[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 156 (Monday, November 8, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H11649-H11654]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     MUHAMMAD ALI BOXING REFORM ACT

  Mr. BLILEY. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 1832) to reform unfair and anticompetitive practices in the 
professional boxing industry, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 1832

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Professional boxing differs from other major, 
     interstate professional sports industries in the United 
     States in that it operates without any private sector 
     association, league, or centralized industry organization to 
     establish uniform and appropriate business practices and 
     ethical standards. This has led to repeated occurrences of 
     disreputable and coercive business practices in the boxing 
     industry, to the detriment of professional boxers nationwide.
       (2) State officials are the proper regulators of 
     professional boxing events, and must protect the welfare of 
     professional boxers and serve the public interest by closely 
     supervising boxing activity in their jurisdiction. State 
     boxing commissions do not currently receive adequate 
     information to determine whether boxers competing in their 
     jurisdiction are being subjected to contract terms and 
     business practices which may violate State regulations, or 
     are onerous and confiscatory.
       (3) Promoters who engage in illegal, coercive, or unethical 
     business practices can take advantage of the lack of 
     equitable business standards in the sport by holding boxing 
     events in States with weaker regulatory oversight.
       (4) The sanctioning organizations which have proliferated 
     in the boxing industry have not established credible and 
     objective criteria to rate professional boxers, and operate 
     with virtually no industry or public oversight. Their ratings 
     are susceptible to manipulation, have deprived boxers of fair 
     opportunities for advancement, and have undermined public 
     confidence in the integrity of the sport.
       (5) Open competition in the professional boxing industry 
     has been significantly interfered with by restrictive and 
     anticompetitive business practices of certain promoters and 
     sanctioning bodies, to the detriment of the athletes and the 
     ticket-buying public. Common practices of promoters and 
     sanctioning organizations represent restraints of interstate 
     trade in the United States.
       (6) It is necessary and appropriate to establish national 
     contracting reforms to protect

[[Page H11650]]

     professional boxers and prevent exploitive business 
     practices, and to require enhanced financial disclosures to 
     State athletic commissions to improve the public oversight of 
     the sport.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to protect the rights and welfare of professional 
     boxers on an interstate basis by preventing certain 
     exploitive, oppressive, and unethical business practices;
       (2) to assist State boxing commissions in their efforts to 
     provide more effective public oversight of the sport; and
       (3) to promote honorable competition in professional boxing 
     and enhance the overall integrity of the industry.

     SEC. 4. PROTECTING BOXERS FROM EXPLOITATION.

       The Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 (15 U.S.C. 6301 
     et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating sections 9 through 15 as sections 17 
     through 23, respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after section 8 the following new 
     sections:

     ``SEC. 9. CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS.

       ``Within 2 years after the date of the enactment of the 
     Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act, the Association of Boxing 
     Commissions shall develop and shall approve by a vote of no 
     less than a majority of its member State boxing 
     commissioners, guidelines for minimum contractual provisions 
     that should be included in bout agreements and boxing 
     contracts. It is the sense of Congress that State boxing 
     commissions should follow these ABC guidelines.

     ``SEC. 10. PROTECTION FROM COERCIVE CONTRACTS.

       ``(a) General Rule.--
       ``(1)(A) A contract provision shall be considered to be in 
     restraint of trade, contrary to public policy, and 
     unenforceable against any boxer to the extent that it--
       ``(i) is a coercive provision described in subparagraph (B) 
     and is for a period greater than 12 months; or
       ``(ii) is a coercive provision described in subparagraph 
     (B) and the other boxer under contract to the promoter came 
     under that contract pursuant to a coercive provision 
     described in subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) A coercive provision described in this subparagraph 
     is a contract provision that grants any rights between a 
     boxer and a promoter, or between promoters with respect to a 
     boxer, if the boxer is required to grant such rights, or a 
     boxer's promoter is required to grant such rights with 
     respect to a boxer to another promoter, as a condition 
     precedent to the boxer's participation in a professional 
     boxing match against another boxer who is under contract to 
     the promoter.
       ``(2) This subsection shall only apply to contracts entered 
     into after the date of the enactment of the Muhammad Ali 
     Boxing Reform Act.
       ``(3) No subsequent contract provision extending any rights 
     or compensation covered in paragraph (1) shall be enforceable 
     against a boxer if the effective date of the contract 
     containing such provision is earlier than 3 months before the 
     expiration of the relevant time period set forth in paragraph 
     (1).
       ``(b) Promotional Rights Under Mandatory Bout Contracts.--
     No boxing service provider may require a boxer to grant any 
     future promotional rights as a requirement of competing in a 
     professional boxing match that is a mandatory bout under the 
     rules of a sanctioning organization.

     ``SEC. 11. SANCTIONING ORGANIZATIONS.

