[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 26 (Thursday, February 9, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H1533]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             SHOULD CONGRESS INTERVENE IN BASEBALL STRIKE?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Colorado [Mr. McInnis] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, tonight I would like to visit with you a 
little about the baseball strike and the very issue that is addressed 
or has been brought to us in the last week, should the U.S. Congress 
deal with the baseball strike? I think in order for us to assess an 
answer to that question, we need to look at what the historical 
standards have been in the U.S. Congress or in the White House before 
we intervene in a labor dispute between two private parties.
  First of all, how about Presidential involvement? You should know 
that in the past, it is very rare for a President to intervene in a 
labor dispute. It has occurred, but the standard that seems to have 
been set in the past is that it was necessary for a precedent to occur, 
and the President was brought in when the strike or the labor dispute 
would have had a crippling impact on the entire Nation.
  I will give you some examples. For example, in 1945, at a time of 
war, President Truman intervened and ordered the coal miners back to 
work. In 1946, he did so with the railroads. In 1952, again during a 
time of major conflict, he ordered the steel workers back to work. 
President Nixon in 1972 ordered the dock workers back to work, 
obviously a crippling impact because we were not able to bring imports 
into the country. President Carter, 1978, with coal, and in 1979 with 
rail. President Reagan in 1981 intervened with the air traffic 
controllers. But even that intervention was somewhat unique because it 
dealt with Federal employees. And President Clinton last August 
intervened in a labor dispute that involved rails.
  But nowhere in our history can we find, especially in a sport or a 
pasttime, that a President has intervened.
  I do commend the President the other day for asking the two parties 
to come to the White House, although I think the President was overly 
optimistic on his chances of succeeding in bringing about a solution to 
this dispute. As a result of that, I think the President made a mistake 
when he offered to both of those parties congressional assistance.
  Should Congress intervene? The answer is clearly no. Baseball, the 
lack of professional baseball, is not a national emergency. I would 
like to see baseball. I am a baseball fan; my son is a baseball fan. 
But it is not going to have a crippling impact on this country if we do 
not have professional baseball for a few weeks or even this summer. It 
is not going to cripple the Nation. It is not like our coal or our 
steel or our dock workers. We should not intervene in a private 
dispute.
  As you can see, where does this lead? Where does it lead if Congress 
does intervene? We had a bill introduced, a bill in this Congress, this 
is a bill to establish a new Federal agency, the National Commission on 
Baseball. Federal employees, seven full-time Federal employees will 
determine such things as what the price of tickets should be, what the 
contract should be, individual negotiations of contracts in the minor 
leagues and the major leagues, and where this baseball stadium should 
be built. The Federal Government will be negotiating TV rights for the 
baseball teams. The Federal Government will have the right under its 
Baseball Commission to subpoena people, as if it is a criminal action. 
You do not want the Federal Government intervening in the private 
marketplace. And baseball does not, by the very merits of its sport, 
does not demand that the U.S. Federal Government intervene in the 
strike.
  I think that it is absolutely necessary, especially when you are 
talking about two very wealthy parties, nobody is going to go hungry 
between the owners and the players. Granted, there is a ripple effect 
for people that work for baseball, but does that upon itself mandate 
that they come in? It sure does not for Bridgestone Tire Co. down in 
Oklahoma or Caterpillar. The President has not asked Congress to 
intervene in those because they do not meet that standard of having a 
crippling impact.
  In conclusion, I urge all of you not to allow Congress to intervene 
in the baseball strike. Let the titans of money resolve it amongst 
themselves. And for gosh sakes, do not create a new Federal agency 
called the Commission on Baseball with full-time employees, another 
building in Washington, DC, another bureaucracy, the right of subpoena, 
the right to determine private contracts. We do not need it. Baseball 
players, baseball owners, go out there and settle it yourselves. It is 
your fight, not the fight of the U.S. Congress.
  We should not give you 1 minute of time by taking it away from the 
debate on crime, which is a national crisis, on the Federal deficit, 
which is a national crisis.
  Go settle your fight amongst yourselves.
  

                          ____________________