United States Boxing Commission Act
UNITED STATES BOXING COMMISSION ACT -- (House of Representatives - November 16, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
I rise in strong support of H.R. 1065, the U.S. Boxing Commission Act, which would establish a national regulatory body for the sport that has been riddled with corruption, scandals and lax enforcement of regulations, putting the lives of contenders on the line.
I want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee Chairman STEARNS with, whom I worked closely on this legislation in a bipartisan way, to produce a product that I hope that our colleagues on both sides of the aisle will readily support.
I want to thank in addition to the bipartisan staff who worked on this legislation, I would like to thank our legislative counsel, Brady Young, for his advice, expertise and the patience that is often required when working with our bipartisan team.
I know that there are some in this body who have just wondered why we are addressing this particular issue of boxing when they argue there are more important issues facing our country. I would respectfully point out that it certainly is not the least important issue that we find time to deal with in this body, and that, in fact, it does deal with the health and the safety of literally thousands of people in our country. So I am happy to be supporting this bill right now.
With the passage of the Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 and the Muhammad Ali Act in 2000, minimum Federal standards were set to protect the physical and economic well-being of boxers, and State boxing commissions were charged with meeting those standards. Some States have strong boxing commissions such as New York, Pennsylvania and Nevada that not only require the Federal standards but set additional regulations beyond the minimum requirements.
I want to point out that nothing in this legislation would prevent those that have stronger regulations from using those. Let me read directly from the legislation on minimum standards: Nothing in this Act prohibits any boxing commission from enforcing local standards and requirements that exceed the minimum standards or requirements promulgated by the commission under this Act.
What we found, however, was that there are too many other States that are ignoring the rules, and boxers are the ones who are paying the price.
Many argue that federally mandated health and safety standards are not being adhered to because no corresponding national regulatory body exists. Let me quote from the letter I received from the College of Sports Medicine, who heavily supports this legislation, when they say that, professional boxing is the only major sport which does not have a governing body to establish and enforce rules and practices. It is the only major sport that does not have that.
When the greatest and prettiest of all times, Muhammad Ali, tells you, ``Boxing reform measures are unlikely to succeed unless a U.S. Boxing Commission is created with authority to oversee a sport that still attracts a disproportionate number of unsavory elements that prey upon the hopes and dreams of young athletes,'' when Muhammad Ali tells you that, as he did to us in our hearing, one listens, and that is what Chairman STEARNS and I did with the drafting of H.R. 1065.
Boxing is an enormous enterprise. The sport generates over $500 million in revenues each year. However, because so many parties have a financial stake in each boxing match and because competing interests often run counter to the boxers' well-being and because not every manager is as upright as Clint Eastwood in ``Million Dollar Baby,'' many contenders end up destitute.
In this sense, boxers are like many other kinds of talent or workers. Their gifts and their hard work are others' fortunes, and they are treated as disposable assets.
Boxing is also unlike many other sports in that there are very serious physical repercussions. If health and safety standards are not being met, boxers could die, and they do.
Over the past 50 years, more than 130 fighters have died due to boxing-related injuries in the United States. In 2005, we lost the first woman to boxing, Becky Zerlentes. Dr. Zerlentes, a professor of geography, got her Ph.D. at my alma mater, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
I believe that it is our responsibility to ensure that boxers are not being put in the ring without being protected, both physically and economically. We know it is a dangerous sport by its nature, but it is our responsibility to ensure that laws that are already on the books are enforced. That is why I joined Chairman STEARNS in drafting H.R. 1065 to establish the United States Boxing Commission. This bill will help to ensure that standards are uniform and enforced and that boxers are protected.
The formation of a national regulatory body is supported by the Association of Boxing Commissioners, the organization of State boxing commissioners. They love their sport, and they want to make sure that the laws that govern it are being enforced, keeping the sport safe and respectable. Our bill also enjoys the support of those who say that boxers' health must come first, the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Association of Professional Ringside Physicians.
Finally, it would be a tribute to the greatest of all times, to Muhammad Ali, who lent his name to the law that is meant to protect boxers from those who see them as just a commodity and is not being enforced as it should be.
