By Sandra Loosemore
CBS SportsLine Figure Skating Writer
Sept. 15, 1998

While much of official Washington's attention is focused on the Starr Report, there is also regular business before Congress.

One of these items is a bill sponsored by Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, to revise the Amateur Sports Act of 1978 -- the legislation that provides the charter for the United States Olympic Committee and defines its relationships with the National Governing Bodies (NGBs) of individual sports, such as the United States Figure Skating Association.

On the surface, the revisions appear to be a good thing. Among the provisions of the new bill are:

• Revisions to reflect the fact that many athletes competing in Olympic-style competition are no longer "amateurs."
• Expansion of the USOC's domain to include the Paralympics as well as the Olympic Games and Pan-American Games.
• A provision intended to prevent a repeat of the Tonya Harding controversy by making the USOC immune from last-minute lawsuits in disputes over athletes' participation in the Olympic Games.
• Establishment of a USOC ombudsman to provide athletes with advice and advocacy on grievance procedures.

So, why is the bill being opposed by the USFSA?

The key trouble is the section that mandates 20 percent athlete representation on all governing boards and committees of the individual NGBs. From the USFSA's point of view, the problem is not with the concept of athlete representation -- the USFSA already conforms to the 20 percent rule -- but with the definition of "athlete" that controls exactly who is qualified to elect and serve in these positions.

The 1978 version of the Amateur Sports Act defines "athletes" as "individuals who are actively engaged in amateur athletic competition (in their sport) or who have represented the United States in international amateur competition (in their sport) within the preceding 10 years."

The new bill adds a clause giving the USOC and the USOC's Athletes' Advisory Council (AAC) veto power over the specific criteria NGBs use to define "athlete." Meanwhile, the AAC has come up with its own proposed definition of "athlete," which includes only individuals who have competed in the Olympic Games or World Championships within the past 10 years.

Elite competitors who have finished in the top half in the championship division at Nationals within the previous two years would also be considered "athletes," but only at the NGB level, and not in USOC matters.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE USFSA is not just an organization for elite competitors. The two largest competitions put on by the USFSA each year are the U.S. Adult Championships and U.S. Precision Skating Championships, and in the main competitive track there are four other divisions below the championship division that are also contested at the national level.

Under the AAC's criteria, adult skaters and those in the junior divisions and below would be completely excluded from consideration as "athletes" at both the NGB and USOC levels, and until the first Precision World Championships are held in the year 2000, even elite-level precision skaters would not be fully qualified as "athletes."

The fear, then, is that a very small group of elite skaters whose interests do not represent those of typical competitors could wind up with a vastly disproportionate amount of power. In an organization with some 60,000 active members, there are only about 50 skaters who meet the AAC's criteria for USOC representation and only an additional 180 or so in the second category.

Furthermore, many of these athletes probably do not have the time or inclination to take on the burden of unpaid committee work in addition to their existing commitments as active competitors or touring professionals. The two-year turnover for athletes in the second category would also likely discourage many of them from making a serious commitment or contribution.

On the other hand, the USFSA's current definition of "athlete" embraces competitors in all divisions and disciplines of the sport. It includes all skaters who have, in the past five years, participated in singles, pairs, or dance in sectional or national competition; in precision skating at the national level; or finished in the top four at the U.S. Adult or Collegiate championships. It has been estimated that about 3,500 skaters meet the USFSA's "athlete" criteria.

THE USFSA HAS BEEN CRITICIZED in the press for trying to "sabotage" the bill through last-minute lobbying when there have supposedly been ample previous opportunities to comment on the bill. In fact, the introduction of the bill in this session of Congress caught the USFSA by surprise.

It has also been reported that the USFSA should have been aware of the progress of the bill since their representative on the AAC, 1992 Olympic ice dance competitor Rachel Mayer Godino, has been a member of the working group responsible for drafting the bill. But it appears that Mayer Godino's role was as an advocate for the interests of the AAC, rather than those of the USFSA.

In general, the AAC seems to have had substantial input and involvement in the drafting of the bill, while little or no effort was made to involve or even inform the various NGBs. On top of that, the bill was passed through committee without the benefit of a formal hearing on governance or other major issues. It is now awaiting action by the full Senate.

The USFSA's position on this also becomes more understandable with a bit of background: Their current definition of "athlete" is already the result of two years' worth of debate.

IN 1996, A USOC AUDIT TURNED UP a problem with athlete representation on the USFSA's Governing Council, which comprises delegates from each USFSA member club. At the club level, there were no mechanisms for ensuring that athletes would hold 20 percent of the votes. So the USFSA formed a task force to produce proposals, including a revised definition of "athlete," which were submitted at the 1997 Governing Council meeting.

Unfortunately, several tactical mistakes were made along the way, resulting in an "us-against-them" conflict pitting elite athletes against entrenched club interests, which led to rejection of the proposals.

The next year, the USFSA tried again with a new task force, a new set of proposals and the new, broader definition of "athlete." These changes were accepted without controversy, and with the support of the USFSA's own AAC, at the 1998 Governing Council meeting in May.

THIS WAS ONLY A FEW WEEKS BEFORE Stevens introduced the bill to revise the Amateur Sports Act. Thus, it's not surprising that the USFSA was less than thrilled to discover that the bill would undo the work just completed.

It might be argued that elite skaters deserve more control of the USFSA because they are the ones who are indirectly providing most of the funding for the USFSA's programs through the sale of television rights for elite-level competitions. On the other hand, all of those elite skaters were once part of the rank and file themselves, and received the same benefits from the USFSA's grass-roots competition and developmental programs.

Moreover, it is hard to reconcile the AAC's elitist attitude with either the broader missions of the NGBs or the USOC's own charter under the Amateur Sports Act. In particular, it would be especially inappropriate to adopt a definition of "athlete" that excludes all Paralympic participants, while one of the major purposes of the bill now before Congress is to give Paralympic athletes the same recognition and rights as those from mainstream sports.