Baseball Legislation Introduced

Legislation that would remove part of the antitrust exemption that major league baseball has enjoyed since a Supreme Court decision in 1922 was introduced Tuesday by senators trying to end the players’ strike.

“The players have already voted to end their strike if this bill becomes law,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee and co-sponsored the legislation.

Actually, Donald Fehr, head of the players’ union, said Monday that if such legislation was passed, he would recommend to the players that they vote to end the strike.

Fehr and mediator W.J. Usery met Tuesday to discuss the possible resumption of talks, and Fehr said he hoped the sides would agree by the end of the week on when talks will resume. A source familiar with the negotiations said the sides could get back together as soon as next week.

“It was a sort of taking-stock session,” Fehr said after his two-hour meeting. “We’ll be in touch with the mediators everyday.”

Usery is scheduled to meet today with acting commissioner Bud Selig.

Fehr called the antitrust legislation “a step forward. It puts us in a position to move this thing forward. We hope to get prompt and favorable consideration.”

Hatch said the bill, also sponsored by Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.), is a new approach that would be limited to labor negotiations.

It would not affect baseball’s ability to control franchise relocation, the minor leagues or any other sport or franchise.

Currently, baseball players--unlike any other athletes or workers--cannot sue in court when owners get together to set labor restrictions.

Some congressional leaders disagree with the move, saying that they agree with it in principle but that its problem is timing because they don’t think Congress should interfere with the baseball negotiations. They have not backed President Clinton’s effort to force the players and owners into binding arbitration.

But by refusing to lift the antitrust exemption, “Congress by omission has already interfered,” Hatch said.

House Speaker Newt Gingrich (D-Ga.) said he does not support Hatch’s proposal.

“I don’t want the Congress to disadvantage either side,” Gingrich said. “I’m certainly willing to look at this issue, but I’m not sure I’m willing to use it as a club to beat up the owners on behalf of the players.”

A hearing on the antitrust issue was scheduled for today before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee, and Selig and Fehr are scheduled to testify.

Gingrich, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) and Usery, were to meet today, but Usery decided late Tuesday to postpone the session.

Hatch said the bill was being circulated in the House, and he would be talking to Dole about it.

Hatch said it would be an uphill fight to get it passed before the baseball season is to start, “but it could be done if people understand this is not congressional intrusion.”

The bill would allow players to sue owners if they unilaterally implement new work rules. Two U.S. circuit courts have said unions can’t file antitrust suits, but the Supreme Court hasn’t ruled on the issue.

In a 1972 Supreme Court case involving former St. Louis Cardinal outfielder Curt Flood, the court said that it would not overturn the antitrust exemption, which was written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, adding that it would be up to Congress to do so.

Several lawmakers have said that such a bill is not worth Congress’ time because of all of the other legislation being considered, and Senate GOP Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi said he doubted the measure would soon come before the Senate. “These are a bunch of spoiled brats on both sides,” he said. “They need to get down and stop acting like kids.”