'This Is Patently Unfair': Yvette Clarke Slams SCORE Act's Name, Image, And Likeness Provisions

Forbes Breaking News

During a House Energy Committee markup meeting before the Congressional recess, Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) spoke about name, image, and likeness (NIL) provisions in the SCORE Act.

Transcript

00:00for your, not an opening statement, but you're going to discuss the bill. Thank you.

00:07Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Thank you. We are here today to consider the

00:14SCORE Act, but a title like the NCAA Wishlist Act would better reflect its true objectives.

00:21Just like big tech, the automotive industry, the energy sector, and many more, college athletics

00:28has become a multi-billion dollar industry. And much like those other industries, the entrenched

00:34powers of college sports have the expertise and financial resources to advocate for their

00:40interests here in the capital and across the country. Unfortunately, the vast majority of

00:45college athletes do not have the same ability to engage lobbyists and public affairs professionals.

00:51That sad reality is clearly demonstrated in the bill before us today. This bill fails to

00:59protect college athletes and look out for their best interests. In particular, I am deeply troubled

01:06by the antitrust exemption this bill would provide the NCAA and other athletic conferences.

01:13Let me remind you all that antitrust lawsuits brought by current and former players are the sole reason

01:28athletes have been able to achieve the gains of the last few years. And if history is any guide,

01:35the NCAA and other athletic conferences simply cannot be trusted with creating fair guidelines that

01:41protect students and college athletes' ability to profit off their own name, image, and likeness.

01:48We simply cannot turn to the same entities that created the broken, inequitable system of the past

01:55to serve as the stewards of a new system. We are already seeing the folly in this thinking play out

02:01with the newly created College Sports Commission, as proposed deals are rejected out of hand due to its

02:09decision to arbitrarily decide that college athletes cannot accept certain appearance fees, which seems

02:15fundamental to monetizing the value of one's name, image, and likeness. So let's be honest about what's

02:23happening in the wake of the House V NCAA settlement. Major universities and conferences, frustrated by

02:30donors directing funds to NIL collectives and players, are seizing on this moment to recoup lost fundraising

02:37dollars. This bill would codify an arbitrary cap on revenue-sharing payments made to players directly

02:46from universities, regardless of how much a university is profiting from their athletes' talent.

02:52This bill would also codify provisions in the House settlement, making it much more difficult for

02:59players to sign other NIL deals. This is patently unfair. Furthermore, this bill would also foolishly

03:08preempt state laws around NIL and college athletics more broadly, which along with antitrust lawsuits,

03:16ushered in this new era of equity and player empowerment. The blanket ban on employment status for

03:22college athletes is also unnecessary at this stage and only serves to further undermine the rights of the

03:30college athletes that have built this multi-billion dollar industry. I understand the pressure certain

03:36members are facing to do something on college athletics. It is big business in many districts across

03:43the country. But let's remember what's really at stake here. The ability for young people to participate

03:50in the free market just like anyone else. It is that simple. I urge my colleagues to reject the NCAA

03:58wish list act. And if we must do something, let's do something that actually serves the players rather

04:05than reverting to an unfair systems of the past. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

Category

Transcript

Be the first to comment

Recommended