       ``(a) Objective Criteria.--Within 2 years after the date of 
     the enactment of the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act, the 
     Association of Boxing Commissions shall develop and shall 
     approve by a vote of no less than a majority of its member 
     State boxing commissioners, guidelines for objective and 
     consistent written criteria for the ratings of professional 
     boxers. It is the sense of Congress that sanctioning bodies 
     and State boxing commissions should follow these ABC 
     guidelines.
       ``(b) Appeals Process.--A sanctioning organization shall 
     not be entitled to receive any compensation, directly or 
     indirectly, in connection with a boxing match, until it 
     provides the boxers with notice that the sanctioning 
     organization shall, within 7 days after receiving a request 
     from a boxer questioning that organization's rating of the 
     boxer--
       ``(1) provide to the boxer a written explanation of the 
     organization's criteria, its rating of the boxer, and the 
     rationale or basis for its rating (including a response to 
     any specific questions submitted by the boxer); and
       ``(2) submit a copy of its explanation to the Association 
     of Boxing Commissions.
       ``(c) Notification of Change in Rating.--A sanctioning 
     organization shall not be entitled to receive any 
     compensation, directly or indirectly, in connection with a 
     boxing match, until, with respect to a change in the rating 
     of a boxer previously rated by such organization in the top 
     10 boxers, the organization--
       ``(1) posts a copy, within 7 days of such change, on its 
     Internet website or home page, if any, including an 
     explanation of such change, for a period of not less than 30 
     days; and
       ``(2) provides a copy of the rating change and explanation 
     to an association to which at least a majority of the State 
     boxing commissions belong.
       ``(d) Public Disclosure.--
       ``(1) FTC filing.--A sanctioning organization shall not be 
     entitled to receive any compensation directly or indirectly 
     in connection with a boxing match unless, not later than 
     January 31 of each year, it submits to the Federal Trade 
     Commission and to the ABC--
       ``(A) a complete description of the organization's ratings 
     criteria, policies, and general sanctioning fee schedule;
       ``(B) the bylaws of the organization;
       ``(C) the appeals procedure of the organization for a 
     boxer's rating; and
       ``(D) a list and business address of the organization's 
     officials who vote on the ratings of boxers.
       ``(2) Format; updates.--A sanctioning organization shall--
       ``(A) provide the information required under paragraph (1) 
     in writing, and, for any document greater than 2 pages in 
     length, also in electronic form; and
       ``(B) promptly notify the Federal Trade Commission of any 
     material change in the information submitted.
       ``(3) FTC to make information available to public.--The 
     Federal Trade Commission shall make information received 
     under this subsection available to the public. The Commission 
     may assess sanctioning organizations a fee to offset the 
     costs it incurs in processing the information and making it 
     available to the public.
       ``(4) Internet alternative.--In lieu of submitting the 
     information required by paragraph (1) to the Federal Trade 
     Commission, a sanctioning organization may provide the 
     information to the public by maintaining a website on the 
     Internet that--
       ``(A) is readily accessible by the general public using 
     generally available search engines and does not require a 
     password or payment of a fee for full access to all the 
     information;
       ``(B) contains all the information required to be submitted 
     to the Federal Trade Commission by paragraph (1) in an easy 
     to search and use format; and
       ``(C) is updated whenever there is a material change in the 
     information.

     ``SEC. 12. REQUIRED DISCLOSURES TO STATE BOXING COMMISSIONS 
                   BY SANCTIONING ORGANIZATIONS.

       ``A sanctioning organization shall not be entitled to 
     receive any compensation directly or indirectly in connection 
     with a boxing match until it provides to the boxing 
     commission responsible for regulating the match in a State a 
     statement of--
       ``(1) all charges, fees, and costs the organization will 
     assess any boxer participating in that match;
       ``(2) all payments, benefits, complimentary benefits, and 
     fees the organization will receive for its affiliation with 
     the event, from the promoter, host of the event, and all 
     other sources; and
       ``(3) such additional information as the commission may 
     require.

     ``SEC. 13. REQUIRED DISCLOSURES FOR PROMOTERS.

       ``(a) Disclosures to the Boxing Commissions.--A promoter 
     shall not be entitled to receive any compensation directly or 
     indirectly in connection with a boxing match until it 
     provides to the boxing commission responsible for regulating 
     the match in a State a statement of--
       ``(1) a copy of any agreement in writing to which the 
     promoter is a party with any boxer participating in the 
     match;
       ``(2) a statement made under penalty of perjury that there 
     are no other agreements, written or oral, between the 
     promoter and the boxer with respect to that match; and
       ``(3)(A) all fees, charges, and expenses that will be 
     assessed by or through the promoter on the boxer pertaining 
     to the event, including any portion of the boxer's purse that 
     the promoter will receive, and training expenses;
       ``(B) all payments, gifts, or benefits the promoter is 
     providing to any sanctioning organization affiliated with the 
     event; and
       ``(C) any reduction in a boxer's purse contrary to a 
     previous agreement between the promoter and the boxer or a 
     purse bid held for the event.
       ``(b) Disclosures to the Boxer.--A promoter shall not be 
     entitled to receive any compensation directly or indirectly 
     in connection with a boxing match until it provides to the 
     boxer it promotes--
       ``(1) the amounts of any compensation or consideration that 
     a promoter has contracted to receive from such match;
       ``(2) all fees, charges, and expenses that will be assessed 
     by or through the promoter on the boxer pertaining to the 
     event, including any portion of the boxer's purse that the 
     promoter will receive, and training expenses; and
       ``(3) any reduction in a boxer's purse contrary to a 
     previous agreement between the promoter and the boxer or a 
     purse bid held for the event.
       ``(c) Information To Be Available to State Attorney 
     General.--A promoter shall make information required to be 
     disclosed under this section available to the chief law 
     enforcement officer of the State in which the match is to be 
     held upon request of such officer.

