[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 10, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S388-S389]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
  S. 249. A bill to permit the National Football League to restrict the 
movement of its franchises, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
the Judiciary.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, last November, John York, the owner of 
the San Francisco 49ers, announced his intention to move the team to 
Santa Clara.
  The 49ers have been an integral part of San Francisco for the past 60 
years. The team was founded in 1946 as part of the All-American 
Football Conference and joined the National Football League in 1950, 
when the two leagues merged.
  The team's name is derived from the city's history, celebrating the 
miners who rushed to San Francisco in search of gold in 1849 and helped 
build the city.
  The team has been a part of San Francisco for so long, and is such a 
central part of its culture, that the prospect of the team leaving 
concerns many of the people of San Francisco.
  In response, I am introducing the Football Fairness Act that provides 
a new and limited antitrust exemption that is designed to slow the 
frequent movement of National Football League teams and prevent 
communities from suffering the financial and intangible costs of these 
moves.
  As Mayor of San Francisco, I had the pleasure of witnessing several 
49ers' Super Bowl victory parades.
  What I remember most about those victories is the way the team's 
success brought the city together. I've also seen other cities unite in 
celebration of their teams' championships.
  Our football teams are more than just businesses. They are a common 
denominator that cut across class, race, and gender to bond the people 
of a city. They are a key component of a city's culture and identity.
  There are instances where a city cannot support a team, but it is 
disheartening when a city that can--and does--support a team is 
nevertheless abandoned and the loyalty of the fans discarded.
  In 1985, then 49ers owner Eddie DeBartolo explored the possibility of 
moving the team to San Jose. As Mayor of San Francisco, I worked with 
the 49ers and we were able to reach an agreement to keep the team in 
San Francisco.
  Today, I remain hopeful that an agreement to keep the team will be 
reached that will benefit the people of San Francisco and the 49ers' 
organization.
  However, this situation highlights a broader trend of NFL teams 
abandoning cities after those communities invested substantial funds 
and good will into a team.
  This persistent movement is bad for our cities.
  In the last 25 years, National Football League teams have moved 7 
times: Oakland Raiders to Los Angeles in 1982, Baltimore Colts to 
Indianapolis in 1984, St. Louis Cardinals to Tempe in 1988, Los Angeles 
Rams to St. Louis in 1994, Los Angeles Raiders to Oakland in 1994, 
Cleveland Browns to Baltimore in 1996, and Houston Oilers to Nashville 
in 1997.
  However, during that same time period only 1 Major League Baseball 
franchise moved. In 2004, with the approval of Major League Baseball, 
the Montreal Expos became the Washington Nationals.
  Why has there been stability in baseball, while National Football 
League teams have moved so frequently?
  Unlike the NFL, Major League Baseball has an antitrust exemption 
which gives the league and its owners control over the movement of its 
teams.
  When the Oakland Raiders sought to relocate to Los Angeles in 1982, 
the National Football League's owners voted to prevent the move. 
However, the courts found that the NFL's intervention was a violation 
of antitrust laws, and the League could do nothing to prevent the 
Raiders from moving.
  Just 12 years later, the Raiders left Los Angeles to return to the 
same city and stadium it had abandoned.
  If a city is incapable of supporting a team, it is understandable 
that a franchise would move. However, of the six cities that have seen 
National Football League teams leave in the last 25 years, five of 
those cities later received another NFL franchise.
  It is clear that NFL teams are not moving because cities cannot 
support teams.
  To address the real costs imposed on communities by the persistent 
and unnecessary franchise movement that we

[[Page S389]]

have witnessed, I am introducing the Football Fairness Act.
  The Football Fairness Act is straightforward and it is limited.
  It would permit the National Football League to review and restrict 
its teams' movement. This should help keep the fans who support the NFL 
from being left out of the equation.
  The Act is targeted. It limits the exemption from antitrust laws 
solely to the National Football League's ability to prevent the 
movement of its franchises. Consequently, the Act will not diminish 
competition.
  I urge my colleague to support the Football Fairness Act and help 
prevent the damage done to fans and communities by frequent NFL 
franchise movement.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 249

       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 ``Football Fairness Act of 
     2007''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds that--
       (1) National Football League teams foster a strong local 
     identity with the people of the cities and regions in which 
     they are located, providing a source of civic pride for their 
     supporters;
       (2) National Football League teams provide employment 
     opportunities, revenues, and a valuable form of entertainment 
     for the cities and regions in which they are located;
       (3) there are significant public investments associated 
     with National Football League facilities;
       (4) it is in the public interest to encourage the National 
     Football League to operate under policies that promote 
     stability among its member teams and to promote the equitable 
     resolution of disputes arising from the proposed relocation 
     of National Football League teams; and
       (5) National Football League teams travel in interstate to 
     compete and utilize materials shipped in interstate commerce, 
     and National Football League games are broadcast nationally.

     SEC. 3. CLARIFICATION OF ANTITRUST LAWS RELATED TO 
                   RELOCATION.

       It shall not be unlawful by reason of any provision of the 
     antitrust laws for the National Football League to enforce 
     rules authorizing the membership of the league to decide that 
     a member club of such league shall not be relocated.

     SEC. 4. INAPPLICABILITY TO CERTAIN MATTERS.

       (a) In General.--Nothing contained in this Act shall--
       (1) alter, determine, or otherwise affect the applicability 
     or inapplicability of the antitrust laws, the labor laws, or 
     any other provision of law relating to the wages, hours, or 
     other terms and conditions of employment of players in the 
     National Football League, to any employment matter regarding 
     players in the National Football League, or to any collective 
     bargaining rights and privilege of any player union in the 
     National Football League;
       (2) alter or affect the applicability or inapplicability of 
     the antitrust laws or any applicable Federal or State law 
     relating to broadcasting or telecasting, including section 1 
     of Public Law 87-331 (15 U.S.C. 1291), any agreement between 
     the National Football League or its member teams, and any 
     person not affiliated with the National Football League for 
     the broadcasting or telecasting of the games of the National 
     Football League or its member teams on any form of 
     television;
       (3) affect any contract, or provision of a contract, 
     relating to the use of a stadium or arena between a member 
     team and the owner or operator of any stadium or arena or any 
     other person;
       (4) exempt from the antitrust laws any agreement to fix the 
     prices of admission to National Football League games;
       (5) exempt from the antitrust laws any predatory practice 
     or other conduct with respect to competing sports leagues 
     that would otherwise be unlawful under the antitrust laws; or
       (6) except as provided in this Act, alter, determine, or 
     otherwise affect the applicability or inapplicability of the 
     antitrust laws to any act, contract, agreement, rule, course 
     of conduct, or other activity by, between, or among persons 
     engaging in, conducting, or participating in professional 
     football.
       (b) Antitrust Laws.--As used in this section, the term 
     ``antitrust laws'' has the meaning given to such term in the 
     first section of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12) and in the 
     Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.).
                                 ______