The NFL Players Union was on Capitol Hill this week to lobby Congress regarding the lockout. The potential of an NFL lockout has terrified fans as it seems a real possibility that next season could be football-free. One group has been galvanizing the fan voice in a strategic manner to attack the lockout with facts, negotiations, and  a strong voice in Washington and beyond - The Sports Fans Coalition. I spoke with Executive Director Brian Frederick on the lockout and other issues where his group is involved.  

This week the NFL Players were on Capitol Hill, what are your thoughts on their having Congress involved? What do you think of the NFL's criticism of this activity saying that ""This deal will be reached at the negotiating table, not in the halls of Congress"

Everyone hopes that Congress doesn't have to get involved in the situation, but the fact that both sides are actively lobbying Congress suggests that this fight will not be over anytime soon. The NFL's criticism of the NFLPA for taking to Capitol Hill represents the height of hypocrisy considering the NFL's own political action committee (NFLPAC) has spent around $2.5 million on lobbying in the last two years. The players aren't spending anywhere close to that kind of money; they're just trying to use their star power. The fans have neither, but they do have numbers. 

What can fans do to stop the lockout? Why should they bother? Is their voice really relevant? 

Their voice is absolutely relevant if fans can unite into one collective voice, which they can do by signing the petition at www.SaveNextSeason.com The NFL and the NFLPA are already very concerned about the Sports Fans Coalition and our efforts. If those efforts are backed up by hundreds of thousands of fans, we could seriously force an end to the resolution -- and one that's in the best interest of fans.  

Breakdown the FCC's recent retransmission ruling and how it affects fan viewing. You were an early voice in that discussion - why? 

 The FCC has decided to open a new rulemaking on the issue of retransmission consent because fights between broadcasters and cable/satellite companies are becoming extremely nasty. The biggest example of this was the Fox-Cablevision dispute that caused millions of sports fans in the New York area to miss the first few games of the World Series. We have said from the beginning that both parties in these disputes should negotiate in private but keeps the games on, especially since the fans have paid for the stadiums. Between that and the FCC telling Comcast that as part of its merger it must make sports programming more available to its competitors, we are pleased that the federal government is starting to pay attention to the concerns of sports fans. 

Besides the NFL what are some other key sports disputes which you want to influence in the next few years? 

Our concerns with the NFL aren't just limited to the looming lockout. We also want to put an end to the NFL's blackout rule which punishes fans in particularly hard-hit communities who can't afford to go to games but who have had to pay taxes on their team's stadium. This is why we have spent so much time raising the concerns of sports fans with the FCC. The blackout rule is on their books and they have the power to change it. 

Also looming on the horizon is a possible NBA lockout. And that fight could be even uglier than the NFL's fight. Unlike the NFL, which has never been more popular, the NBA has serious problems now, including the situation involving the New Orleans Hornets, who are now owned by the league and may relocate or contract. 

Finally, we will continue to fight for a college playoff and will work to gain Congressional support of any action in that direction. The NCAA is clearly unable to gain control of its most profitable product and given the inequities that are inherent in the BCS system, Congressional action may be the only hope for change. The vast majority of sports fans everywhere hate the BCS enough to accept Congress' involvement, I believe. 

Who do you believe currently thinks they speak for fans but really doesn't?  

Well, clearly the NFLPA and the NFL both feel that their interests represent the best interests of fans. And I believe that they believe that. But there's no way they can objectively assess or speak to fans' true concerns. Only a nonprofit advocacy organization can challenge both sides. In addition, sometimes some sports media tend to believe that they are speaking for the fans, but they don't ever truly challenge the leagues or the owners because they don't to lose access or because they have business relationships with the leagues. This creates a problem for our organization when we depend on the same media to get out the word about the issues affecting fans. Which is why we are so dependent upon people spreading the word about sportsfans.org. When fan interests don't get coverage, it's not because those interests aren't important -- it's because those interests conflict with the interests of the sports-media complex. 

