Fetterman and McCormick vote to pass the Protect College Sports Act

Audio By Carbonatix

(The Center Square) – Legislation supporters say would help "end the chaos and uncertainty plaguing college sports," while providing student athletes, fans, schools, and coaches "desperately needed relief" passed the U.S. Senate on Monday. 

Both of Pennsylvania's elected officials serving in the upper chamber voted in support of the bill. 

“As a former Division I college athlete, I know how important college sports can be to student-athletes and their communities,” said U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick, R-Pa., who was co-captain of the Army wrestling team at West Point. “And since coming to Congress, I’ve heard from Pennsylvania student-athletes and universities, both big and small. They all told me the same thing: College sports have become the Wild West.”

“I voted to pass the Protect College Sports Act to establish a national standard for NIL agreements, clarify eligibility and transfer rules, protect student-athlete scholarships, and support women’s and Olympic sports programs,” he added. “I believe it’s our best shot to stop the chaos and bring some certainty and fairness to college sports.”

The Protect College Sports Act, authored by U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., passed by a 77-22 vote.

Fetterman, who played football at Albright College, also voted to pass the bill. He did not respond to a request for comment from The Center Square asking why he supported it.

Following the bill clearing the U.S. Senate on Monday night, NCAA President Charlie Baker thanked the senators who authored and voted in support of the proposal “for their bipartisan effort to protect this uniquely American tradition of college sports in the decades to come.”

"Student-athletes from across the country and all three NCAA Divisions worked hard to get on this legislation moving and thanks to their advocacy, the bill just received a massive, bipartisan vote in the Senate," Baker said. “Now the bill moves to the U.S. House of Representatives and there is much work left to do to ensure student-athlete benefits are codified into federal law and future generations of young people can access those benefits and use college sports as the launching point for their careers.”

The NCAA argues that the legislation provides a nationwide, level playing field, as opposed to a “patchwork of state laws” which they believe “has destabilized college sports.”

In an effort to address revenue sharing, The New York Times reports that the bill would protect the right of college athletes to receive compensation for their “name, image and likeness” and institute guarantees for scholarships and health care.

The proposal sets a five-year eligibility period, according to the NCAA, which they say aligns with its age-based rule and “provides limited antitrust protection to enforce that rule as well as NCAA academic requirements.”

Transfer limitations are included for student athletes in the proposal, setting a one-transfer rule with “limited exceptions and provides limited antitrust protection to enforce that rule,” the NCAA said. 

In an effort to address tampering, the association said the bill “empowers the NCAA to set and enforce transfer windows and tampering rules.” 

Eligibility and transfer challenges can only be heard in federal court, according to the NCAA, to ensure that rules cannot be vacated nationwide.

As the bill was being debated over the summer, Penn State President Neeli Bendapudi penned a letter to Fetterman expressing her concern about the proposal. 

The Big Ten Conference, in which Penn State is a member, and the Southeastern Conference, SEC, issued a joint statement in June also expressing their opposition to the proposal. However, by the end of July, the conferences had endorsed the bill after some tweaks. 

On Monday, the Big Ten said they were “pleased” about the vote and were looking “forward to the next steps to passage as we continue to support the act as passed by the Senate."

ESPN reports that the Protect College Sports Act prevents Power 4 conferences, which include the Big Ten, SEC, the Atlantic Coast Conference, known as the ACC, and the Big 12 Conference, from growing beyond a total of 19 teams. The bill would also “force any school wanting to jump from one Power 4 conference to another to spend three years as an independent before joining the new league -- although that waiting period would no longer apply after 2031.”

Unlike the Big Ten and the SEC, On3 reports that the ACC and Big 12 were on board with the proposal from the beginning. 

The ACC, in which the University of Pittsburgh is a member, said that the bill clearing the U.S. Senate on Monday “represents an important step in the ongoing discussions surrounding the future of college athletics,” as they will “continue supporting all 18 of our member institutions as they engage directly with Congress and other stakeholders.” 

The American Athletic Conference, which includes Temple University, also described the bill passing the U.S. Senate as an “important step forward for college sports.”