We need to pass this bill to do a service to the boxers, to the young athletes who see their dreams and their hopes come to life when they are in the center of that ring and the bell signals the first round.
I urge my colleagues to join in this bipartisan leadership of this legislation and support H.R. 1065.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I am aware of some concerns raised by the Governor's office in New Jersey about this legislation, where they are concerned about what they say is the erosion of State authority. So I want to be very clear about this and once again read from the bill and read an additional section from it:
``Section 9, Noninterference with Boxing Commissions. Paragraph a, Noninterference: Nothing in this act prohibits any boxing commission from exercising any of its powers, duties, or functions with respect to the regulation or supervision of professional boxing or professional boxing matches to the extent not inconsistent with the provisions of this act.'' By that we mean anything that has more enforcement powers. We are just setting a floor and the States can exercise all their powers, duties, or functions in addition to that.
And ``b, Minimum Standards: Nothing in this act prohibits any boxing commission from enforcing local standards or requirements that exceed the minimum standards or requirements promulgated by the commission under this act.''
A State like New Jersey that contends that they are doing a good job, we say go ahead and do it. We welcome that. We acknowledge that, and we hope that they will continue to do it. But the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of States, despite the passage of the acts of 1996 and the Muhammad Ali Act in 2000, are not doing that; and that is why most people associated with this sport including State commissioners, including State commissioners have weighed in in support of this legislation and look forward to the Federal Government seeing that boxing alone is not without some kind of national standards, and that is why this commission is so important.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would like to say a special thank you to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush) for the work he has done on the bill and for his strong support of the legislation.
I would also like to read a statement on behalf of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) who is the ranking Democrat on the Committee on the Judiciary.
He says, ``I rise in strong support of H.R. 1065, the United States Boxing Commission Act, which establishes a Federal commission with oversight responsibilities for professional boxing in the United States. This much-needed commission will establish uniform minimum standards which States must follow. It will also be empowered to issue additional regulations to improve the integrity and safety of the sport.
``Further, the commission will establish a Federal licensing requirement for participation in United States matches for certain boxing personnel, including boxers, managers, promoters, match makers, referees, judges and sanctioning.
``In July 2003, the GAO issued a report on professional boxing and listed elements identified by industry experts as essential to improving the health, safety and economic interests of boxers: medical examinations, monitoring of training injuries, assessments of medical risks, health and life insurance, the presence of appropriate medical personnel and equipment, and enforcement of suspensions for injuries.
``Additionally, the GAO found that industry experts believe additional changes are required in boxing and listed the following needed changes: one, require pension plans for boxers; two, require full disclosure of purses and payments; three, require minimum uniform contractual terms between boxers and promoters; and, four, prohibit conflicts of interest.
``While the Federal law has created requirements for States to follow, these laws are largely being ignored. H.R. 1065 will aid in correcting this injustice.
``Boxers often have little or nothing to show from their match proceeds, despite others earning vast wealth off the boxers' talents. We owe it to our athletes to create laws that protect their interests and to make sure those laws are enforced. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1065 and to support professional boxers.''
Mr. Conyers was unable to come down to the floor himself and wanted to make sure that this strong support of the legislation was placed in the RECORD.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie), who is himself a champion weight lifter, for weighing in on this legislation. I appreciate it very much.
There are literally millions of people who enjoy the sport of boxing, who watch it and follow it and who want to see that there is some integrity in that sport. A lot has been said about the contenders themselves, about the boxers. I would echo what my chairman, Mr. Stearns, has said in response to the question, why should we care? We should care about these young boxers who are trying to follow their dreams and to help create a sport that does guarantee them some level of standards of health and safety and opportunity. And we should also care because it is a $500 million industry in this country that has been plagued with lots of scandals and irregularities.