     ``SEC. 14. REQUIRED DISCLOSURES FOR JUDGES AND REFEREES.

       ``A judge or referee shall not be entitled to receive any 
     compensation, directly or indirectly, in connection with a 
     boxing match until it provides to the boxing commission 
     responsible for regulating the match in a State a statement 
     of all consideration, including reimbursement for expenses, 
     that

[[Page H11651]]

     will be received from any source for participation in the 
     match.

     ``SEC. 15. CONFIDENTIALITY.

       ``(a) In General.--Neither a boxing commission or an 
     Attorney General may disclose to the public any matter 
     furnished by a promoter under section 13 except to the extent 
     required in a legal, administrative, or judicial proceeding.
       ``(b) Effect of Contrary State Law.--If a State law 
     governing a boxing commission requires that information that 
     would be furnished by a promoter under section 13 shall be 
     made public, then a promoter is not required to file such 
     information with such State if the promoter files such 
     information with the ABC.

     ``SEC. 16. JUDGES AND REFEREES.

       ``No person may arrange, promote, organize, produce, or 
     fight in a professional boxing match unless all referees and 
     judges participating in the match have been certified and 
     approved by the boxing commission responsible for regulating 
     the match in the State where the match is held.''.

     SEC. 5. CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

       Section 17 of the Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 
     (15 U.S.C. 6308) (as redesignated by section 4 of this Act) 
     is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence by striking ``No member'' and 
     inserting ``(a) Regulatory Personnel.--No member''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Firewall Between Promoters and Managers.--
       ``(1) In general.--It is unlawful for--
       ``(A) a promoter to have a direct or indirect financial 
     interest in the management of a boxer; or
       ``(B) a manager--
       ``(i) to have a direct or indirect financial interest in 
     the promotion of a boxer; or
       ``(ii) to be employed by or receive compensation or other 
     benefits from a promoter, except for amounts received as 
     consideration under the manager's contract with the boxer.
       ``(2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1)--
       ``(A) does not prohibit a boxer from acting as his own 
     promoter or manager; and
       ``(B) only applies to boxers participating in a boxing 
     match of 10 rounds or more.
       ``(c) Sanctioning Organizations.--
       ``(1) Prohibition on receipts.--Except as provided in 
     paragraph (2), no officer or employee of a sanctioning 
     organization may receive any compensation, gift, or benefit, 
     directly or indirectly, from a promoter, boxer, or manager.
       ``(2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) does not apply to--
       ``(A) the receipt of payment by a promoter, boxer, or 
     manager of a sanctioning organization's published fee for 
     sanctioning a professional boxing match or reasonable 
     expenses in connection therewith if the payment is reported 
     to the responsible boxing commission; or
       ``(B) the receipt of a gift or benefit of de minimis 
     value.''.

     SEC. 6. ENFORCEMENT.

       Subsection (b) of section 18 of the Professional Boxing 
     Safety Act of 1996 (15 U.S.C. 6309) (as redesignated by 
     section 4 of this Act) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1) by inserting a comma and ``other than 
     section 9(b), 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, or 16,'' after ``this 
     Act'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (3) and (4), respectively;
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) Violation of antiexploitation, sanctioning 
     organization, or disclosure provisions.--Any person who 
     knowingly violates any provision of section 9(b), 10, 11, 12, 
     13, 14, or 16 of this Act shall, upon conviction, be 
     imprisoned for not more than 1 year or fined not more than--
       ``(A) $100,000; and
       ``(B) if a violation occurs in connection with a 
     professional boxing match the gross revenues for which exceed 
     $2,000,000, an additional amount which bears the same ratio 
     to $100,000 as the amount of such revenues compared to 
     $2,000,000, or both.''; and
       (4) in paragraph (3) (as redesignated by paragraph 2 of 
     this subsection) by striking ``section 9'' and inserting 
     ``section 17(a)''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Actions by States.--Whenever the chief law 
     enforcement officer of any State has reason to believe that a 
     person or organization is engaging in practices which violate 
     any requirement of this Act, the State, as parens patriae, 
     may bring a civil action on behalf of its residents in an 
     appropriate district court of the United States--
       ``(1) to enjoin the holding of any professional boxing 
     match which the practice involves;
       ``(2) to enforce compliance with this Act;
       ``(3) to obtain the fines provided under subsection (b) or 
     appropriate restitution; or
       ``(4) to obtain such other relief as the court may deem 
     appropriate.
       ``(d) Private Right of Action.--Any boxer who suffers 
     economic injury as a result of a violation of any provision 
     of this Act may bring an action in the appropriate Federal or 
     State court and recover the damages suffered, court costs, 
     and reasonable attorneys fees and expenses.
       ``(e) Enforcement Against Federal Trade Commission, State 
     Attorneys General, Etc.--Nothing in this Act authorizes the 
     enforcement of--
       ``(1) any provision of this Act against the Federal Trade 
     Commission, the United States Attorney General, or the chief 
     legal officer of any State for acting or failing to act in an 
     official capacity;
       ``(2) subsection (d) of this section against a State or 
     political subdivision of a State, or any agency or 
     instrumentality thereof; or
       ``(3) section 10 against a boxer acting in his capacity as 
     a boxer.''.

