Selected Boxing Commissions’ Documentation of Compliance Varied

The 8 state and 2 tribal boxing commissions that we reviewed varied in the  extent to which they had documentation indicating compliance with the 10  provisions of the act related to the fundamental elements we identified. All 10 commissions had documentation indicating compliance at least 75  percent of the time for three provisions—those that require prefight  medical examinations, disclosure of amounts paid to promoters, and  registration of boxers—but only 2 commissions had documentation at least  75 percent of the time for the provision prohibiting conflicts of interest. The number of such provisions enacted by an  individual Commission ranges from 10 (California) to 4 (Missouri). All 10  states and tribes have provisions fully covering the additional element that  requires uniform boxing and scoring rules, and eight states or tribes have  provisions fully covering the additional element that requires the filing of  postfight medical reports. Federal Action under the Act Has Been Limited

Actions taken by the Department of Justice under the act have been  limited. Justice officials said the department does not prosecute cases  unless they are referred to it by federal law enforcement agencies. Furthermore, the officials said, violations of the act are  misdemeanors, and U.S. FTC officials said  they periodically check the sanctioning organizations’ Web sites to assess  whether the required information has been made available to the public  and has found the Web sites to be adequate. In February 2003, legislation was introduced in the Senate that would  amend the act by, among other things, creating a new organization within  the Department of Labor to provide oversight and enforcement of the  federal boxing laws. The purpose of this new federal organization is to  facilitate more uniform enforcement of federal requirements designed to  enhance boxers’ health, safety, and economic interests as well as the  integrity of the sport. The Department of Justice’s GAO liaison and the  Federal Trade Commission’s GAO liaison and Office of General Counsel  provided only oral technical comments, which we incorporated as  appropriate. According to the president, ABC is frustrated with the lack of enforcement  of the Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996. Establish Uniform Contractual Terms

There are frequent reports of boxers’ economic exploitation. Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

In analyzing the adequacy of efforts to protect the health, safety, and  economic well-being of professional boxers and to enhance the integrity of  the sport, our objectives were to (1) identify fundamental elements  considered important to address the major health and safety, economic,  and integrity problems facing professional boxing; (2) assess the extent to  which the act’s provisions cover these elements and whether selected state  and tribal boxing commissions have documentation indicating compliance  with the act’s provisions; (3) assess the extent to which selected states and  tribes have adopted provisions that cover fundamental elements in addition  to those covered in the act; and (4) determine what actions the Department  of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) have taken under the  act. To identify fundamental elements that are considered important to address  the major health and safety, economic, and integrity problems facing  professional boxing, we reviewed recent congressional testimony and  studies conducted by a task force of the National Association of Attorneys  General, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the  Department of Labor. To assess  the extent to which selected state and tribal boxing commissions have  documented their compliance with the act’s provisions, we identified 8 of  the 46 state boxing commissions and 2 of the 8 tribal boxing commissions  for review. The state and tribal commission we selected accounted  for 49 percent of all professional boxing events held in the United States  during calendar year 2001.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 established minimum health and safety standards for professional boxing and provided for limited federal oversight by the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. In 2000, the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act amended the act to better protect boxers' economic well-being and enhance the integrity of the sport. However, reports of problems continue, including permanent and sometimes fatal injuries, economic exploitation, and corruption. GAO was asked to (1) identify fundamental elements considered important to protect professional boxers and enhance the integrity of the sport; (2) assess the extent to which provisions of the Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996, as amended (the act), cover these elements and determine whether selected state and tribal boxing commissions have documentation indicating compliance with the act's provisions; (3) determine whether selected states and tribes have provisions that cover additional elements; and (4) identify federal actions taken under the act.

What GAO Found

Based on GAO's review of congressional testimonies and national studies dating from 1994 through 2002, GAO identified 15 fundamental elements that are considered important to protect boxers' health, safety, and economic well-being and to enhance the integrity of the sport. The act addresses 10 of the 15 fundamental elements that GAO identified. The 8 (of 46) state and 2 (of 8) tribal boxing commissions that GAO selected for review accounted for 49 percent of the fights in 2001 and varied in the extent to which they had documentation indicating compliance with the 10 provisions of the act related to the fundamental elements. For example, all 10 commissions had documentation indicating compliance at least 75 percent of the time for 3 provisions--requiring prefight medical exams, disclosure of purses and payments, and registration of boxers--but only 2 commissions had documentation indicating compliance at least 75 percent of the time for a provision prohibiting conflicts of interest. Commissions either gave no reason for the lack of documentation, cited privacy or liability concerns, or said they were unaware of the federal provision. The eight states and two tribes that GAO reviewed vary in the extent to which they adopted additional provisions that cover elements not covered by the act's provisions. The number of such provisions ranges from 10 (California) to 4 (Missouri). For example, the states have provisions requiring the filing of postfight medical reports, uniform boxing and scoring rules, and boxing commission officials' knowledge of the sport. Federal actions taken under the act have been limited. The Department of Justice said it has not exercised its authority to prosecute cases because none have been referred to it by federal law enforcement authorities. Furthermore it noted that violations under the act are misdemeanors, and it generally applies its resources to prosecuting felonies. The Federal Trade Commission periodically checks the Web sites of the organizations that sanction professional boxing events to see whether they have posted the information that they are required to make available to the public and has found them to be adequate. Legislation was recently introduced to significantly amend the act by, among other things, creating a new organization within the Department of Labor that would provide oversight and enforcement of boxing laws. This new federal organization is intended to facilitate more uniform enforcement of federal requirements aimed at enhancing boxers' health, safety, and general interests as well as the integrity of the sport. The Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission provided only technical comments on our report. The Association of Boxing Commissions and five state and tribal commissions had concerns about the lack of existing federal enforcement and the economic impact of any additional federal requirements.