So we are not talking about creating a major bureaucracy to oversee this, we are looking at a self-funding body that would now add professional boxing to every other sport that has some national standards and national rules and regulations. I think it is fairly modest in its construction, and I would certainly urge all Members on both sides of the aisle to join us, and thank Members on both sides who came down and supported this regulation.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition, although I do not oppose the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I just want to make a few remarks in support of the Stearns amendment. The Stearns amendment would ensure that establishment of the boxing commission would not be a burden to the taxpayers. It would require that the fees collected from the licenses go to offset the cost of running the commission. The amendment is fiscally responsible, and it is consistent with PAYGO principles that helped us achieve budget surpluses in the 1990s.
This amendment was crafted in consultation with the Committee on Appropriations and achieves the stated objective. While I believe that boxing needs to have serious oversight, I also believe it should be paid for by those who profit and promote the ringside event. It is the least they can do for the sport they love, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment enhances safeguards to protect professional boxers. We all know that boxing is a tough sport with even tougher consequences and it is essential that we protect boxers as much as possible.
Unfortunately, there are varying standards among the States on what type of medical services need to be available during boxing matches. Because appropriate medical care is critical in determining whether the fighter injured in the match will recover, suffer permanent damage or will die, depending on the extent of the injury, this amendment would call on the boxing commission to establish minimum standards and what type of medical services must be available at professional boxing matches.
Additionally, many boxers only have insurance coverage the night of the fight. It is not surprising that many insurance companies do not offer boxers health and life insurance policies at affordable rates for the rest of the time. And not every boxer is a prize fighter taking home a big purse. This amendment would simply encourage the Boxing Commission to establish an insurance fund to cover members of the professional boxing community.
We have all heard of the destitute boxer struggling to get by. This amendment would call on the Boxing Commission to come forward on recommendations regarding the feasibility of the pension system for professional boxing participants. Remember, again, this is asking them to come forward simply with a recommendation regarding the feasibility of a pension system.
Finally, like most other sports, boxing is an international business. As such, I believe it is important for the Boxing Commission to enter into agreements with other foreign boxing entities to set minimum health standards for boxers who fight overseas.
All of these measures are important to improve the sport and to provide additional safeguards to boxing, and I urge support of this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner) named this the Archie Moore Criteria for Rating Boxers. So the reason that he called this amendment the Archie Moore criteria for rating boxers is because Archie Moore, also known as the Old Mongoose, held the light middleweight title for 10 years. By the time of his retirement, after 197 fights, Archie had compiled a truly unassailable sports record of 145 knockouts. All of this is even more remarkable when one considers that he spent a large part of his career, approximately 16 years, traveling to an unending string of boxing honky tonks open to fighters who could not break into the big leagues.
Archie did not get a title shot until he turned 39, a time when most boxers retire. There were many barriers preventing great boxers like Archie from rising through the ranks. One primarily being a broken rating system for boxers.
It is the job of the sanctioning organizations to rate boxers and to designate a champion. Sanctioning organizations make their money by sanctioning champion fights. The higher a fighter is rated, the more likely it will be for him to get high paying fights, especially championship fights.
However, often rankings are not based on objective talent or win-loss records; rather, boxers who belong to certain promoters may be highly ranked regardless of skill and ability. A fighter could be the best in his weight class, but if he is not associated with the right people he may not be ranked and thus lose his chance to further his career.
Previously, Congress passed legislation under the Mohammed Ali act to require all sanctioning organizations to develop credible and consistent ratings criteria. However, there are still problems with the system.
For example, one of the sanctioning organizations had a dead man ranked in the top 10 of a super middle weight division for 4 months. During the 4 months in which the dead man was actually ranked, he moved up in the ratings, going from Number 7 to Number 5.
This is just one incident on a long list of problems associated with the ratings system conducted by boxing sanctioning organizations. Obviously, something is wrong, and something ought to be done.
My amendment will require the Boxing Commission to establish guidelines for rating boxers. These guidelines must be followed by organizations that sanction boxing events. My amendment does not strip boxing sanctioning organizations from ranking boxers; however, it does require them to adhere to a set criteria established by the Boxing Commission.
Boxing will never be the sport it once was until the rating system is made more legitimate and respectable, which is why I am asking you to support my amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov