media

Defending your sponsorship: the outlawing of ‘paid patriotism’

By Todd C. Koesters, Matthew T. Brown and Mark S. Nagel

Introduction

The intersection of sports and politics is not new. Championship winning teams in the United States have been taking pictures with the President at the White House since Calvin Coolidge hosted the Washington Senators following their World Series championship win in 1924 (Neumann, 2016). Famous athletes have voiced their support for presidential candidates, and presidential candidates have discussed the importance of reaching particular voting demographics like the “NASCAR dad” or the “soccer mom” (Drehs, 2004). Politicians have thrown out first pitches, flipped coins before games, and even commanded the Navy band to play the University of Michigan fight song (Leslie, 2008). However, this intersection of sports and politics hasn’t always been amicable. Congressional investigations and/or hearings have been held or called over the use of performance enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball (MLB), the prevalence of head injuries/concussions in the National Football League (NFL), the handling of abuse allegations directed at a former Penn State assistant football coach, and whether or not the United States Postal Service is entitled to a sponsorship refund following Lance Armstrong’s doping admission (Ezell, 2013; Newman, 2005; Red; 2012; Thompson, 2015).

Background of Paid Patriotism

On November 4, 2015, the intersection of sports and politics arose again when Senators John McCain (R-Arizona), Jeff Flake (R-Arizona), and Richard Blumenthal (D- Connecticut) called into question 122 advertising and marketing contracts totaling millions of dollars between Department of Defense (DOD) entities (i.e., Army, Navy, National Guard, etc.) and professional sport teams and leagues. The Senators released the details of the DOD contracts in a report titled Tackling Paid Patriotism Oversight Report (2015). Examples of these marketing contracts included the National Guard spending $49.1 million on sports sponsorships with the NFL, MLB, National Basketball Association (NBA), National Hockey League (NHL), Major League Soccer (MLS), and a Professional Golfers’ Association of America (PGA) Tour event. Though payments were made to a variety of sport organizations, much of the money (more than $6.1 million) and criticism went to the NFL and its individual franchises. The most highly scrutinized contracts involved events that included enlistment and re-enlistment ceremonies, family reunions with returning service members, tickets, player appearances, and the highly popular full-field exhibition of the American flag. Senator McCain was outspoken in his concern that these types of paid activities were uncalled for acts of “paid patriotism,” particularly in a fiscal environment in which the national debt was projected to grow from $10.6 trillion to nearly $20 trillion by the end of President Barack Obama’s administration in early 2017.

The report received extensive attention and many pundits discussed the topic fervently, with the vast majority expressing their concern that the government should not misuse taxpayer money to pay sport organizations for patriotic events. Specific instances in the report were noted as inappropriate, including the New England Patriots, Atlanta Falcons, and Buffalo Bills each receiving more than $600,000 while numerous other NFL teams were garnering six figure checks. In total, the report uncovered $53 million in military payments to professional sports teams for “marketing and advertising contracts” between 2012 and 2015 (McCain & Flake, 2015).

Legal History

Though the Tackling Paid Patriotism Oversight Report was perceived by many as the main focus of the senators, it was actually researched, compiled, and published to support an amendment to the 2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The Act was passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by President Obama in November 2015 and became Public Law No: 114-92 (National Defense Authorization Act, 2016). The NDAA includes two provisions, Section 341 and 345, which specifically address military spending on sporting events. Section 341 addresses the idea of “paid patriotism” with benefits considered to be personal in nature. It states: “The Department of Defense may not enter into any contract or other agreement under which payments are to be made in exchange for activities by the contractor intended to honor, or giving the appearance of honoring, members of the armed forces … at any form of sporting event” unless those activities are provided on a “pro bono basis or otherwise funded with non-Federal funds” and are compliant with military rules limiting the acceptance of gifts deemed to be personal in nature (National Defense Authorization Act, 2016, SEC. 341). The legal standard is clear. Professional sports teams can continue to honor military members and their families. They can continue to wave flags, salute heroes, and conduct tearful reunions. However, taxpayer dollars cannot be used to do it.