NASCAR might be heading for a funding wreck, if a new amendment banning military sponsorship of professional sports becomes law. The proposal, approved in the House Appropriations Committee Thursday, would prohibit tax dollars from being used, “to sponsor professional or semi-professional motorsports, fishing, wrestling or other sports.”
The bipartisan amendment, which is attached to a $608-billion defense bill headed to the House of Representatives for consideration, is backed by Representatives Jack Kingston (R-GA) and Betty McCollum (D-MN).
Kingston argues that during this time of deep cuts and troop reductions, “the military should not be spending nearly $100 million sponsoring professional sports.” But backers of the sponsorship deals contend that motorsports are the best platform for the military to connect with potential recruits for America’s all-volunteer force.
At the heart of the debate is whether the spending is actually worthwhile or wasteful. Some estimate that military sponsorships of NASCAR have generated 50,000 potential recruits and are particularly effective because of the sport’s demographics. McCollum however, points to one race that the Air National Guard paid $650,000 to sponsor, resulting in zero actual recruits.
Is the U.S. military getting enough recruiting bang for its sponsorship bucks? Or are there better, more cost-effective recruiting tools out there? If NASCAR loses this one, who will pay for those gentlemen to start their engines?
GUEST
Jack Kingston, Republican Congressman representing first district in Georgia. Sponsored the amendment