Proposed MMA pension plan should be KO'd
One key to good legislating is knowing when not to act.
Unfortunately, Assemblymember Matt Haney, D-San Francisco, didn't get the memo before he introduced a bill last month to create a state-administered pension plan for mixed martial arts fighters.
We get it. His intentions were good. He says he wants to make sure the fighters “are protected and taken care of.”
The language of his legislation, Assembly Bill 1136, accurately describes the fighters' risk of “extraordinary disability in the normal course of their trade,” such as traumatic brain injuries, multiple concussions, eye injuries and other neurological impairments. Haney wants MMA fighters to have “support and protection when they retire.”
But his bill will do little to achieve that.
Fashioned after a four-decade-old program for boxers, Haney's proposal would allow the California State Athletic Commission to require a fee on tickets or contributions by the fighters, their managers and the promoters of MMA events to fund the plan.
The program for boxers shows why this is a bad idea. That pension plan is funded by an 88-cent fee on every ticket. The program was rocked by scandal when an investigation found that the athletic commission had not made any pension payments to eligible boxers or their beneficiaries for six years. Reforms have been made since then.
But the average one-time payout since 2012 for 171 boxer pensions has been around $19,000, according to Andy Foster, executive officer of the Athletic Commission. Let's get real: $19,000 is not going to begin to cover the medical costs for the injuries Haney describes in his bill, much less provide any sort of retirement security.
Perpetuating the myth that this would somehow be a meaningful pension is a cruel deception of fighters.
Meanwhile, the athletic commission has an investment adviser and a third-party administrator to oversee the boxer pension fund, which has total assets, as of Jan. 31, of just $4.7 million. That's a bureaucratic waste.
California already has a much better retirement program. Since the boxing pension was reformed, the state established CalSavers, which is now mandatory for most employers who don't already provide retirement plans for their workers and is available for independent contractors such as boxers and MMA fighters.
If Haney wants to provide retirement security for MMA fighters, he should develop legislation that requires contributions on their behalf to a CalSavers account. But perpetuating and expanding an inefficient, outdated and minimalist boxer pension plan is not the answer.
There is also the bigger question of why the state should be encouraging a sport that is dangerous. The boxer pension fund provides larger payouts to fighters who get in the ring more. The MMA proposal would do the same.
These are not the incentives or values state legislators should be supporting. If Haney truly wants to protect and take care of fighters, he would help them find other ways to make a living.