     SEC. 7. ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Definitions.--Section 2(a) of the Professional Boxing 
     Safety Act of 1996 (15 U.S.C. 6301(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (10) by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``, including the Virgin Islands.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(11) Effective date of the contract.--The term `effective 
     date of the contract' means the day upon which a boxer 
     becomes legally bound by the contract.
       ``(12) Boxing service provider.--The term `boxing service 
     provider' means a promoter, manager, sanctioning body, 
     licensee, or matchmaker.
       ``(13) Contract provision.--The term `contract provision' 
     means any legal obligation between a boxer and a boxing 
     service provider.
       ``(14) Sanctioning organization.--The term `sanctioning 
     organization' means an organization that sanctions 
     professional boxing matches in the United States--
       ``(A) between boxers who are residents of different States; 
     or
       ``(B) that are advertised, otherwise promoted, or broadcast 
     (including closed circuit television) in interstate commerce.
       ``(15) Suspension.--The term `suspension' includes within 
     its meaning the revocation of a boxing license.''.
       (b) State Boxing Commission Procedures.--Section 7(a)(2) of 
     the Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 (15 U.S.C. 
     6306(a)(2)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (C) by striking ``or'';
       (2) in subparagraph (D) by striking ``documents.'' at the 
     end and inserting ``documents; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) unsportsmanlike conduct or other inappropriate 
     behavior inconsistent with generally accepted methods of 
     competition in a professional boxing match.''.
       (c) Renewal Period for Identification Cards.--Section 
     6(b)(2) of the Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 (15 
     U.S.C. 6305(b)(2)) is amended by striking ``2 years.'' and 
     inserting ``4 years.''.
       (d) Review of Suspensions.--Section 7(a)(3) of the 
     Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 (15 U.S.C. 6306(a)(3)) 
     is amended by striking ``boxer'' and inserting ``boxer, 
     licensee, manager, matchmaker, promoter, or other boxing 
     service provider''.
       (e) Alternative Supervision.--Section 4 of the Professional 
     Boxing Safety Act of 1996 (15 U.S.C. 6303) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``No person'' and inserting ``(a) No 
     person''; and
       (2) by inserting at the end thereof the following:
       ``(b) For the purpose of this Act, if no State commission 
     is available to supervise a boxing match according to 
     subsection (a), then--
       ``(1) the match may not be held unless it is supervised by 
     an association of boxing commissions to which at least a 
     majority of the States belong; and
       ``(2) any reporting or other requirement relating to a 
     supervising commission allowed under this section shall be 
     deemed to refer to the entity described in paragraph (1).''.
       (f) Health and Safety Disclosures.--Section 6 of the 
     Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 (15 U.S.C. 6305) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Health and Safety Disclosures.--It is the sense of 
     Congress that a boxing commission should, upon issuing an 
     identification card to a boxer under subsection (b)(1), make 
     a health and safety disclosure to that boxer as that 
     commission considers appropriate. The health and safety 
     disclosure should include the health and safety risks 
     associated with boxing, and, in particular, the risk and 
     frequency of brain injury and the advisability that a boxer 
     periodically undergo medical procedures designed to detect 
     brain injury.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Bliley) and the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley).


                             General Leave

  Mr. BLILEY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks on H.R. 1832, and to insert extraneous material on the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BLILEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Madam Speaker, earlier this year, 19 bipartisan State attorneys 
general and numerous State boxing commissioners from across the United 
States asked Congress for help in cleaning up the sport of boxing. 
These State agencies strongly endorsed the Muhammad Ali Act, saying it 
was necessary legislation

