If an individual is getting a free education, in order to play a sport, should those financing the education know the amount of money they earn from endorsements—based on being a player?
“Senate Bill 906, authored by Senator Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), would specifically add more transparency to the 2019 SB 206 law, the one that allowed student athletes to receive compensation for the use of the name being used, sign endorsement deals, and hire a sports agent. Under SB 906, those that make NIL deals with student athletes worth more than $5,000 would have to would have to tell the college/university of the student the amount of compensation and value of items and services provided to the student athlete or the athlete’s immediate family, the name of athletic team for which the student currently plays or the team the student athlete is expected to play, the student athlete’s gender identity, and the total amount of compensation and value of the items/services provided to all student athletes at the postsecondary institution each year by sport and gender of the team.
Like a politician getting a salary, those receiving tax dollars should also file reports on income. This, to me is a good bill.
Bill to Bring Transparency to What Collegiate Student Athletes Make Vetoed by Gov. Newsom
Veto of SB 906 comes 5 years following the passage of SB 206
By Evan Symon, California Globe, 10/2/24 https://californiaglobe.com/fr/bill-to-bring-transparency-to-what-collegiate-student-athletes-make-vetoed-by-gov-newsom/
A bill that would have made all name, image, and likeness deals by collegiate student athletes worth more than $5,000 more transparent, was vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom on Monday, resulting in the last veto made this session.
Senate Bill 906, authored by Senator Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), would specifically add more transparency to the 2019 SB 206 law, the one that allowed student athletes to receive compensation for the use of the name being used, sign endorsement deals, and hire a sports agent. Under SB 906, those that make NIL deals with student athletes worth more than $5,000 would have to would have to tell the college/university of the student the amount of compensation and value of items and services provided to the student athlete or the athlete’s immediate family, the name of athletic team for which the student currently plays or the team the student athlete is expected to play, the student athlete’s gender identity, and the total amount of compensation and value of the items/services provided to all student athletes at the postsecondary institution each year by sport and gender of the team.
Senator Skinner wrote the bill to not only make larger deals transparent, but also highlight gender equity from NIL deals.
“SB 206 sparked a revolution in the multibillion-dollar industry of college sports. Today, student athletes across the country are receiving compensation for their talent and hard work,” said Skinner in August. “That’s great news. But there has also been an increase in college sports boosters forming so-called ‘collectives’ and other strategies that appear to be benefitting men and once again shortchanging women athletes. SB 906 will shine a light on NIL and give us a better understanding of NIL’s impact on gender equity in college sports.”
The bill received little opposition in the legislature throughout the year, passing unanimously in each vote with only a few Senate or Assembly members not voting. As the bill was of no cost to the state and required more transparency from state universities over just how much student athletes were making and from where, both parties were satisfied with the bill. However, many also questioned the bill, as the boosting of transparency worried many in collegiate athletics in California that many students would reconsider going to California universities in favor of ones out of state without such transparency laws. The fact that much of NIL compensation was still being held up in courts also worried many, as the passage of SB 906 could potentially put the state in a bind down the line.
SB 906 veto
This fear led to Governor Newsom soundly vetoing SB 906 on Monday, marking his last veto of the year.
“This bill would require any entity or person that provides compensation or any item of value or service to a student athlete, or to the student athlete’s immediate family, over $5,000 for athletic purposes, to disclose specific information to the student athlete’s college or university,” said the Governor in his veto message on Monday. “It also would require the institution to make that information publicly available and listed with the athletic sport and gender makeup of the team.”
“I appreciate the author’s partnership on name, image and likeness (NIL). Since signing SB 206 (Skinner) in 2019, we have seen student athletes benefit from NIL across the nation. However, college sports are in a period of transition as many schools are changing athletic conferences and relevant issues are currently pending in the courts. As Governor, I want to ensure California’s colleges continue to be competitive with other states. Further changes to this dynamic should be done nationally.”
Others noted that this was likely not over.
“As soon as other states begin to get legislation for this, California might come around,” explained student athlete advisor Frank Kelly to the Globe on Tuesday. “But, as the veto showed, the state doesn’t want to be caught at a disadvantage over this. They want their schools to stay competitive for student athletes.”
