To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to cap certain intercollegiate athletics compensation and buyouts as a condition of institutional participation in Federal student aid programs, and for other purposes.
Summary
What This Bill Does
The bill creates congressional findings that escalating athletics compensation diverts resources from academic priorities and women's/Olympic sports, and that prior court rulings require a statutory antitrust safe harbor for any, amends the Higher Education Act to cap total annual compensation for any athletics department employee at 10x the institution's published undergraduate tuition and required fees, as a condition of Title IV eligibility, and creates an antitrust safe harbor: compliance with or enforcement of compensation cap rules established under Section 3 shall be treated as lawful under federal antitrust laws (Clayton Act, FTC Act) and similar state. It relies on regulatory standard, reporting requirements, and liability protections. The main policy areas are Technology and Education.
Who Benefits and How
NCAA could face reduced risk, Athletics conferences could face reduced risk, and Higher education institutions could face reduced risk.
Who Bears the Burden and How
Head coaches at major college athletics programs could lose revenue opportunities, Athletic directors at major programs could lose revenue opportunities, and Universities and colleges participating in Title IV would take on compliance duties.
Key Provisions
- Creates congressional findings that escalating athletics compensation diverts resources from academic priorities and women's/Olympic sports, and that prior court rulings require a statutory antitrust safe harbor for any...
- Amends the Higher Education Act to cap total annual compensation for any athletics department employee at 10x the institution's published undergraduate tuition and required fees, as a condition of Title IV eligibility.
- Creates an antitrust safe harbor: compliance with or enforcement of compensation cap rules established under Section 3 shall be treated as lawful under federal antitrust laws (Clayton Act, FTC Act) and similar state...
Evidence Chain:
This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.
At a Glance
What This Bill Does
The bill creates congressional findings that escalating athletics compensation diverts resources from academic priorities and women's/Olympic sports, and that prior court rulings require a statutory antitrust safe harbor for any, amends the Higher Education Act to cap total annual compensation for any athletics department employee at 10x the institution's published undergraduate tuition and required fees, as a condition of Title IV eligibility, and creates an antitrust safe harbor: compliance with or enforcement of compensation cap rules established under Section 3 shall be treated as lawful under federal antitrust laws (Clayton Act, FTC Act) and similar state.
Key Policy Areas
Technology, Education
Primary Purpose
The bill creates congressional findings that escalating athletics compensation diverts resources from academic priorities and women's/Olympic sports, and that prior court rulings require a statutory antitrust safe harbor for any, amends the Higher Education Act to cap total annual compensation for any athletics department employee at 10x the institution's published undergraduate tuition and required fees, as a condition of Title IV eligibility, and creates an antitrust safe harbor: compliance with or enforcement of compensation cap rules established under Section 3 shall be treated as lawful under federal antitrust laws (Clayton Act, FTC Act) and similar state.
Policy Domains
Whole bill
Identified Gains
- NCAA
- Athletics conferences
- Higher education institutions
- Women's and non-revenue sports programs
- Students at Title IV institutions
Identified Costs
- Head coaches at major college athletics programs
- Athletic directors at major programs
- Universities and colleges participating in Title IV
- Head coaches and athletic directors (as potential antitrust plaintiffs)
- Athletics conferences and media-rights affiliates
Legislative Progress
IntroducedMr. Baumgartner introduced the following bill; which was referred to …
Stakeholder Effects
cui bono?How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.
Athletic directors at major programs, Athletics conferences, Athletics conferences and media-rights affiliates
Positive-direction: Athletics conferences, NCAA
Negative-direction: Athletic directors at major programs, Athletics conferences and media-rights affiliates, Head coaches and athletic directors (as potential antitrust plaintiffs), Head coaches at major college athletics programs
Higher education institutions, Students at Title IV institutions, Universities and colleges participating in Title IV
Positive-direction: Higher education institutions, Students at Title IV institutions, Women's and non-revenue sports programs
Negative-direction: Universities and colleges participating in Title IV
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.
Learn more about our methodology