingly, stadium finacing and 
revenues have been tied to whether a league will grant a city a new 
franchise or whether an existing franchise will remain. Because this 
problem exists in all sports, it is not necessarily tied to the 
antitrust exemption.
  Recently, major league baseball announced the possibility of 
expanding the league by creating two additional teams. No doubt, the 
announcement will inspire a flury of activity and expenditures on the 
part of a number of cities in order to attract a team. Such activity is 
not unique to baseball, however, as recently evidenced by the bidding 
for two new NFL franchises on the part of Memphis, St. Louis, 
Charlotte, Baltimore, and Jacksonville. In order to gain its franchise, 
Jacksonville committed to a $121 million renovation of the Gator Bowl. 
St. Louis has started construction of a $258 million domed stadium in 
the belief it will get an NFL franchise eventually. All of the cities 
spent significant amounts of money merely to be considered as a viable 
location.
  Recently, many football and baseball teams have threatened to leave 
for other cities unless the city builds a new stadium or provides 
favorable arrangements on concessions such as parking and sky boxes. 
Locally, Jack Kent Cooke, owner of the Washington Redskins, is in the 
process of trying to move his team out of Washington if he can find a 
municipal or State government to finance a stadium. The city of Buffalo 
recently announced it will spend $23 million on the Bills' stadium--$5 
million on the largest scoreboard in the country and an undisclosed 
amount on new private suites. The Bills organization indicated that any 
needed additional revenue would be covered by increased ticket prices. 
The Judiciary Committee should consider whether the taxpayers' return 
on these stadium improvements are comparable to their investments.
  Purportedly, there is a movement to pay television among the 
professional sports leagues. The recent television contract major 
league baseball signed has raised concerns because it could mean that 
playoffs are not on network television for the first time ever. 
Certainly, on step the committee should take is a review of the law 
that provides a limited antitrust exemption for all professional sports 
leagues to negotiate television contracts. The law was passed in 1966 
and has not been amended since that time even though telecasting has 
changed radically. The original purpose and foundation for the law 
should be examined in light of the expanded use and availability of 
cable television and pay per-view.
  Normally, Congress would not take an interest in the salaries or 
financial arrangements of a private business. In the case of 
professional sports, however, the many instances in which 
municipalities and States provides funds for facilities create a public 
interest in the fiscal health of a team. The committee has an 
obligation at least to highlight the different options available to 
assure that teams remain viable and community money is not wasted. The 
owners of major league baseball have recommended a salary cap to be 
imposed on each team. Presently, the National Basketball Association 
has a salary cap, and the National Football League will have one in 
place next season.
  In addition, the ability of teams in small media markets to exist and 
remain competitive becomes less certain as team salaries rise. A city's 
significant investment in stadiam infrastructure is threatened when a 
team fails. Baseball has a revenue sharing proposal under negotiation 
to attempt a more equitable distribution of money among teams from 
large and small media markets. The commitee needs to consider whether 
measures such as a salary cap and revenue sharing will help to 
stabilize clubs financially in small media markets and protect the 
investment of the local community.
  Mr. President, the Judiciary Committee has undertaken a bold 
examination as part of its obligation to address the problems facing 
sports fans. I look forward to reviewing the proceedings of Senator 
Metzenbaum's next hearing and those in the future. I am confident that 
in the end, the committee will develop a comprehensive and effective 
approach to restore the importance of the fan in the scheme of 
professional sports.

                          ____________________