[[Page H11652]]

to prevent exploitation of professional boxers and to curb the 
anticompetitive and fraudulent business practices in the sport. 
Congress is now giving the States and State boxing commissioners their 
requested assistance.
  In 1996, the Committee on Commerce passed legislation establishing a 
uniform, nationwide system of licensing and minimum health and safety 
standards for boxers. This Act was a resounding success. Because of our 
bill, for the first time, States could keep track of and protect 
professional boxers with appropriate oversight and supervision. For 
example, when boxer Mike Tyson committed the barbaric act of biting off 
a portion of Evander Holyfield's ear 2 years ago, Tyson's suspension 
from boxing was swift and nationwide.
  While the 1996 bill has been a resounding success, it was only an 
important first step of cleaning up the sport of boxing. Two weeks ago, 
the Miami Herald reported that over 30 prizefights have been fixed or 
tainted in the last 12 years.
  Just last Thursday, a Federal grand jury issued a 32-count indictment 
against the president and three officials of the International Boxing 
Federation on charges of taking bribes from promoters and managers to 
manipulate rankings, as well as racketeering and money laundering. 
According to the Federal prosecutor, ``In the IBF, rankings were 
bought, not earned, completely corrupting the ranking system.''
  The Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act would put an end to this 
corruption. It requires the establishment of objective and consistent 
criteria for the ratings of professional boxers. It requires 
disclosures of compensation received in connection with a boxing match 
by promoters, managers, sanctioning bodies, and judges and referees. It 
provides for tough new penalties for criminals who continue to try to 
manipulate and undermine the sport through coercion and bribes.
  According to Boxing News, ``The Ali Act, if enacted, would greatly 
clean up boxing in America.'' Ring Magazine calls this ``well thought 
out'' legislation that ``will be a huge step toward getting rid of the 
bandits and parasites in the sport.'' ESPN says that ``The Ali Act, 
modest in scope, can make a difference. It is a small, but significant 
step, and one that would cost nothing to taxpayers.''
  I congratulate the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), the chairman of 
the Subcommittee on Finance and Hazardous Materials, for his leadership 
in moving this bill forward, and I look forward to restoring honesty 
and integrity to this great sport.
  Also, before closing, I want to acknowledge the support and 
assistance from the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the 
chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.
  Madam Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this important 
measure.
  Madam Speaker, I include the following letters for the Record, as 
follows:

         House of Representatives, Committee on Education and the 
           Workforce,
                                 Washington, DC, November 1, 1999.
     Hon. Tom Bliley,
     Chairman, Committee on Commerce, House of Representatives, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Bliley: I am writing regarding H.R. 1832, the 
     Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act, which is within the 
     jurisdiction of the Committee on Commerce and in addition the 
     Committee on Education and the Workforce. The bill amends the 
     Professional Boxing Safety Act. I have no objection to this 
     bill being scheduled under suspension of the House Rules. The 
     Committee on Commerce ordered the bill favorably reported on 
     September 29, 1999.
       Given the impending adjournment and since I support the 
     reported bill, I do not intend to call a full Committee 
     meeting to consider this bill; however, the Committee does 
     hold an interest in preserving its jurisdiction with respect 
     to issues raised in the bill and its jurisdictional 
     prerogatives in future legislation. As such, Members of the 
     Education and the Workforce would expect to be represented 
     should the provisions of this bill be considered in a 
     conference with the Senate.
       I would appreciate the inclusion of this letter in the 
     Report you file to accompany this bill. I thank you for your 
     attention to this matter and look forward to swift passage of 
     H.R. 1832.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Bill Goodling,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                                        Committee on Commerce,

                                 Washington, DC, November 2, 1999.
     Hon. William F. Goodling,
     Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce, House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Bill: Thank you for your letter regarding your 
     Committee's jurisdictional interest in H.R. 1832, the 
     Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act.
       In the past, our committees have worked cooperatively in 
     the enactment of the Professional Boxing Safety Act, and I 
     acknowledge your role as an additional committee of 
     jurisdiction. I appreciate your cooperation in moving the 
     bill to the House floor expeditiously and agree that your 
     decision to forgo further action on the bill will not 
     prejudice the Committee on Education and the Workforce with 
     respect to its jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar 
     legislation. Further, I will support your request for 
     conferees should this bill be the subject of a House-Senate 
     conference. I will also insert a copy of your letter and this 
     response in the Committee's report on the bill and the 
     Congressional Record when H.R. 1832 is considered by the 
     House.
       Thank you again for your cooperation.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Tom Bliley,
                                                         Chairman.

  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeGETTE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1832, the Muhammad 
Ali Boxing Reform Act.
  For many years, there has been widespread concern, as the gentleman 
from Virginia (Chairman Bliley) stated, about the boxing industry in 
the United States. Not only have scandals plagued the industry as long 
as I can remember, but fighters have been taken advantage of 
financially, and opportunities to compete for a title have not always 
been awarded to legitimate contenders.
  As my colleagues know, Madam Speaker, almost every other major sport 
in the United States operates with a central body to establish 
appropriate business standards and effective mechanisms of self-
regulation. But not boxing. Boxing exists in a world of alphabet soup 
organizations whose rating methodologies are as visceral as the famous 
Ali mirage and promoters who are as untouchable as Ali was behind the 
``rope-a-dope.''
  The purpose of the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act is to increase 
disclosure and prevent abuses in professional boxing, specifically 
targeting conflicts of interest that arise for promotors.
  H.R. 1832 limits contracts between boxers and promotors, ending the 
coercive practice of requiring long contracts for fighters to obtain 
particular bouts.
  The bill also seeks to ensure that the manager is an independent 
applicant of the boxer, not an agent serving the financial interests of 
the promoter.
  Furthermore, the sanctioning organizations would have to establish 
objective criteria for the rating of professional boxers and to fully 
disclosure their bylaws, rating systems, and officials.
  I firmly believe that, with these limitations, the boxing industry 
can take a giant step toward the 21st century and the ending of 
corruption.
  I would like to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Bliley) 
and especially the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Oxley) for his hard 
work on this legislation. Much credit is also due to Senator John 
McCain, who is the author of the Senate approved version of this bill.
  In the end, the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act puts abuse in the 
boxing industry on the ropes. By passing this important legislation, I 
believe that Congress will deliver the final one-two punch to boxing 
corruption.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1415

