HOUSE RESOLUTION 34
(By Mr. Speaker, Mr. Kiss, and Delegates Douglas, Amores, Brown,
Compton, Faircloth, Fleischauer, Givens, Harrison, Hatfield,
Hrutkay, Hubbard, Leach, Mahan, Mathews, Mezzatesta, Michael,
Pino, Poling, Smirl, L. Smith, Spencer, Staton, Trump,
Varner, Webster and Fletcher)
[Introduced March 4, 2002]
Requesting the West Virginia State Athletic Commission to carefully
consider rejecting any application for licenses to hold the
heavyweight championship professional boxing match where one
of the contestants who would be sparring is not considered
worthy for licensure by other states.
Whereas, A supposition has been raised to the Cabinet Secretary
of the Department of Tax and Revenue under which the State Athletic
Commission is organized, of the prospect of holding the heavyweight
championship professional boxing match within the State of West
Virginia; and
Whereas, The State of Nevada, where this heavyweight
championship match was to have been originally held, has denied one
of the contestants a license to fight; and
Whereas, The States of Texas and Georgia, and the Cities of Los
Angles and Washington, D.C. have either rejected licensure of the
same contestant or will not make a decision to license this
contestant without first holding a public hearing; and
Whereas, Application for licensure for the event, the contestants, and the promoter are among the licenses that must be
submitted and approved by the State Athletic Commission first; and
Whereas, The State Athletic Commission in its legislative rule
has a requirement for granting a license that requires applicants
to satisfy the Commission that the applicant has not been convicted
of a felony involving moral turpitude; and
Whereas, One of the contestants who would be fighting in this
championship match has threatened members of the press, attacked
other contestants outside of the boxing ring, has bitten off parts
of opponent's ears during a match, has been convicted of felonious
rape and been denied licenses in other states and cities; and
Whereas, The signers of this resolution agree with many members
of the public who are outraged by the thought of this contestant
being conveyed the privilege of a West Virginia license; and
Whereas, Allowing this contestant to have a license in West
Virginia would send a message to our young and the World, that West
Virginia does not value civility or women, that it only values the
thought of generating the dollar; and
Whereas, There will be those that argue that State of West
Virginia would benefit financially from this match, but that it is
questionable how the community in which this match, or indeed the
State of West Virginia could benefit but that our neighboring
States of Ohio and Pennsylvania would benefit because of the availability of lodging, dining, and accessibility in those states;
and
Whereas, The fact the operators of the proposed event site have
been attributed in a State newspaper as stating the promoters want
a quick contract, because of the volatile nature of the situation,
should cause this matter to receive careful consideration,
therefore, be it,
Resolved by the House of Delegates:
That the Athletic Commission of West Virginia, as organized
under the Department of Tax and Revenue, should vote against
licensing a contestant who has been rejected for licensure by other
State Athletic Commission with whom West Virginia has reciprocal
agreements of licensure.