A Path Forward for Reforming College Sports

As we move into 2020, it is important to assess where we are with the uniquely American phenomenon of elite, commercialized college sports.

Often, what is claimed about college sports is not what’s actually happening. The industry and its largest governing body, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), claim to promote an academic-first culture where sports are a student’s hobby, played by amateurs driven by their love of the game to represent their school.

Yet, in reality, commercialized college sport has produced pressures that challenge the academic integrity of institutions of higher education, the ability of athletes to get a real education, propelled out-of-control spending, eliminated basic rights for athletes that are afforded to other students, and failed to protect college athletes from health and welfare risks.

The United States is the only country in the world that has a significant portion of elite athletic development and commercialized sport embedded within its education systems. Consider that ten of the biggest outdoor sports stadiums in the world (excluding auto racing venues) are American college football stadiums. None of the largest ones are NFL stadiums.

Like millions of others, I love college sports, but there are several reasons why it needs to change:

(1) An overwhelming majority—98 percent—of all athletics programs spend more than they make, requiring mandatory student fees and general fund subsidies that prompts tuition increases and more student debt;

(2) Excessive staff salaries and expensive building sprees for lavish athletes-only facilities that isolate them from other students and the college experience;

(3) The NCAA doesn’t use its power and resources to address the health and safety needs of college athletes;

(4) Academic fraud and other academic improprieties within athletic departments and extensive recruiting of athletes who do not meet admissions standards threaten academic integrity; and

(5) Outdated amateur rules prevent athletes from exploiting the rights to their own names, images, and likenesses, or seeking work available to non-athlete students.

The popularity of college sports is not going away, nor do I think it should. However, changes are necessary and not to be feared. The question we need to ask is: Should the management and conduct of college athletics be based on myth or reality?

As interim president of The Drake Group, a group of faculty, staff, and others concerned about the corrosive aspects of commercialized college sport on education, we have worked on athletic reform for nearly 20 years. The Drake Group has a reform plan based on the simple observation that the current model of college sports does not work as intended. Once all sides get to that baseline, then real change can happen. The system, however, works very well for some parties, such as highly paid coaches, administrators, media entities like ESPN, and major sponsors. It does not work so well for the primary stakeholder: the athletes.

To reform college sports, The Drake Group advocates:

Controlling spending: Create a limited and structured anti-trust exemption granted by Congress. A full exemption is not practical or needed, but this exemption stops the financial arms race through Congress controlling access to federal funds for institutions that do not limit excessive spending. A limited exemption also allows the capping of sports budgets and coaches’ salaries without fear of litigation.

Academic disclosure: Public disclosure of athlete majors, faculty, and advisors without identifying individual athletes. Other academic changes include structured freshman ineligibility and a minimum 2.0 GPA. The freshman ineligibility proposal requires academic remediation for incoming freshmen athletes more than one standard deviation below the profile of the incoming class. Those freshmen should also have limitations on their sports-related activities—including competition—until they are able to “compete” in the classroom.

Eliminating “athlete-only” facilities: These facilities separate the athlete from other students, which inhibits access and exposure to all that college can offer.
Revamping athletic time commitments: An absolute 25-hour weekly maximum commitment for all athletic activity. The current NCAA 20-hour limit has many loopholes. Athletes average 40-50 hours weekly on athletic endeavors, which makes it difficult to be a full-time student.

Enhancing athlete rights: Athletes should have the freedom to transfer, along with name, image, and likeness rights to profit off their success, and a guarantee of their right to pursue any academic field.

None of those changes would affect the public’s interest in college sports. They would also bring NCAA rules closer to their original intent of being an organization that is focused on education as the main priority with athletics being an avocation that supports academic and life skill endeavors. The Drake Group is convinced that the NCAA will not reform itself.

While notable changes have happened in the past five years, such as a cash stipend allowance and greater transfer freedom, these changes were forced by public outrage, a burgeoning college athletes’ rights movement, government intervention, and several lawsuits.

As structured, American college sports, especially Division I, is based on three false perceptions. Those misperceptions are academics first, amateurism, and competitive equity. Academics are not the priority in Division I athletics. College athletes—by the NCAAs own studies—spend about 50 hours per week on sports-related activities and they struggle to pursue their majors of choice due to athletic obligations. College sports are infested with an eligibility-first culture to remain competitive rather than an education-first culture. The only amateur quality about college athletics is that colleges refuse to pay their players. Nor is competitive equity anything but a mirage: Out-of-control spending on coaches, facilities, and recruitment efforts tilt the playing field in favor of big spenders.

To start the above-mentioned reforms, the first step should be a two-year Congressional study to identify all problems and remedies such as was done with the Amateur Sports Act of 1978, which reorganized amateur sports governance in America and gave athletes significant voting rights in the administrative structure.

A promising bill to do so is The Congressional Advisory Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics Act of 2019 (HR 5528) in the House of Representatives, sponsored by Donna Shalala of Florida (former president of the University of Miami) and Ross Spano. As stated by Rep. Spano in a press release announcing the bill’s filing, “Our higher education institutions receive a substantial amount of federal student support funding. There is little oversight, and as a result, we have little insight into how the funding is being spent and if the students’ best interests are being prioritized. This commission would fill that gap.”

While it might seem strange to ask Congress to fix college sports, only Congress can provide legal ways to limit spending, such as capping coach salaries, while also tying Department of Education funding to ensure compliance with the reforms. We are at a serious crossroads with college sports governance and reform. The time for serious action is now, and HR 5528 and The Drake Group model are achievable pathways to get there.

