[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 50 (Thursday, March 27, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H2454-H2456]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
KEEP TITLE IX INTACT
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bradley of New Hampshire). Under the
Speaker's announced policy of January 7, 2003, the gentlewoman from New
York (Ms. Slaughter) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of
the minority leader.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, in 1972, about 30,000 women played
college sports. Today, that number has increased by more than 500
percent.
In 1972, about 200,000 girls played high school sports. Today, that
number has increased by more than 80 percent.
Mr. Speaker, it is no coincidence that women and girls have more
opportunity today than they did 30 years ago. That is not because they
have more interest than they used to, and it is not because they have
more ability than they used to. The increased opportunities are
attributable to one law, Title IX.
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 is the Federal law that
prohibits sex discrimination in education. It states: ``No person in
the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of or be subjected to
discrimination under any education program or activity receiving
Federal financial assistance.''
In essence, Title IX requires schools and colleges receiving Federal
funds to give women and girls equal athletic opportunities, including
athletic scholarships, equipment, coaching and facilities, among other
benefits.
Unfortunately, Title IX has come under assault. Those who favor
changing Title IX argue, mistakenly, that it has led to the
disappearance of athletic opportunities for male athletes. While both
sides of the debate over Title IX athletics policies agree that they
should allow for gender parity and overall fairness in sports, the real
question that begs to be answered is, what constitutes fairness?
For those who wanted to alter Title IX and how it has been
implemented, fairness means that male athletes should have a monopoly
over opportunities and resources for their programs, regardless of how
underfunded or nonexistent similar programs for female athletes may be.
For these challengers to Title IX, it is fair that, while more women
than men attend college, only 42 percent of all college athletes are
women. For them, it is fair that females currently receive 1.1 million
fewer, 41 percent, opportunities at the high school level and 58,000
fewer, 38 percent, opportunities at the college level than do their
male counterparts.
This ill-conceived notion of fairness that opponents of Title IX put
forth justifies the fact that men currently receive $133 million more
than women in athletic scholarships. Division I-A colleges and
universities allocate on average 71 percent of their scholarship money
for men's athletics, and their recruiting dollars for male athletes
double those spent on female athletes.
Opponents of Title IX charge that the law takes money and
opportunities away from men's athletics. What these people fail to
realize is that Title IX does not deprive men of athletic resources.
The real problem is that the resources that male athletes receive are
distributed inequitably among men's sports.
Take these statistics, for example. Football and men's basketball
consume 72 percent of the total men's athletic operating budget at
Division I institutions, leaving other men's sports to compete for the
remaining funds.
Sixty-eight percent of the increased expenditures for men's Division
I-A sports programs from 1998 to the Year 2000 went to football alone.
The increase for football exceeded the entire operating budget for
women's Division I sports in 2000 by over $1.69 million.
What is more, large football and basketball programs are not as
revenue producing as Title IX proponents claim. The vast majority of
NCAA football and men's basketball programs spend more money than they
bring in. In fact, 64 percent of Division I and II football programs do
not generate enough money to pay for themselves, much less any other
sports. In 1999, these programs reported annual deficits averaging $1
million for Division I-A athletics.
Now, do not get me wrong, I love football, and I graduated from the
University of Kentucky, so I love basketball. I just do not believe
that our little girls should be denied the opportunity to play sports
so that football teams can dip from a bottomless fount of funds.
Opponents of Title IX not only feel that this gross imbalance is
fair, but they oppose any efforts to salvage the progress that has been
made. It bothers me deeply that opponents of Title IX say that male
athletes are treated unfairly. Although 30 years of progress since
Title IX have seen sports participation for males and females grow,
female athletes are still not treated equitably.
I urge all of my colleagues to cosponsor House Resolution 137,
expressing the sense of Congress that changes to Title IX athletic
policies contradict the spirit of athletic equality and gender parity
and should not be implemented and that Title IX should be kept intact.
My resolution has been signed by both Republicans and Democrats, by
men and women.
