The National Football League — by far the richest sports league in the world — paid for several U.S. House of Representatives aides to attend last month’s NFL Draft.
The catch?
The aides allowed top NFL officials lobby them on issues of significant financial and political importance to the league.
“Stadium Construction and Municipal Bonds” was the first session for at least 11 aides who attended the NFL’s “Government Affairs Congressional Forum” in Detroit on April 25 and April 26.
Another session, titled “Community Relations & Economic Impact,” touted the NFL’s marquee events such as the Super Bowl and how they bring “thousands of jobs and tens of millions of dollars in economic activity to a local economy.”
ALSO READ: Democratic congressman commits massive stock law violation
Members flew from Washington to Detroit on April 25 — the first round of the three-day NFL Draft — and went back the next day, according to the agenda.
The NFL spent about $800 to $900 per attendee on travel and lodging, according to the congressional disclosures.
The details were part of Raw Story’s review of congressional travel disclosures submitted by attendees to the House Committee on Ethics, which requires such documentation when private sources pay for lawmakers or their staff members to travel on official business.
The NFL, whose 32 franchises are worth an average of $5.1 billion each, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Among those attending were two aides to House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA): AJ Sugarman, policy adviser, and Ben Napier, floor director.
The chiefs of staff for two House Democrats attended: Jeremy Marcus for California Rep. Doris Matsui and Nicole Varner for Rep. Marc Veasey of Texas.
Others include:
Some of the other sessions in the agenda — and the point of view the NFL was selling:
Kennesaw State economics professor JC Bradbury said the general view among academics is that using public money for stadiums and sports events does not make economic sense.
But, he added, the NFL’s lobbying to use public money for those purposes makes perfect sense.
“Politicians seem willing to foot the bill, so why not ask?” Bradbury said. “As (Seinfeld television show character) George Constanza once said, ‘Why should I pay when, if I apply myself, maybe I can get it for free?’
"’Economic development’ is just a convenient justification, even though it has been long debunked by economists. Subsidizing sports to promote economic development is like taking up smoking for the health benefits.”
ALSO READ: Trump campaign allegedly took ‘excessive’ contributions by the nickel and dime
Matthew Shapiro, vice president of NFL Events Strategy, and Brad Firestone, vice president of NFL Tax and Risk Management, led the stadium construction session. An agenda described the session as “Discussion of Federal-tax-exempt bonds as a tool to promote economic development at the local level that allow state and local governments low-cost financing for community economic development projects.”
“It's interesting that they are discussing tax exemptions for municipal bonds,” Bradbury said. “The 1986 tax reform made it much more difficult for stadiums to qualify for the federal tax exemption for municipal projects. I wonder if there is a push to get rid of it.”
Another session caught Bradbuy’s eye: A discussion of the vastly lowered threshold for reporting income on tax returns from individual transactions.
“This change may affect season ticketholders and other fans who resell over $600 of tickets per year,” the agenda said. “Will include discussion of a permanent solution that would raise the threshold and reinstate a minimum level of transactions.”
Said Bradbury: “They are clearly pushing for changes to make life easier for their wealthy fans.”
