CHAMBERSBURG – Every weekday morning on First News, the local – live morning radio information show with Pat Ryan and Michele Jansen features the big talk topics and opinion from local Attorney Clint Barkdoll.
On June 22, two topics covered by the Big Talk on First News were voter ID requirements and a Supreme Court decision about college athletes.
Listen to the full audio here: https://soundcloud.com/newstalk1037fm/22-june-atty-barkdoll
Almost 80% of Americans support requiring some form of identification to vote.
Barkdoll said, “HR 1 was the original proposal from the House that was this very intensive, I think, overreaching proposal that Manchin said he would not support. He now came out with what he’s styling as Senate Bill 1, which Stacey Abrams and others are supporting. It does have a voter ID component to it. It’s also saying you could bring in your utility bill as your voter ID.”
Critics are saying that it’s easy to forge utility bills, so that’s not as foolproof as a government issued photo ID.
It could be voted on as early as today or tomorrow and it could have the votes to pass.
Barkdoll said, “If that passes, there’s going to be this whole new array of criteria that states would have to adopt when it comes to voting.”
Jansen said, “I’m very concerned about this. There’s still a lot of things in this. Just the idea that the federal government is taking over what should be the state’s prevue. Is that even constitutional?”
Barkdoll said, “That’s a question. Voting is purely within the prevue of the states. And of course it’s a very decentralized system. Does the federal government have the authority to step in and enforce any of these sort of things? A court obviously hasn’t weighed in on this yet.”
It will likely be tied to funding as an incentive for states to comply.
Barkdoll said, “If you’re a state, you don’t have to adopt this, but if you want funding, you must comply with it and there’s where we get into kind of gray areas.”
NCAA takes a hit from the Supreme Court
A unanimous decision from the US Supreme Court has said if you’re a college athlete, you are allowed to monetize or use your name and likeness for financial benefits.
Barkdoll said, “Now that could be anything from endorsing products or if ESPN is advertising the game of the week this week and they’re showing the Penn State quarterback on every ad, that quarterback may have a right to some kind of a fee or royalty for using his likeness on those ads.”
Each athletic conference will roll this out on their own, so the Big Ten will have its own set of rules for how they’re going to do this and the Atlantic Coast Conference, etc.
Barkdoll said, “This is big win for college athletes. They’ve been clamoring for this for years, saying that in many cases they feel like they’re being taken advantage of when the parent university is making millions and millions of dollars off of their jerseys and likeness…it’ll be interesting to see how this plays out in the fall. There’s already some groups organizing to help these athletes kind of capitalize on this new rule.”
Ryan said, “I totally love this. I’m absolutely for it. The very idea that for such a long time these bloated institutions of higher education have been ripping off these unbelievable players. I think it’s a huge gain for people that are on that rise. You’ve worked your tail off for a very long time only to hand it over to the university of whatever? Good for the college athlete.”
Barkdoll added, “There’s a lot of research to show these college athletes, their image often times peaks in college because many times they’re not able to parlay this into a professional career. So it’s that brief window of time in college that they’re able to do this and as the Supreme Court points out, they’ve essentially used an anti-trust theory here, that the NCAA can’t limit the ability of these individual athletes to go out on their own and make money off of their name and their likeness and the things that they’re doing for the college.”