The United States Congress’ Subcommittee on Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection held a hearing on mixed martial arts just two short months ago. Therein, former two-division Ultimate Fighting Championship titleholder and UFC hall of famer Randy Couture joined Oklahoma Rep. Markwayne Mullin to make the case for extending the economic protections that cover boxers to their counterparts in MMA.
If introduced, H.R. 44, better known as the Ali Expansion Act, would decouple promotions like the UFC and Bellator MMA from their titles and rankings system, placing those responsibilities within the domain of independent sanctioning bodies licensed by state athletic commissions. Champions would be required to fight the No. 1 contender of their division at least once annually, and firewalls would be erected to prevent promoters from also acting as managers.
Other features of the bill would require MMA promotions to disclose dealings with fighters and other stakeholders, as well as the revenue generated, in connection with the events on which they compete. In the words of Pennsylvania Athletic Commission Executive Director Greg Sirb, who also testified at the hearing, these provisions would inform fighters of the “size of the [financial] pie” so they know “how big a piece” of it they should ask for at the negotiating table.
On the other end of the witness table was Marc Ratner, the UFC’s senior vice president of regulatory affairs. In between being roasted by Mullins, Ratner defended the current state of MMA regulation, asserting the UFC treats its athletes “fairly by any objective measure” and that the conflicts and corruption of boxing that necessitated legislative intervention there aren’t found in MMA.
Read more at Debets: How the Ali Act Could Reshape MMA in 2018
