James Davis: “I rise in support of the Riggs- Roemer amendment and against the mandate we are debating here this afternoon. This is a…”

“I rise in support of the Riggs- Roemer amendment and against the mandate we are debating here this afternoon. This is a well-intended provision in the bill. It has, as its sponsor has mentioned, the goal of encouraging students to participate in intercollegiate athletics, team sports that teach teamwork, individual sports that teach self-esteem and confidence. But the provision does not have the intended effect and indeed it will have the opposite effect; that is, it will risk hurting students. As has been mentioned, if enrollment were to drop at an institution, if student interest in participating in a particular sport were to decline and the budget dropped for that particular sport, this bill could have the effect of eliminating Federal funding that is needed to run that university or college and eliminating sorely needed financial aid. Let us focus on what the real issue here is. The real issue is that we should adequately fund our universities and colleges, not just intercollegiate athletics for women but for men as well. They should not have to compete against each other. Secondly and most importantly, as the sponsor of this provision alluded to, we need to strongly fund financial aid, because the greatest threat to participation in intercollegiate athletics is the time of our students who are increasingly being forced to work, as the sponsor was, and attend school and are robbed of the opportunity for extracurricular activities outside the classroom.…”