  Mr. BLILEY. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), the chairman of the subcommittee.
  (Mr. OXLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Last Thursday, the President and three other officials from the IBF, 
the

[[Page H11653]]

International Boxing Federation, were indicted. They were brought under 
criminal charges for operating IBF's sanctioning body as a racketeering 
enterprise in which fighters' rankings were routinely altered in 
exchange for hundreds of thousands of dollars in illicit bribes from 
promoters and managers. This scandal follows on the heels of an 
investigation by the Miami Herald revealing more than 30 fights in the 
past 12 years have been fixed or tainted, including at least one 
heavyweight championship match.
  Madam Speaker, I have with me a copy of the Miami Herald, Sunday, 
October 31, which is titled ``Fixed Fights, Down for the Count,'' in 
which the columnist, Ken Rodriguez of the Miami Herald, chronicles just 
how bad the situation is in boxing and how badly it needs cleaning up. 
And I want to cite that as an example of what we can do, working with 
the media, to uncover this kind of activity.
  In 1996, I sponsored a bipartisan boxing reform bill which prohibited 
conflicts of interest for State boxing commission employees. It also 
established the first-ever uniformed licensing and health and safety 
system to protect professional boxers. This legislation was a great 
success and the State boxing commissions and attorneys general now have 
asked us to go one step further to clean up the corruption among boxing 
promoters, managers, and sanctioning bodies.
  H.R. 1832, the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act, is based on the 
numerous bipartisan hearings this committee has held over the past 2 
decades on the need to reform the boxing industry. On June 29, 1999, 
our committee held a hearing, just after the controversial decision in 
the Holyfield-Lewis heavyweight championship fight, in which an IBF 
judge awarded the title to Mr. Holyfield, the IBF champion, instead of 
to Mr. Lewis, the WBC champion and clear apparent winner, according to 
some boxing commentators. In the words of one hearing witness, the 
decision was ``highly influenced.'' Another witness said bluntly, 
``Lewis was robbed.''
  H.R. 1832 expands on our initial success with boxing reform, 
extending the conflict-of-interest prohibitions in the 1996 act to 
apply to other boxing entities besides State commissions. Specifically, 
H.R. 1832 would enact seven critical reforms:
  First, bribes are prohibited for sanctioning bodies. Two, conflicts 
of interest are prohibited for boxing managers and promoters. Three, 
boxers are protected from coercive contracts. Four, new strong 
disclosure requirements are created for promoters, sanctioning bodies, 
judges, and referees to reduce corruption. Fifth, boxing judges and 
referees are required to be approved by the State commissions. Sixth, 
unsportsmanlike conduct would be added as a new category of suspendable 
offenses. And, seven, the State boxing commissions are encouraged to 
adopt uniform rules, regulations, rating criteria, and guidelines for 
contracts.
  These are important reforms which, according to the Congressional 
Budget Office, would have no significant impact on the Federal budget 
and would not result in any significant cost to the States. This 
legislation passed the Senate earlier this year. It passed our 
committee by a bipartisan voice vote, and has received support from the 
president of the Association of Boxing Commissions, International 
Boxing Digest, Boxing News, the editor of Ring Magazine, the World 
Boxing Council, and numerous promoters, managers, and boxers.
  In the words of one of boxing's greatest, Muhammad Ali, ``The day 
this bill is signed into law cannot be soon enough. I pray justice will 
be done and somehow, along the way, honor can be restored to this 
sport.''
  Madam Speaker, I provide for inclusion in the Record two letters from 
Muhammad Ali in support of this legislation, the most recent dated 
November 8, today, as well as a letter from the National Association of 
Attorneys General in support of this legislation.

                                              National Association


                                         of Attorneys General,

                                   Washington, DC, April 28, 1999.
     Hon. John McCain,
     U.S. Senate, Chairman, Senate Commerce, Science, and 
         Transportation Committee, Washington, DC.