(image - wikicommons)

The Kentucky Speedway is hosting a NASCAR Sprint Cup race this coming July. In order to expand seating for the event the Speedway applied for state tax rebates and received them. This is the second time in the last few weeks that NASCAR owners have made out like bandits by receiving government funding for the sport, something which should have fans wondering how that funding trickles down.

The Kentucky Speedway received from the State of Kentucky rebates worth over $20 million over the next ten years. That funding was approved with the Governor's blessing, a coup for NASCAR and racing on its own - but that's not all they've won of late. The President's tax package, recently signed into law, included a tax provision which would benefit owners of NASCAR tracks with capital projects to the tune of $40 million. The Federal incentive isn't a new thing; it's actually been occurring since 2004 and adjusts the depreciation schedule for tracks to avoid taxation.

NASCAR was obviously pleased with the federal tax incentive - "being able to provide the track owners the opportunity to invest more in their tracks and make them better and safer is important for us and our fans" said a spokesman.

NASCAR owners are smart to lobby on both issues but I have a hard time believing the fans' chief concern when they see their tax dollars being dispersed is safety. I would venture to say that the price of a ticket is the number 1 priority, an issue which doesn't appear to be a string attached to federal funding.

NASCAR owners deserve great applause for their fantastic state and federal lobbying on behalf of the sport, but fans have a right to ask how this funding on the local and federal side translates to their pocketbook.  NASCAR would likely respond that incentives help them create jobs which should be enough for taxpayers, but I think that fans have the right to ask for more. The fans also support local jobs by paying for merchandise, tickets, etc and could make themselves part of the conversation if they chose.

And they will have the chance in the near future.

The Gateway International Raceway in Madison, IL is now looking for a local tax break to help them sell their facilities while the federal tax break that the President just signed is due to expire in 2 years.

Fans should consider gearing up on this issue before the next legislative silly season to determine if it's worth a push for lower tickets or other fan needs, or if its better to remain in neutral on this ongoing issue.

(image - wikicommons)

It's not news that the possibility of an NFL lockout looms large. The question is what to do about it. This is the first in a series of regular
sports lobbying analysis to determine if there is a way to stop the lockout through the power of politics, government, and your voice ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

This past week, an interesting group of anti-lockout advocates stepped on to the field - state legislators from Massachusetts.
State Representative Marty Walsh and State Senator Brian Joyce were actively
engaged in writing letters to Patriots owner Robert Kraft regarding the lockout.
Their questions and overall lobbying strategy coupled with his response are insightful
as to the question - is there a way to create political pressure to stop the
lockout?

Why Do These Elected Officials Care? - Representative Marty Walsh is involved because he is a ticket holder and
fan. It's unclear why Brian Joyce is involved. What's obvious is that it doesn't
appear they have been swayed by some large constituent body in MA upset about
the lockout and asking them to intervene. On the one hand it is promising that
elected officials would be aware of the lockout and work to stop it on their
own, but it is disappointing that the fan base wasn't the impetus for their actions.
The difference of course is legislative time spent dealing with the matter. For
each elected official, there is likely a dozen other issues they have to deal
with on a weekly basis and the constituencies of those issues likely have a more active voice than the average football fan.

What Was Their Argument? - The argument that the legislators used is interesting. Arguing jobs,
Walsh wrote of past lockouts as "We all
remember the empty stadiums, empty streets, and ill-will wrought by those work
stoppages. Nobody wants to re-live that experience." This is an argument
which doesn't reflect the sad nature of fans not being able to watch a beloved
sport, but instead puts the burden of jobs on NFL owners. This response seems
to be the result of the NFL Players Union's earlier
letters to politicians across the country warning of devastating job losses if
the lockout occurs. In a letter to NY politicians, the Union
wrote "During one of the worst economies
since the Great Depression, NFL owners are preparing to cancel the 2011 season
and, in the process, devastate New York businesses and stadium workers who count on football Sundays to make
ends meet."  The Players Union lobbying
strategy seems to be successful in not necessarily getting universal
legislators to act (this was only a few) but it is successful in giving those that act a
valid argument when discussing the issue with NFL owners in their state.