{time} 1530
It is receiving this wide support for one simple reason: it is the
right thing to do. Most Americans know that it is the right thing to
do. A Gallup poll in early January reported that seven out of 10 adults
who understood the law supported keeping title IX intact and rejecting
any changes. In fact, a Wall Street Journal poll from January found
that 66 percent of Americans go so far as to favor cutting men's teams
[[Page H2455]]
in order to ensure equal athletics opportunities for women.
Any changes to title IX must be rejected on their face because
tinkering with the law in any way implies that title IX does not work
and that it needs improvement.
I come from the ``If it ain't broke, don't fix it'' school; and, Mr.
Speaker, title IX is not broken. Title IX has been the dam that holds
back gender discrimination in educational programs for 30 years,
allowing millions of young women the opportunity to pursue goals of
which their predecessors, including me, could only dream.
I am standing here to defend the integrity of this landmark civil
rights law because it is the right thing to do, but I also rise in
honor of my dear friend and beloved colleague, Patsy Mink. In 1972
Patsy helped to enact title IX and in honor of her valiant work,
Congress renamed title IX the ``Patsy Mink Equal Opportunity in
Education Act.'' She would be standing right here beside me if she were
alive today. She struggled for 30 years to protect educational equity
for men and women, and it is the memory of the beautiful legacy that
she left behind that we must not give up on the fight to preserve
equality for women.
Opponents of title IX are trying to redefine what America sees as
fair. As a consistent defender of gender equality and protection of
equal rights for all of our citizens, male and female, I am outraged by
this particular brand of fairness. Patsy would have been outraged as
well, and she would not have tolerated it.
I hope all of my colleagues will join me with our Republican and
Democratic friends who support this legislation as we all fight to
preserve the integrity of this landmark law. Please cosponsor this
title IX resolution for Patsy Mink, for our Nation's girls, and for the
sake of equality.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson).
Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my support for title IX.
As my colleagues may know, title IX is facing sharp criticism from the
Bush administration for being discriminatory. Despite the overwhelming
successes and support that title IX enjoys, Secretary Rod Paige created
the Commission on Opportunity and Athletics to determine whether this
measure needs to be updated for the 21st century. The commission's
recommendations could result in the loss of thousands of slots on teams
for female athletes and millions of scholarship dollars.
Donna de Varona and Julie Foudy, Olympic Gold medalists and members
of the commission, refused to sign the proposed changes to title IX. In
their minority report, Foudy and de Varona cited various problems in
the commission's process, including the omission of representatives of
high school athletics, failure to examine potential remedies for
discrimination against women and girls, and profound imbalance of
viewpoints in panelist testimonies. Even though Secretary Paige said he
would not consider certain controversial proposals to alter the
landmark legislation, there is growing concern over his sincerity,
since he did not withdraw the recommendation to use interest surveys to
estimate how many girls are available to participate in sports. Both de
Varona and Foudy withdrew their support of this proposal.
There is concern from the Bush administration that title IX has
adversely affected men's sports programs, such as gymnastics and
wrestling. However, these sports faced the greatest decline since 1982
and 1992, when there was little enforcement of title IX. There are
reports that programs such as football and men's basketball take more
than their fair share of the athletic budget, leaving insufficient
funds for other sports, regardless of gender.
When rethinking title IX, we must go back to its original purpose,
and that is to ensure that ``no person in the United States shall, on
the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the
benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational
program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.'' I
support, Mr. Speaker, equal opportunity for both sexes and believe
resources can be allocated under title IX to both male and female
athletic programs in an equitable manner.
Title IX does not apply solely to athletics. It includes access to
educational programs too. Title IX and the Women's Educational Equity
Act of 1974 have opened doors for women seeking a college or
postgraduate degree. In 1972, the year title IX was signed, women
earned just 7 percent of all law degrees. By 1997 they received 44
percent. Five years after title IX was signed, women earned only 9
percent of all medical degrees. But because of title IX, 41 percent
received medical degrees.