More than half a million athletes compete in college sports each academic year, across all of the NCAA's divisions, according to NPR, adding that most of those who earn money compete in revenue-generating sports, such as football and basketball, in Division I. 

They also note that “only a small percentage of athletes earn six figures or more, most of them football and men's basketball players in the four "power" conferences: the SEC, Big Ten, ACC and Big 12.”

President Donald Trump has also been a vocal supporter of the bill. 

“This is a really big deal,” Trump said on social media, following the passage of the bill. “It will not only save college sports, it will save the colleges themselves. Congratulations to Randy Levine, President of the New York Yankees, and all of those who worked with him, on a job well done!”

While the bill cleared the U.S. Senate by a 55-vote margin, a number of lawmakers and organizations opposed it. 

U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, a Democrat representing New Jersey, is a former Division I college football player. He was a vocal opponent of the proposal and noted that some college athletes and organizations, including the NAACP, Congressional Black Caucus, and AFL-CIO expressed concerns about how the bill was written “without athlete input.” He also argues that it “shields the NCAA from accountability, and puts the burden of enforcement on athletes themselves.”

“At its core, it's a bill that undermines the rights of young people who pour their blood, sweat, tears, countless hours of work, and more into their craft,” said Booker. “Listen to the athletes. Listen to those who represent them. This so-called “Protect College Sports Act” isn’t about protecting college athletes—it’s about protecting wealthy coaches, powerful institutions, and an NCAA that’s held unbridled power for decades while athletes faced discrimination and injustice.”

In his opposition, Booker cited that college sports are now a roughly $20 billion industry, while more than 40 football coaches earn over $5 million a year.

“College athletes put their bodies on the line, and generate billions, they deserve a real voice and real rights,” Booker added. “This bill pulls the rug out from under them. Athletes deserve leaders who stand with them and I’ll keep fighting alongside them.”

On Tuesday, the NAACP said that they “strongly condemned” the passage of the Protect College Sports Act, arguing that the bill “only serves to give even more power to colleges and universities at the expense of student-athletes.”

"It protects those powerful schools from accountability while stripping student-athletes' ability to collectively bargain and limits their compensation for their hard work and skill,” NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson said. “On top of that, the bill offers vague promises of funding for HBCUs as a political trade-off for the harm this legislation will do to Black student-athletes.”

"We cannot continue to ask Black student-athletes to generate billions in revenue on the field and the court while they shoulder all the risk and receive none of the guaranteed security they deserve, like secure long-term healthcare and educational protections,” Johnson added. “Sharecropping is over, and this bill will only serve to harm student-athletes.”

While the AFL-CIO hasn’t issued a press release following the passage of the bill, two weeks ago, they argued against the proposal, saying it would “deny college athletes the rights and protections they are owed as workers” and “cut off any path they have to advocate for themselves, all so the NCAA, conferences, and schools can consolidate money and power.”

“For decades, a group of employers worked together to stop hundreds of thousands of workers from getting paid for work that generated billions of dollars every year. As soon as those workers won the right to compensation, it became a five-alarm fire stretching from the Capitol to the White House,” said AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler. “In the labor movement, we’re all too familiar with what’s going on when workers begin to demand a say over how they are treated, anti-union interests respond by trying to snuff out that effort.” 

“We urge the Senate to reject the Protect College Sports Act and work with athletes to draft legislation that empowers them to fight for better terms and conditions at work,” Shuler added. “And Congress should focus the rest of its time this month tackling the growing problems facing working Americans, not shoring up the power of wealthy sports conferences.”

The AFL-CIO also noted that college athletes won the right to be compensated for their name, image, and likeness starting in 2021, despite opposition from the NCAA and athletic conferences.

Jackson Pruitt, a football player at Temple University and a member of Athletes.org, was among the players who voiced their opposition ahead of the vote. 

“Do not give the institutions permanent legal protection without having independent athlete representation,” he said two weeks ago.

While the Protect College Sports Act has cruised through the Senate and has Trump's support, the U.S. House has yet to vote on the proposal. 

The House is on recess until after the November midterm election, NPR notes, saying that “its chances of passing are unclear.”