[ad_1]
SACRAMENTO – Two guests of honor attended the monthly meeting of the Oakland Rotary Club in November 2015: the University of California fanfare and an expert in sports economics extolling the rules of the N.C.A.A. college athletes receive compensation for their game.
While the group was training the crowd in the small theater – it was the week of Cal's football match against Stanford – the conversation about a multi-billion dollar company dependent on amateur athletes drew the 39, ear of a member of the public, Nancy Skinner.
His answer could break the economic model of major university sports.
Canceled the state assembly in 2014 and considering running for state senate, Skinner had spent much of his adult life defending causes that might be expected of a Berkeley activist: graduate assistants, banning styrofoam to fast food companies and raising taxes on the wealthy.
"Suddenly, the light bulb went out," Skinner said of the discussion at the Rotary meeting. "Rather than being the viewer who will say, 'My God, it's so unfair, how do these people come out with that?' I say, "Hey, if I'm in the Senate, can the state intervene?" ? & # 39; "
She is about to know it.
Skinner who was elected to the state Senate three years ago, introduced a bill that would allow college athletes in California to be paid for the use of their name, their image and their resemblance – Be it basketball stars signing their own marketing agreements or water polo players announcing swim lesson offers.
the Fair Pay for Play Act, that Skinner wrote with Steven Bradford, a Democratic colleague in the State Senate, authorized the state assembly the Monday by a vote of 72-0, with the support of civil rights advocates and free market advocates, including some Republicans. One version of the bill had already been approved by the Senate.
Once the chambers have settled all the differences, which should be a formality, the legislation will head to another major hurdle – Governor Gavin Newsom will have 30 days to sign it.
The measure, SB 206, would come into effect on January 1, 2023 and caused the expected opposition from the NCAA, the systems of the University of California and California State University, as well as the 39 prominent private colleges such as Stanford and the University of Southern California.
But Skinner's bill has recently received much-publicized support.
LeBron James, a frequent critic of the NAC, went on Twitter last week to urge California residents to contact their state representatives and tell them to support the bill.
"This law is a game change," James wrote.
A day later, Senator Bernie Sanders from Vermont retweeted James' message and added one of his own: "College athletes are workers," wrote Sanders. "Pay them."
This bill is the last battle of a long-standing debate over N.C.A.A's commercial booty. amateurism, a model that has largely survived court challenges, even though it has been reduced to the margins.
In recent years, the N.C.A.A. allowed colleges to grant "participation fee" allowances and scholarships, to relax strict rules for transfer and to encourage spending on mental health and meals for athletes, although most of the changes required incitement from the courts or from public opinion. (N.C.A.A. has abolished the limit of food that can be provided to athletes when Shabazz Napier, a Connecticut basketball star, told reporters at the 2014 2014 Finals that he often went to bed hungry.)
But opponents of the California bill see it as crossing a critical line and a professionalization of colleagues.
"We are strongly opposed to anything that could lead to a payment system for gambling," he said. Larry Scott, the commissioner of the Pac-12 conference, which has four universities in California and eight outside the state.
Scott and other leaders in university sport, including N.C.A.A. President, Mark Emmert, in a letter to California lawmakers this summer – describe a catastrophic scenario for state sports teams if the bill comes into force. They say that it might be forbidden for California colleges to compete for N.C.A.A. championships because they would have an unfair advantage in recruiting – being able to attract athletes with the opportunity to take advantage of everything from the sale of jerseys to sponsorship offers.
"It's like sitting down to play Monopoly and pulling out a different rulebook and every time I get Go, I'll give myself $ 400 instead of $ 200," he said. Andy Fee, sports director of the state of Long Beach. "I do not imagine too many people will agree to allow California schools to compete for N.C.A.A. championships. "
Although the state of Long Beach has abandoned its football program and is not a threat to reach the Final Four in basketball, the school maintains championship ambitions in some sports. He is winning two consecutive national titles in men's volleyball.
"It's not a high-income sport, but in this community it's a big problem," said Fee. "What am I going to do, get into their locker room and say," Hey, are you the best team in the country and now you're not going to play for a championship? "
The bill could lead to further complications, according to opponents.
What happens if a quarterback reaches a marketing agreement with a casino? Or does a basketball star have an agreement to promote a marijuana clinic when cannabinoids are on the North American Prohibited List? What about international students, whose F-1 visas largely prevent them from working off campus?
In his letter, Emmert highlighted the difficulties in resolving such thorny issues and asked legislators to table the bill until October, when a NAC. Committee to study the questions of name, image and likeness is supposed to complete his report.
Skinner, however, dismissed a call for more time.
"I went there," she said, noting that the NAC. formed his working group after the bill began to make its way through the legislature in April. "You had your chance."
That's why, she said, the bill would not come into force for more than three years – enough time to take into account the unintended consequences.
Skinner expects her opponents to hold legal challenges during this period, but she is also anticipating a growing number of allies.
Similar bills are in their infancy in the state legislatures of Washington and Colorado, and US Rep. Mark Walker, Republican of North Carolina, introduced a federal bill this year that would allow college athletes to be compensated for the use of their name, image and likeness. .
Skinner sees his bill as a catalyst rather than an end in itself.
While sitting in her state capitol office last week, Skinner recounted how she was a graduate student, listening to Harry Edwards, the sociologist who has coached many athletes on social activism, including Tommie Smith. and John Carlos, the Olympians who raised at the Mexico Games in 1968, the medals are placed on the medals to draw attention to racial injustice at home in the United States.
She presented the current debate as a resumption of her first political fight – the organization the assistants of his colleague professor for the right to be treated as an employee, with benefits in terms of salary and health.
In this case, she believes that an athlete should be treated like any other student with a marketable skill. An engineering student who creates a robot and a music student with a chance to work in D.J. club would have no limit to what they could earn for their efforts, except what others were willing to pay.
"For me, it's all about starting with a civil rights issue and waiting for a moment: it's like a ruthless exploitation of any student," Skinner said. "I do not know of any other sector that can count on a large number of talented people for whom it denies them any benefit and any remuneration."
Alan Blinder contributed to the reportage of Atlanta.
[ad_2]
Source link