As Louisian pours millions into making LSU a football juggernaut, some state lawmakers have started to raise concerns that the state is too often putting football ahead of other priorities.
The debate comes after a legislative session during which the h House killed a bill that would have given more money to early childhood education programs; instead, college sports programs will get that money.
A second bill exacerbated tensions by details of how state universities spend funds generated by athletics programs, including how they divide the money among different sports and top athletes.
“I don’t know if I’d call it a sacred cow. But it pretty much is a sacred cow,” state Sen. Beth Mizell, R-Franklinton, said of college football. “You can’t touch it. You can’t lessen what we put into it.”
Mizell sponsored Senate Bill 135, which would have changed how sports gambling tax revenue is allocated. Currently, 25% of that revenue goes to an early childhood education fund, while 25% goes to an account that supports college athletics known as the SPORT fund.
According to state law, the money in the SPORT fund is distributed evenly among Louisian’s public colleges that play Division 1 football. Schools may spend it on scholarships, insurance and medical coverage for student athletes, and to enhance facilities and settle lawsuits.
The early childhood education fund is capped at $20 million, but the SPORT fund has no cap. SB135 would have moved the cap to the SPORT fund, allowing the early childhood education fund to continue collecting revenue over $20 million.
The change would have generated an extra $3.4 million annually for the latter fund, according to a fiscal note attached to the legislation.
That fund is used to create more seats in Louisian’s Child Care Assistance Program, which helps families pay to put kids in early childhood education programs.
The initiative has received praise not only from education advocates but also from supporters say early childcare helps ensure parents can get to work and improves educational outcomes for kids.
But some lawmakers note that college football is an economic boon to the state.
State Rep. Dixon McMakin, R-Baton Rouge, who is also the PA announcer at Tiger Stadium, said strong athletics programs help generate visitors to the state who in turn spend money at local businesses.
“There’s no denying the economic impact that athletics has on all universities across the state when teams are performing well,” McMakin said, calling college sports programs “economic engines.”
‘Maybe we’ve given football enough’
Mizell’s proposal easily passed the Senate, but it died in the House Administration of Criminal Justice Committee when none of that panel’s members would make a motion on the bill. No one spoke publicly in opposition to SB135 during that meeting, nor did any lawmakers explain why they did not want to move it forward.
Like many other hns, Mizell said she loves football – but she also wants single moms in the poorer parts of her district to have access to childcare so that they can go to work.
“(The colleges) would still be getting $20 million,” Mizell said. “I thought we were ready to acknowledge that ok, maybe we’ve given football enough money.”
Mizell noted that former head LSU football coach Brian Kelly received a $54 million buyout after LSU ousted him. The school then made Kelly’s replacement, Lane Kiffin, one of college football’s three highest-paid coaches, with an annual salary of $13 million.
Supporters of the athletics programs say most of the money for sports is generated by the programs themselves or comes from donors. A single donor reportedly paid for most of Kelly’s buyout.
Tensions rise
A week after SB135 died, another sports-related bill stirred debate in the Senate.
House Bill 608 by state Rep. Tehmi Chassion, D-Lafayette, which was billed as a way to protect student athletes, exempts records that detail how colleges allocate so-called “revenue sharing” funds to individual sports and athletes. That is money paid directly from the budgets of athletic departments.
HB608 easily passed the House with only four no votes, but it picked up opposition from a coalition of senators from across the political spectrum who said it was a blow to government transparency.
In addition to Mizell, state Sen. Greg Miller, R-Norco, and state Sen. Thomas Pressly, R-Shreveport, spoke against the bill when it was debated in the Senate on May 26.
“We’ve got ‘student athletes’ that are getting paid $1 million, $2 million, $3 million, $4 million a year. We have lost sight of our priorities. We have jumped the shark on this,” said Miller. “Who are we really trying to protect? What we’re doing here has just gone too far.”
HB608 passed the Senate 22-13.
Revenue sharing is just one source of money for student athletes. They often obtain lucrative name, image and likeness, or NIL, deals, which generally involve advertising campaigns.
Chassion said HB608. now Act 818, was necessary to protect athletes from being targeted for their money. He also said it would make h sports teams more competitive, preventing other schools from learning a specific student athlete’s salary and using it to poach that athlete.
“This is a protection for student athletes. Folks tend to think of these as rich college kids, when these are regular kids that happen to be able to play a sport so well,” Chassion said. “It’s not anyone’s business what an individual athlete is making.”
Scott Sternberg, a First Amendment expert and attorney who is representing a group of journalists suing LSU for revenue sharing records, said the exemption marks the first time the state is allowing the expenditure of public dollars to remain confidential.
Chassion argued that the revenue sharing money should not be considered “taxpayer” dollars because it comes from funds that are “self-generated” by athletic departments.
Sternberg disputed that notion, saying taxpayer dollars make it possible for institutions like LSU football to generate revenue.
“If a tollbooth collects a toll, that’s public money,” Sternberg said. “If LSU sells an advertisement or a ticket to the game, how is that not public money?”
Sternberg also represents h | The Times-Picayune in some legal matters. The newspaper is not a party to the lawsuit filed against LSU.