SOURCE






Happy birthday Michelle Obama, I've canceled your school lunches! Donald Trump's administration lets schools cut back on fruit and veg and sell MORE pizza and burgers - and serve fries every day

Donald Trump's administration proposed new school lunch guidelines Friday that would undo several changes made by Michelle Obama to get more fruit and veggies on the menu: a move that comes on the former first lady's birthday.

The Department of Agriculture, which oversees the Food and Nutrition Service, said it is proposing new rules 'to simplify meal service and reduce food waste.' That would include 'increasing flexibility in the “vegetable subgroups” requirements for school lunches.'

But the changes would allow schools to cut the amount of vegetables and fruits required at lunch and breakfasts while giving them the ability to offer more pizza, burgers and fries instead.

It would also undo rules championed by Michelle Obama as part of her Let's Move initiative and The Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010.

Friday is the former first lady's 56th birthday.

Michelle Obama made healthy eating a signature issue during her time in the White House. 'I am determined to work with folks across this country to change the way a generation of kids thinks about food and nutrition,' she said.

Trump, however, is known for his love of fast food. He often ate McDonalds or Kentucky Fried Chicken on the campaign trail.

One of his favorite meals is a hamburger with a side salad consisting of an edge of iceberg lettuce covered in blue cheese. Apple pie with ice cream is his favorite dessert.

Consumer groups slammed the proposed school meal changes.

'The proposed rule would allow anything that might be allowable as an entrée on any one school day to be served as an a la carte item every single day. In practice, if finalized, this would create a huge loophole in school nutrition guidelines, paving the way for children to choose pizza, burgers, French fries, and other foods high in calories, saturated fat or sodium in place of balanced school meals every day,' Center for Science in the Public Interest Deputy Director of Legislative Affairs Colin Schwartz said in a statement.

'The Trump administration proposal also would limit the variety of vegetables served at lunch and allow schools to reduce the amount of fruit served with some breakfasts. (If past is prologue, lobbyists for the potato industry likely have replacements in mind.),' Schwartz added.

'The potato industry and junk food lobbyists should not be able to dictate what is and is not on school menus for 30 million students,' said Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook in a statement.

'Just because President Trump consumes cheeseburgers and fries every day doesn’t mean children want or should be given the same choice.

'There are far too many kids struggling with obesity in this country, and we should be making it easier for them to choose fresh, local whole fruits and vegetables, not limiting them to highly processed foods that will only make this epidemic worse.'

The changes had been sought by food manufacturers and some school districts that were frustrated with the higher food costs that come at providing more fruits and vegetables.

The USDA defended the proposed rules, arguing they would reduce food waste. 'Schools and school districts continue to tell us that there is still too much food waste and that more common-sense flexibility is needed to provide students nutritious and appetizing meals,' Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said in a statement. 'We listened and now we’re getting to work.'

A public comment period on the new rules opens January 21.

The USDA oversees nutritional programs that feed nearly 30 million students at 99,000 schools. About two-thirds of those kids qualify as low-income and receive meals free or for a reduced price.

Low-income kids are at a higher risk for obesity and are less likely to have healthy meals at home, making school lunches and breakfasts an important alternative for them. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, nearly 14 million children and adolescents struggle with obesity.

Additionally, the new rules would make it 'simpler to offer meats or meat alternates' at school meals. And they would cut the fruit serving guidelines from from one cup to a half cup.

For school lunches, the new rules would allow potatoes as a vegetable everyday and would allow them to offer pizza and burgers over more nutritious choices.

It's not the first time the USDA has changed school meal guidelines. In March, they allowed school breakfast programs to 'credit any vegetable offered, including potatoes and other starchy vegetables, in place of fruit.'

SOURCE





Religious Liberty Finds an Ally in Trump

The administration issues new guidance to protect faith expression in public schools.

Thursday was National Religious Freedom Day, which, as Gary Bauer notes, “commemorates the day in 1786 when the Virginia General Assembly adopted the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, written by Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson’s statute became the foundation for the First Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees religious freedom, among other key liberties.”

To mark the occasion, President Donald Trump hosted in the Oval Office students, teachers, and others whose expressions of faith have been silenced in public schools, as well as those who’ve fought in the court system to protect those rights. He declared that he’s fighting back against the “growing totalitarian impulse on the far left that seeks to punish, restrict, and even prohibit religious expression.” Indeed, he ordered nine federal agencies to roll back regulations that restrict religious liberty — most of them issued during the tenure of the most faith-intolerant regime in the history of our Republic.

Schools won’t be forced to sponsor religious activities. The guidance states, “For example, teachers and other public school officials, acting in their official capacities, may not lead their classes in prayer, devotional readings from the Bible, or other religious activities.” Yet, the order also states, “Students and teachers do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”

Moreover, each year, states must provide a list of districts or local schools that have “a policy that prevents, or otherwise denies participation in, constitutionally protected prayer.” And Fox News notes, “States are also required to report local schools that do not certify to the state that they don’t have unconstitutional prayer policies.”

While anti-religious zealots complained that Trump’s budding theocracy “undermines” civil rights and will have “dire consequences” for homosexuals and religious minorities, the truth is that he’s doing what he was elected to do — protect the religious liberty enshrined in the First Amendment.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins praised the administration’s new rules, saying, “For years, we’ve watched secularists pressure school administrators into telling students that they can’t pray, read their Bibles, or talk about their faith in class. Now, the tables are turned. For once, the onus isn’t on kids or districts to defend their freedoms — it’s on states to certify that they’re compliant and respectful of these basic rights. Thanks to President Trump, the government is finally standing up to schoolyard bullies who make a living trying to intimidate and silence students.”

SOURCE