Does a new NIL bill in Congress have a chance?

As universities gear up to shell out millions of dollars to directly pay their athletes, a U.S. House committee debated legislation Tuesday that would regulate name, image and likeness compensation in college sports.

In the end, the Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements or SCORE Act squeaked through the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade by one vote along party lines. It now goes to the full House Energy and Commerce Committee for consideration.

The proposed legislation, which has Republican and Democratic sponsors, would codify the right for student athletes to get paid for the use of their NIL and override a patchwork of state laws around the country.

“It is long past time that we take action to ensure that we have a sustainable future for college sports, especially for women’s sports and the Olympic sports. That creates predictability and certainty for all student-athletes,” said Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., the subcommittee chairman.

“We must act now to protect and preserve the uniquely American institution of college sports we have all come to know and love.”

Should Congress stay out of the way?

But New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., the ranking Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee, said the bill does little to protect college athletes, while giving the NCAA “nearly limitless and unchecked authority” to govern every aspect of college athletics.

“Rather than offering college athletes new, strong, enforceable protections, the SCORE Act offers window dressing to address health and safety concerns and purposefully eliminates the ability of college athletes and law enforcement authorities to enforce violations of even those weak protections,” he said.

“We should not be doing anything that stifles the progress being won by the college athlete. The landscape of modern college sports is well on its way to being developed by these recent court decisions and Congress should allow that work to play out. Don’t get in the way.”

The recently approved House v. NCAA settlement allows each school to pay its athletes up to $20.5 million per year, which works out to about 22% of the average athletic department revenue at Power Four schools. The vast majority of the money will go to athletes in football and men’s basketball, the two most revenue-generating sports at most universities.

The proposed legislation mirrors some of the terms in the settlement and makes clear that college athletes are not university employees. It would allow athletes to hire agents, while receiving student privacy protections and support for financial literacy, contract guidance, and brand building. It prohibits pay-for-play and predatory compensation schemes, while reserving appropriate guarantees to agent access.

College sports at risk?

Rep. Russell Fry, R-S.C, said the future of college sports could be at risk if Congress fails to act. He said the bill ensures college athletes can benefit from their NIL while also protecting the broader ecosystem of collegiate athletics.

“Establishing school liability protections ensures compliance with fair rules and reduces the threat of frivolous lawsuits that strain university budgets and jeopardize athletic programs themselves,” he said.

Democrats on the committee said that while the bill requires agents to register with the NCAA and conferences, it fails to include meaningful protections to help ensure college athletes don’t hire predatory agents.

Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass.,said the bill would give the NCAA too much power at the expense of athletes.

“There is no enforcement mechanism. There is no recourse, right now, for states or for individuals. There is a liability shield into perpetuity, with no sunset, no revisiting by Congress,” she told the committee.

“So I want us all to understand that deeply before we go ahead. Because it doesn’t feel pro-player, to me. It doesn’t feel like this is an extension of athletes’ rights. It feels like we’re putting a couple of modest player protections into a bill based on what we know right now, and not being able to revisit it later and not giving them tools to advocate for themselves.”

Pro players’ associations, power conferences weigh in

Ahead of the hearing, players’ associations for the NFL, NBA, Major League Baseball, NHL and MLS issued a joint statement Monday urging Congress to reject the proposed legislation, according to The Athletic.

In their letter, the players’ associations warned that giving the NCAA an antitrust exemption would allow it and its members to “collude to harm athletes.”

“Whatever progress the athletes have made has been a result of their use of the antitrust laws,” they wrote. “The SCORE Act would take that weapon away from them.”

Meanwhile, power conferences endorsed the bill.

“In the absence of federal standards, student-athletes and schools have been forced to navigate a fractured regulatory framework for too long,” they wrote. “Following the historic House settlement, this bill represents a very encouraging step toward delivering the national clarity and accountability that college athletics desperately needs.”