[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 13 (Monday, January 25, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S979-S980]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. McCAIN (for himself and Mr. Bryan):
  S. 305. A bill to reform unfair and anticompetitive practices in the 
professional boxing industry; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.


                     muhammad ali boxing reform act

 Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am introducing the Muhammad Ali 
Boxing Reform Act in the 106th Congress. This legislation would 
establish a series of practical reforms to reduce interstate restraints 
of trade in the industry; protect boxers from exploitative business 
practices; reduce arbitrary practices by sanctioning organizations; and 
increase financial disclosure requirements to prevent misconduct by 
promoters and sanctioning bodies. The legislation I am introducing 
today is the same version of the Ali Act that was reported out of the 
Senate Commerce Committee and passed by the Senate last year.
  I am pleased to again have the cosponsorship and sound counsel of my 
colleague from Nevada, Senator Richard Bryan. He has a strong interest 
and long record of promoting responsible oversight of the professional 
boxing industry. Boxing is of course a major industry in Nevada, and 
Senator Bryan has worked closely with his State's athletic commission 
to assess and propose effective measure to make boxing a more respected 
and healthy industry.
  I have attached a summary of the Ali Act to concisely describe its 
major provisions. The bill is a modest and practical proposal which 
would simply curb some of the most egregious and anti-competitive 
practices which have exploited athletes and undermined the integrity of 
the boxing industry. Senator Bryan and I worked with state 
commissioners and credible boxing industry leaders from across the U.S. 
to develop the Ali Act. It requires no public funding and would create 
no new bureaucracy at any level of government. This legislation instead 
requires adherence to fair business practices and public disclosure 
requirements designed to significantly reduce abusive practices in the 
sport.
  It is worth noting that the public response to the Ali Act has been 
tremendous. We have received strong praise for this legislation from 
every sector of the industry and, most importantly, from boxers 
themselves. It is to be expected that certain vested interests in 
professional boxing industry will not welcome any reforms of anti-
competitive and confiscatory business practices in the sport. However, 
the Ali Act will clearly improve the sport in the public interest, and 
will not inhibit any legitimate business practices. If enacted, the 
professional boxing industry will not only be free of certain types of 
abusive and unethical business practices, but competition should surely 
increase. Competition is the heart of any sport, and fair, open 
competition is the key to a sport's success. I look forward to the day 
when boxing achieves the reputation of credible competition and fair 
business practices for its athletes.
  I will work with members of the Senate Commerce Committee to promptly 
bring the Ali Act before the full Senate this year. With the Ali Act 
also being introduced in the House of Representatives in the near 
future, I am hopeful that 1999 will be the year the professional boxing 
industry in America embarks on a new path of fair business practices, 
legitimate rankings, and enhanced integrity.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a summary of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                   The Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act


                  Protecting Boxers From Exploitation

       (a) Declares that all contracts between boxers and 
     promoters must contain specific terms regarding the length of 
     time it covers, and the minimum number of bouts per year for 
     the boxer.
       (b) Limits certain ``option'' contracts between boxers and 
     promoters to one year. (Those where a boxer is forced to 
     provide options to a promoter, as a condition of getting a 
     particular bout. Prevents promoter from controlling a weight 
     division by coercing options from all boxers.)
       (c) Prohibits a promoter from forcing a boxer to hire an 
     associate, relative, or any

[[Page S980]]

     other individual, as the boxer's manager, or in any other 
     employment capacity. (This stops a promoter from grabbing 
     another 33% of a boxer's purse; mirrors the regulation of 
     most state commissions.)
       (d) Prohibits conflicts of interest between managers of a 
     boxer and the promoter. (Managers should be an independent 
     advocate for the boxer--not serve the financial interests of 
     promoter.)


               Sanctioning Organization Integrity Reforms

       (e) Sanctioning organizations (abbreviation: ``SO'') 
     conducting business in the U.S. must establish objective and 
     consistent criteria for the ratings of professional boxers.
       (f) Each year, SO's must provide the following information 
     either on a publicly accessible website, or to the FTC; their 
     bylaws, ratings criteria, and roster of officials who vote on 
     their ratings.
       (g) When an SO changes their rating of a U.S. boxer, it 
     must inform the boxer in writing of the reason for the 
     change. Each SO must establish an appeals process (i.e. 
     exchange of correspondence) for boxers in the U.S. to contest 
     their ranking in writing.
       (h) No SO can receive payments or compensation from a 
     promoter, boxer, or manager, except for the established 
     sanctioning fee and expenses they receive for sanctioning a 
     bout, which must be reported to the relevant State 
     commission.


        Public Interest Disclosures to State Boxing Commissions

       (i) SO's must disclose to a state boxing commission all 
     charges and fees they will impose on the boxer(s) competing 
     in the event, as well as all payments and revenues the SO 
     receives.
       (i) The promoter(s) affiliated with each event shall file a 
     complete and accurate copy of all contracts they have with 
     the boxer pertaining to the event, with the boxing commission 
     prior to the event, and disclose in writing all fees and 
     costs they will assess on the boxer(s). Club level boxing 
     events (those less than 10 rounds) are excluded. No burden on 
     small business.


                              Enforcement

       (k) Civil and Criminal penalties similar to the existing 
     federal boxing law, but fines are higher to deter major 
     promoters from violations. Also, allows enforcement by State 
     Attorney Generals.


                                 Notes

     1. The Ali Act requires no federal or state funds and creates 
     no new federal bureaucracy.

                          ____________________