Did It Work?  "They should lobby the union. We're
negotiating hard" replied Kraft to a reporter's question on this response.   Not exactly a win....

Lessons Learned 

1.      Pressure by politicians on those actively involved with the lockout does work. An NFL
owner is rich for a reason and typically those other business interests which make him rich involve other policy issues with local elected officials. An NFL owner wants to be able to
speak to a legislator about issues relating to business interests and not have
to defend an NFL lockout.

2.      The argument is solid. Jobs mean something. Many owners spent their own time
lobbying to have cities pay exorbitant costs with the argument that the money brought in by new jobs and taxes would be a quality return on investment. Legislators are in a
position to flip that argument back on the owners.

3.      Elected officials can't do it alone. It's great these elected officials are involved,
but without the constituency heavily backing up their efforts it becomes easy
for NFL owners in this case or the players union in the future to ignore concerned
elected officials or tell them it isn't as big a deal as they think. Why should
elected officials think differently if they haven't heard from local fans? It's a coup for the lobbying union to have this level of active constituency, but it isn't reflective of every legislator in MA who has fans in his district which would be obviously upset should a lockout occur. Where are those fans? It seems all of them need to speak to their local mayor, senator or legislator to tell them why they don't want a lockout. 

(image - wikicommons)

This week the Stanley Cup took to Capitol Hill where it was shuffled from office to office to be photographed and admired by Members of Congress and their staff. The Stanley Cup was used as part of "Hockey Day on Capitol Hill" in conjunction with the Congressional Hockey Caucus. Hockey and Stanley seem to have missed an opportunity here to really push some sports influence.

The NHL can't simply give away the attention and star power that comes with their greatest trophy and not ask for something in return.  When any form of celebrity ventures to meet with their elected official they typically come with an "ask" relating to an issue or concern. For an elected official to meet with the celebrity, get a picture and the subsequent press coverage the elected official has to listen or buy in to the issue the celebrity is lobbying. So to with sports lobbying, no sports player or organization should give away the attention that comes with their presence or in this case their famous trophy for free.

Contrast this with The American Meat Institute which regularly brings MLB players to their annual hot dog lunch to promote their meat-centric agenda. The likes of Mike Boddicker, Graig Nettles, and Harmon Killebrew are just some of the greats who have helped influence with their star power at what is now an institutional event in Washington. I recall when I was on Capitol Hill what a hot ticket this was which was only reserved for senior staff and people actually dealing with meaty issues (sorry, can't help myself).  Most sports lobbying gets it right but it's unclear what the hockey lobbying strategy was here.

I'm sure Hockey Day was a great success and it raised awareness for how great hockey is but NHL has issues they could be lobbying on. In the past the NHL as an organization has taken to the Hill to work on cable disputes. As for the players, they could be working on the ongoing performance drug issues or could follow their Canadian counterparts and weigh in on the safety regulation issues that involve the sport.

Not the end of the world, but hockey wins no trophies for this lobbying effort.

(image - wikicommons)

Maury Litwack is a recognized lobbying expert and founder of the advocacy training and education firm - Capitol Plan. Maury served on the staff of two Congressmen where he provided legislative expertise and political strategy. Maury left the Hill to expand the Washington office of Miami-Dade County, the 6th largest county in the country. His analysis of lobbyists, lobbying, celebrity advocacy, and earmarks have appeared in political publications such as The Hill, Daily Caller and FoxNews.com and on the radio in programs such as AOL's Politics Daily and XM/SIRIUS POTUS. His take on ongoing tech advocacy issues have appeared in top technology publications Business Insider -SAI, TechCrunch, and Mashable