theory behind specter's concern for NFL (1 Viewer)

[Jackavelli]

http://openmike.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/02/15/668023.aspx

In this case, run over to Specter’s list of campaign contributions accounting at opensecrets.org. Number two on the list, with $100,100 is the cable giant Comcast Corp. Number one, with $197,500, is Blank Rome, a law firm that represents Comcast.

By sheer coincidence, Comcast is one of the cable companies at war with the NFL over the league’s NFL Network.

 

[kevison]

yeah, I actually heard that on ESPN radio the other day. You're right, it is a big coincidence with the NFL network struggle with Comcast and everything.

 

[St. Widge]

I also posted the list on the big Bellichick thread a few days ago.


http://www.saintsreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61205&page=4

 

[SaintsJunkie]

yeah they have been talking about that for a while on sirius, his supporters want to discredit the nfl, it's a shame that our government is run by a few lobbies, not exactly of the people for the people.

 

[billinms]

Specter has introduced legislation numerous times over the years concerning the NFL. In several cases, attempting to limit teams' ability to leave town.

2006: Sen Specter "said he would sponsor legislation to eliminate the antitrust exemption that allows the National Football League to negotiate broadcast rights for all of its 32 teams."

2005: Warned that the Eagle's suspending of Terrell Owens "could be an antitrust violation."

1999: "Introduced a bill that would require teams to set aside 10 percent of television revenue and use the money to pay up to 50 percent of stadium construction costs."

1996: Publicly supported a bill "that calls for any professional sports franchise that relocates and breaks a stadium lease to retire outstanding municipal bonds and repay other public assistance that benefited the team."

1989: Urged the NFL and Players Associations to rid the sport of steroids.

1987: "Introduced legislation calling on the Justice Department to study the implications of new technology—specifically cable television and ''pay-per-view'' services—with regard to antitrust laws and the N.F.L.'s television practices."

1985: Proposed a bill to allow cities to sue in Federal court to prevent football team from abandoning them for more profitable locations.

1983: Sponsored legislation granting professional football leagues a limited antitrust exemption allowing them to adopt rules against the signing of underclassmen.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2008/02/specter-more-than-a-spectator.php

 

[CargoJon]

I'm not a huge Specter fan, but looks like in 87 and 89 he had a lot of foresight into things to come concerning the league.....

 

[SaintJ]

Specter's not going to get bought so easy.

Specter's from Philly. Comcast was founded and is based here. Specter and the Roberts family, which has about 30%+ voting control of Comcast (one of the world's most widely held stocks, so this = "voting control"), run in the same small circles of the same small town, but neither owns the other. Neither Specter nor the Roberts family has ever rolled like that. Not that they're totally above it, but that's not how they roll.

Moreover, people forget that even small towns have their own fiefdoms. Specter's a multi-term senator and was so before Comcast became a real power about 10-12 years ago.

And please trust me that Blank Rome's % of Comcast's legal budget is immaterial.

Forget conspiracies. This is just classic Specter, and it would have happened whether Comcast was here or not.

 

[SaintsJunkie]

all politicians are bought, by definition. they all have to get re-elected and need campaign contributions-for favors, they just decide who is going to buy them, but they are all bought. I also know if you talk to their lawyer and make the correct campaign contribution or cash, you can get a license or contract for just about anything.

 

[Three Monkeys]

Specter has introduced legislation numerous times over the years concerning the NFL. In several cases, attempting to limit teams' ability to leave town.

2006: Sen Specter "said he would sponsor legislation to eliminate the antitrust exemption that allows the National Football League to negotiate broadcast rights for all of its 32 teams."

2005: Warned that the Eagle's suspending of Terrell Owens "could be an antitrust violation."

1999: "Introduced a bill that would require teams to set aside 10 percent of television revenue and use the money to pay up to 50 percent of stadium construction costs."

1996: Publicly supported a bill "that calls for any professional sports franchise that relocates and breaks a stadium lease to retire outstanding municipal bonds and repay other public assistance that benefited the team."

1989: Urged the NFL and Players Associations to rid the sport of steroids.

1987: "Introduced legislation calling on the Justice Department to study the implications of new technology—specifically cable television and ''pay-per-view'' services—with regard to antitrust laws and the N.F.L.'s television practices."

1985: Proposed a bill to allow cities to sue in Federal court to prevent football team from abandoning them for more profitable locations.

1983: Sponsored legislation granting professional football leagues a limited antitrust exemption allowing them to adopt rules against the signing of underclassmen.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2008/02/specter-more-than-a-spectator.php

Does anyone really have a problem with any of this?

From someone on the left side of the argument, I'm the last person to be arguing for a Republican, but I think these kinds of legislation are more about the NFL's wonderful anti-trust exemptions.

 

[St. Widge]

Specter's not going to get bought so easy.

Specter's from Philly. Comcast was founded and is based here. Specter and the Roberts family, which has about 30%+ voting control of Comcast (one of the world's most widely held stocks, so this = "voting control"), run in the same small circles of the same small town, but neither owns the other. Neither Specter nor the Roberts family has ever rolled like that. Not that they're totally above it, but that's not how they roll.

Moreover, people forget that even small towns have their own fiefdoms. Specter's a multi-term senator and was so before Comcast became a real power about 10-12 years ago.

And please trust me that Blank Rome's % of Comcast's legal budget is immaterial.

Forget conspiracies. This is just classic Specter, and it would have happened whether Comcast was here or not.