     Hon. Thomas Bliley,
     House of Representatives, Chairman, Commerce Committee, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator McCain and Representative Bliley: We, the 
     leadership of the National Association of Attorneys General 
     (``NAAG'') Boxing Task Force, and Attorneys General 
     interested in industry reform, strongly endorse the Muhammad 
     Ali Boxing Reform Act (S. 305) and fully support your efforts 
     to improve the professional boxing industry. We believe this 
     legislation will curb anti-competitive and fraudulent 
     business practices and prevent blatant exploitation of 
     professional boxers.
       We are encouraged by the support S. 305 has received in the 
     Senate, and we look forward to working with you to protect 
     the health and safety of professional boxers and to prevent 
     exploitation, fraud, and restraints of trade. The Muhammad 
     Ali Act provides a practical approach to long-standing 
     problems of fraud and restraints of trade in this industry.
       The Boxing Task Force, currently comprised of 19 Attorneys 
     General, was formally established in March 1998 after 
     legislation was passed by both the House and Senate Commerce 
     Committees and then subsequently by both the House and 
     Senate. (The Professional Boxing Safety Act 15 U.S.C. 
     Sec. 6301, et seq.). After Federal Trade Commission Chairman 
     Robert Pitofsky's suggested that state Attorneys General 
     review business practices in the professional boxing 
     industry, the National Association of Attorneys General 
     created the Boxing Task Force to examine interstate boxing 
     practices in the United States, identify the problems 
     therein, and recommend ways to improve the industry.
       In furtherance of our common objectives, the Task Force 
     conducted a public hearing on January 19-21, 1999, where 
     testimony, including numerous recommendations, was received 
     from individuals representing a cross-section of the boxing 
     industry. Testimony was elicited from boxing promoters on 
     their role in the industry and on the issue of long term and 
     exclusive contractual options. Sanctioning organizations 
     testified about the methods utilized to rank fighters. 
     Various experts on boxers' injuries discussed the necessity 
     for medical clearance and the use of proper equipment and 
     ringside safety precautions. Industry members and business 
     leaders discussed a structured annuity and pension plan for 
     professional boxers.
       We are in the process of reviewing the testimony, and after 
     further consultation with members of the industry, we will 
     compile a report with our recommendations. We seek to reform 
     certain practices within the industry, to return integrity to 
     boxing on behalf of the athletes and the ticket-buying 
     public, and to otherwise enhance the well-being of boxing and 
     all associated with it.
       Finally, we would like to emphasize the importance of the 
     proposed enforcement guidelines of the Muhammad Ali Boxing 
     Reform Act, which would permit a State, as parens patriae, to 
     being a civil action on behalf of its residents in an 
     appropriate district court of the United States for 
     violations of the Boxing Reform Act. We believe that the 
     authority to enjoin the holding of a professional boxing 
     match, and to enforce compliance with the Muhammad Ali Boxing 
     Reform Act, is necessary to ensure lawful and responsible 
     boxing industry compliance with national reforms.
       Thank you for your consideration of our views. We hope you 
     will favorably consider the Muhammad Ali Act. We stand ready 
     to assist you as the bill advances, so please feel free to 
     call on us.
           Sincerely yours,
         Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of New York, Chair, NAAG 
           Boxing Task Force; Jim Ryan, Attorney General of 
           Illinois, Vice Chair, NAAG Boxing Task Force; Janet 
           Napolitano, Attorney General of Arizona; Richard 
           Blumenthal, Attorney General of Connecticut; Bill 
           Lockyer, Attorney General of California; Robert A. 
           Butterworth, Attorney General of Florida; Jeffrey A. 
           Modisett, Attorney General of Indiana; Tom Miller, 
           Attorney General of Iowa; Richard P. Ieyoub, Attorney 
           General of Louisiana; J. Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney 
           General of Maryland; Mike Moore, Attorney General of 
           Mississippi; Jeremiah W. ``Jay'' Nixon, Attorney 
           General of Missouri; Frankie Sue Del Papa, Attorney 
           General of Nevada; Peter Verniero, Attorney General of 
           New Jersey; W.A. Drew Edmondson, Attorney General of 
           Oklahoma; Hardy Myers, Attorney General of Oregon; Mike 
           Fisher, Attorney General of Pennsylvania; Jose A. 
           Fuentes-Agostini, Attorney General of Puerto Rico; Mark 
           L. Earley, Attorney General of Virginia.
                                  ____



                                   Greatest of All Time, Inc.,

                            Berrien Springs, MI, November 8, 1999.
     Hon. Michael Oxley,
     Hon. Eliot Engel,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representatives Oxley and Engel: We are pleased that 
     ``The Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act'' (H.R. 1832) is being 
     brought up before the full House of Representatives. We 
     strongly support this bill which will protect boxers from 
     exploitations and unfair treatment by unscrupulous promoters 
     and other business interests that dominate this troubled 
     industry. We urge all members of Congress to support this 
     effort to make boxing a more honorable sport.
           Most sincerely,
     Muhammad Ali.
     Lonnie Ali.

