PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 488.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Nov 29, 1994
Baseball Fans and Communities Protection Act of 1994 - Amends the Clayton Act to apply the antitrust laws to any unilateral terms and conditions of employment in restraint of trade or commerce imposed by any party to an agreement between two or more major league baseball clubs and the labor organization representing the baseball players. States that the antitrust laws shall not apply to a term or condition imposed solely with respect to a player party to a uniform player contract that is assigned, at the time such imposition occurs, to a non-major league professional baseball club.
People & committees
Rep. Synar, Mike [D-OK-2] · D–OK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 488.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 103-871.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 103-871.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended).
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended).
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic and Commercial Law.
Referred to the House Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1764)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 2, 2021. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4994 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4994 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4994 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4994 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.