So what is his motivation? Is he just a huge fan of government getting involved in private business or is he doing it as a favor to his friends?

Multi-term Senator or not, he likely owes many favor to people who helped to make him a multi-term Senator and he has to do plenty of "favors" to keep himself a multi-term Senator. And, that could even taken the form of going after the "big, bad" NFL to make the common folk happy because he's "sticking it to the man."

By the way J, why is that an allegedly conservative Republican Senator has the Law Firm of Baron & Budd (one of the largest plaintiff's firms in the country) as one of his to 20 campaign contributors? Is he planning on running on the pro trial lawyers platform next time?

 

[St. Widge]

Does anyone really have a problem with any of this?

From someone on the left side of the argument, I'm the last person to be arguing for a Republican, but I think these kinds of legislation are more about the NFL's wonderful anti-trust exemptions.

I have a problem with every single one of them except the action he took in 1983. All of the others are simply expansion of Federal Government power. It's not surprising that if you consider yourself on the left you would like what Specter has been doing.

 

[CargoJon]

So what is his motivation? Is he just a huge fan of government getting involved in private business or is he doing it as a favor to his friends?

Multi-term Senator or not, he likely owes many favor to people who helped to make him a multi-term Senator and he has to do plenty of "favors" to keep himself a multi-term Senator. And, that could even taken the form of going after the "big, bad" NFL to make the common folk happy because he's "sticking it to the man."

By the way J, why is that an allegedly conservative Republican Senator has the Law Firm of Baron & Budd (one of the largest plaintiff's firms in the country) as one of his to 20 campaign contributors? Is he planning on running on the pro trial lawyers platform next time?

:mdr168: :mdr168: :mdr168: :mdr168: :mdr168:

You don't know Arlen Specter that well, do you? He's been on of our Senators here as long as I can remember. And "conservative" is the one of the last words I'd use to describe him.

 

[St. Widge]

:mdr168: :mdr168: :mdr168: :mdr168: :mdr168:

You don't know Arlen Specter that well, do you? He's been on of our Senators here as long as I can remember. And "conservative" is the one of the last words I'd use to describe him.

Actually, no I don't really know much about him, but if the above is indicative of his voting record then he is clearly not an economic conservative. I guess he's yet another reason not to confuse the term "Republican" with "conservative".

 

[Three Monkeys]

I have a problem with every single one of them except the action he took in 1983. All of the others are simply expansion of Federal Government power. It's not surprising that if you consider yourself on the left you would like what Specter has been doing.

"2006: Sen Specter "said he would sponsor legislation to eliminate the antitrust exemption that allows the National Football League to negotiate broadcast rights for all of its 32 teams."
"1987: "Introduced legislation calling on the Justice Department to study the implications of new technology—specifically cable television and ''pay-per-view'' services—with regard to antitrust laws and the N.F.L.'s television practices."

So if the NFL is indeed 32 different businesses, why don't they let each team negotiate its own TV contract? And for that matter, its own merchandising? And what happens when this whole thing negotiates "pay-per-view" services? The individual teams won't have the ability to broadcast locally on their own?

"1999: "Introduced a bill that would require teams to set aside 10 percent of television revenue and use the money to pay up to 50 percent of stadium construction costs."
"1996: Publicly supported a bill "that calls for any professional sports franchise that relocates and breaks a stadium lease to retire outstanding municipal bonds and repay other public assistance that benefited the team."

God forbid the teams be required to help pay for the cost of stadiums and then provide some sort of guarantee when they abandon the city.


At least three of his proposals protect municipalities from being screwed by the NFL. Two of them are about the individual teams ability to negotiate on their own behalf (free market and all that).

Funny how the only one you like is the one denying someone the right to offer himself up for a job. Since it doesn't appear that you favor a free market, which side are you arguing from.?

 

[St. Widge]

"2006: Sen Specter "said he would sponsor legislation to eliminate the antitrust exemption that allows the National Football League to negotiate broadcast rights for all of its 32 teams."
"1987: "Introduced legislation calling on the Justice Department to study the implications of new technology—specifically cable television and ''pay-per-view'' services—with regard to antitrust laws and the N.F.L.'s television practices."

So if the NFL is indeed 32 different businesses, why don't they let each team negotiate its own TV contract? And for that matter, its own merchandising? And what happens when this whole thing negotiates "pay-per-view" services? The individual teams won't have the ability to broadcast locally on their own?

"1999: "Introduced a bill that would require teams to set aside 10 percent of television revenue and use the money to pay up to 50 percent of stadium construction costs."
"1996: Publicly supported a bill "that calls for any professional sports franchise that relocates and breaks a stadium lease to retire outstanding municipal bonds and repay other public assistance that benefited the team."

God forbid the teams be required to help pay for the cost of stadiums and then provide some sort of guarantee when they abandon the city.


At least three of his proposals protect municipalities from being screwed by the NFL. Two of them are about the individual teams ability to negotiate on their own behalf (free market and all that).

Funny how the only one you like is the one denying someone the right to offer himself up for a job. Since it doesn't appear that you favor a free market, which side are you arguing from.?

Don't favor a free Market? I favor nothing but a free market. I think businesses should be able to decide how they want to run them without government interference. Every thing Specter proposed above, except the one I agreed with, gave the government power over a private company. If municipalities don't want to pay for a stadium they don't have to. No one is forcing them to do it.

Who said the NFL was 32 different businesses? Why would they need to be?