[[Page H11654]]

                                                 Muhammad Ali,

                               Berrien Springs, MI, June 30, 1998.
     Senator John McCain,
     Russell Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator McCain: Thank you for all of your effort in 
     setting up guidelines for boxers in the ring today and for 
     those in the future. I can't begin to express how honored I 
     am that you would name the Boxing Reform Act after me.
       After reading the summary you sent me, I can only tell you 
     that these guidelines are long overdue. I only wish they 
     would have been in effect when I was boxing.
       Thank you for caring enough about the sport of boxing that 
     you would help those in the ring today and in the future.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Muhammad Ali.

  Mr. BLILEY. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin).
  Mr. TAUZIN. Madam Speaker, during our subcommittee markup on this 
bill earlier this year, we asked a panel of witnesses about the judging 
of the Holyfield-Lewis championship unification fight that had just 
occurred. Two said the scoring was incompetent, two indicated that it 
was dishonest, and the last said Lewis was robbed. Well, we all are 
robbed when one of our national sports becomes tainted in such a way.
  I grew up watching boxing as a child with my grandfather and my dad 
in the little community of Chackbay, Louisiana. I have heard of too 
many young fighters who have put so much into training themselves for a 
big fight only to suffer from what Muhammad Ali has called the 
``dishonest ways'' of promoters.
  This bill protects boxers from dishonest promoters. It prohibits 
coercive contracts and empowers the States to develop uniform rules and 
regulations governing the sport. It requires the sanctioning bodies, 
the referees, judges, and promoters to disclose any conflicts of 
interest and sources of compensation to help the States enforce their 
laws and protect boxers from any taint of corruption.
  I want to note, as my good friend, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Oxley), has done, that this legislation has the support of the 
president of the Association of Boxing Commissioners, Ring Magazine, 
International Boxing Digest, Boxing News, numerous promoters, managers, 
and boxers, all of who want to clean up this sport and indeed restore 
it to its former glory.
  Last June, when we began our work in the subcommittee, we indeed 
promised that we would bring this reform bill to the floor of the 
House. I am very happy that the Committee on Commerce, with the help of 
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley) and the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Oxley), kept that promise and we have now delivered this bill to 
the floor of the House.
  I also want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel) for 
working so closely with the gentleman from Ohio on this legislation, 
and, of course, the chairman and ranking member of our full Committee 
on Commerce for moving this bill forward. This is long overdue, and 
those who love the sport of boxing, as I do, and so many do in my 
district and across America, will hail this day as a very important day 
in restoring the dignity and the glory of the sport of boxing in 
America.
  Ms. DeGETTE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
in closing to acknowledge that my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle did note that I am not the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel), 
who has worked very hard on this bill.
  I too would like to commend him. He is sorry he could not be here to 
manage the time today, but he had a family emergency and I am filling 
in.
  This is an excellent bill, and I commend particularly the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).
  Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1832, the 
Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act.
  For years, there has been widespread concern about the boxing 
industry in the United States. Not only have scandals plagued the 
industry as long as I can remember, but fighters have been taken 
advantage of financially and opportunities to compete for a title have 
not always been awarded to legitimate contenders.
  As you know, Madam Speaker, almost every other major sport in the 
United States operates with a central body to establish appropriate 
business standards and effective mechanisms of self-regulation. Not 
boxing. Boxing exists in a world of alphabet soup organizations whose 
rating methodologies are as ephemeral as the famous Ali ``mirage'' and 
promoters who are as untouchable as Ali was behind the ``rope-a-dope.''
  The purpose of the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act is to increase 
disclosure and prevent abuses in professional boxing, specifically 
targeting conflicts of interest that arise for promoters.
  H.R. 1832 limits contracts between boxers and promoters, ending the 
coercive practice of requiring long contracts for fighters to obtain 
particular bouts.
  The bill also seeks to ensure that the manager is an independent 
advocate of the boxer, not an agent serving the financial interest of 
the promoter.
  Furthermore, the sanctioning organizations would have to establish 
objective criteria for the rating of professional boxers and fully 
disclose their by-laws, rating systems, and officials.
  I firmly believe that with these limitations, the boxing industry can 
take a giant step toward the 21st century and the ending of corruption.
  I would like to thank my good friend, Chairman Oxley, for his hard 
work on this legislation. It has been my pleasure to serve as the lead 
Democratic cosponsor of his bill in the House and to cosign several 
dear colleagues with him.
  Much credit is also due to Senator John McCain, author of the 
Senator-approved version of the bill. I would also like to call 
attention to Eliot Spitzer, the Attorney General of the State of New 
York, for his efforts to root out corruption in the boxing industry. As 
Chairman of the National Association of Attorneys General Boxing Task 
Force, Eliot Spitzer has helped guide Congress through the legal 
technicalities required for effective enforcement of new boxing 
regulations. His contribution and testimony before Congress will not be 
forgotten.
  In the end, the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act puts abuse in the 
boxing industry on the ropes. By passing this important legislation, I 
believe that Congress will deliver the final one, two punch to boxing 
corruption.
  Ms. DeGETTE. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BLILEY. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1832 , as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________