So we see title IX indeed can work.
Education is the key to a better life, and title IX has greatly aided
a woman's ability to achieve the American dream. I will continue to
support title IX and to encourage my colleagues to do the same. It is a
question of equity, Mr. Speaker.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Woolsey), a tireless fighter for gender equity.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join my colleagues today in
support of title IX, and I would like to thank the gentlewoman from New
York (Ms. Slaughter) for organizing this afternoon's effort.
As we stand here today, title IX is being threatened by
recommendations from the commission on title IX, a commission appointed
by President Bush and his administration to study title IX, hoping to
alter the law.
Before title IX, fewer than 30,000 girls participated in
intercollegiate athletics. Today, more than 100,000 women compete. In
high school, fewer than 7 percent of girls played various sports prior
to title IX, and today, the number of participants has increased to 40
percent, over 40 percent, as a matter of fact.
Do these gains mean that the work of title IX is finished, and that
it is time for the supporters of title IX to take their balance and go
home? Absolutely not.
Contrary to the scare tactics being used by opponents of title IX to
say that women's sports are using up athletic funds needed for men's
sports, the facts show that women, even with title IX, continue to
receive far less funding for their sports than men. It is a fact: title
IX does not deprive men of athletic resources.
In fact, the real problem is that the resources that the male
athletics receive are distributed inequitably among men's sports. In
addition, schools choose to eliminate teams for many reasons, and all
of those reasons are not related to title IX.
In fact, I had a very interesting experience as a member of the
Committee on Education and the Workforce when we had a hearing on title
IX quite a few years ago, I think it was about 5 years ago, as a matter
of fact. I sat there and I listened to the witnesses at this hearing
tell us that men's wrestling, men's football, and every sport that the
guys are interested in were being threatened because of women's sports
and because of an investment in title IX.
Somehow or another, they made a big mistake. They brought forward an
individual representing San Francisco State University who sat before
us and told us that the men's football program at San Francisco State
was eliminated because of title IX. Well, I had my ability at that
point to contradict, because, Mr. Speaker, one of my sons, I have three
sons and a daughter, all athletes, including my daughter. One of my
sons was an all-American football player from San Francisco State
University. He was a tackle. He was the captain of the defensive team,
and I went to every single game. Mr. Speaker, I loved cheering for that
kid and that team. Well, there were no programs at the games, there was
no band, there were no food vendors, and the reason was, nobody at that
school was particularly interested in football. And I knew that, we
knew that, and a few years after my son graduated from college, the
program was discontinued. But it had nothing to do with title IX; it
had to do with the fact that at that time in San Francisco at that
particular university, it was a State University, there was just no
interest in the program.
Title IX, therefore, must continue to be defended. We cannot have it
used as the reason for men's sports not getting their due when they get
more than their due. In my own State of California where women make up
over 56 percent of the full-time students at our
[[Page H2456]]
108 State and community colleges, women's sports receive 35 percent of
the athletic budget. And let me remind my colleagues, they make up 56
percent of full-time student bodies.
In Georgia, more than 86 percent of the legislative branch for
stadiums, for lighting and equipment at public schools went to boys'
sports projects; 86 percent. So while title IX is transforming the
playing field for men's and women's sports in general, it is not level
yet.
Mr. Speaker, we need to keep title IX strong. We need to fight any
attempts by this administration or Congress that will weaken its
effectiveness. It is not just because we want girls to get to play; it
is because when one plays on a team or when one is in an individual
sport and that sport is valued at all, one learns. One learns
competitiveness; one learns how to compete with one's self and do
better the next time; one learns how to win and one learns how to lose,
and one learns how to play on a team. All of that plays out later when
one is involved in the business world, when one is involved in raising
children, when one is involved in knowing how important one's own self-
esteem is and how important it will be to raising one's children. So we
must strengthen title IX. We must never weaken its effectiveness.
____________________