Newsom rejects California Dems’ proposal to ban youth tackle football under 12

Governor Gavin Newsom Rejects ⁣Proposal⁣ to Ban Full-Contact⁤ Football for Kids Under 12

Governor Gavin⁣ Newsom (D-CA)‍ poured cold water on a Democratic​ proposal to ban full-contact football for children​ under 12 in California.

Assembly Bill 734,​ introduced‌ by California Democrat Kevin McCarty of Sacramento, gained momentum after passing an Assembly committee 5-2 last⁤ week. The bill aims to gradually phase out tackle football for California youth, starting ​with kids under 6 in 2025, then kids under 10 in 2027, and⁤ finally all ⁣children under 12 in 2029.

While the ban on ‌tackle football for kids under ⁢12 ‌gained support among ‌California Democrats, Governor Newsom‌ made it clear on Tuesday that he would not sign the bill if it reached his desk, as reported by ABC⁢ 10.

“I will not sign legislation that bans youth ⁢tackle football,”

Newsom said. “I⁣ am deeply concerned about the health and safety of our young athletes, but an outright ban is not the answer. My Administration will work ​with the Legislature and the bill’s author to strengthen safety in youth ⁣football — while ensuring parents have⁣ the freedom​ to‌ decide which sports are most appropriate for their children.”

AB ⁢734 marks McCarty’s third attempt to pass a bill​ banning tackle football for the state’s youth.

The assemblyman has argued that “Banging your⁤ brains around for little kids just isn’t safe.” Assemblymember Mike ‍Gipson, another California Democrat, also voted in support of the ⁣bill⁤ while‌ it was in committee, emphasizing⁢ that it doesn’t diminish ⁣the valuable⁢ learning opportunities that football provides for​ the state’s youth.

“Football and organizational sports in general are‌ clearly proven ways to keep kids out of trouble,”

said Gipson, who chairs the state Assembly’s committee in charge of regulating sports.​
“This bill is ⁢not taking away that ability, it is simply saying that⁣ we’re going⁤ to move from tackle⁢ football to flag football and we can still have the ⁤same learning experiences.”

The proposal aims ⁣to⁢ encourage​ flag football as an alternative to tackle⁢ football, but some parents and coaches have‌ criticized the ban, arguing that it⁣ would push the sport “in the wrong direction.”

CLICK HERE ​TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

“We would lose the ⁢far greater benefits that football provides to a limited risk of injury,” ⁣ said youth and high⁣ school football coach Tyrone Jones.

Ashley Bertram, a mother of three boys, added that flag football could be more dangerous since players don’t wear the same protective gear⁢ as ⁤in full-contact football.

“Flag football is still a contact ‍sport,”

Bertram said.
“If⁤ you⁤ think that just because ⁣a 7-year-old boy is running ​up to take a flag, that ⁤they’re not ramming into each other to do that, you’re out of your mind! We’re talking ​about boys!”

In his statement ‌announcing his stance on the ban on full-contact football⁣ for kids⁣ under 12, Newsom highlighted‌ the actions he has already taken ​to promote safety standards ‍in youth football.

“California remains committed ‍to building on the California ​Youth Football Act, which I signed in​ 2019, ​establishing ​advanced safety standards for youth ​football,”

Newsom said.
“This law provides⁢ a comprehensive⁣ safety framework for young athletes, including equipment standards ⁢and restrictions on exposure ‌to full-contact tackles.”

What are the concerns of opponents of the ​ban on⁢ tackle football for children under 12?

Football because it is safer for children under 12.”

Supporters of the bill argue⁤ that banning tackle football for children under ‌12 ‍is necessary to protect their developing brains. Studies have shown a clear link between repetitive head impacts in football ​and long-term brain damage,‌ such as chronic traumatic encephalopathy ⁣(CTE). CTE is a degenerative brain​ disease that has ‍been found in numerous ‍deceased football players, including ⁤many who played youth football.

Opponents⁤ of the ban, on ⁤the ⁣other hand, argue ‍that it is‌ an overreach ⁤of government power⁣ and ⁢infringes on parental ‍rights.​ They believe that parents should⁢ be able to decide ​what sports are appropriate ​for their ​children and​ that the focus should be on improving safety measures and education surrounding concussions and head injuries.

Governor⁣ Newsom’s rejection of​ the proposal to ban full-contact football for kids under 12 reflects his ⁢belief that an outright ban is ‍not‌ the solution. He acknowledges the importance of addressing the health and safety concerns but emphasizes the need to work together to strengthen safety measures ⁣in youth football. This approach allows parents to⁤ make informed decisions about their children’s participation in sports, while ensuring that‌ the game remains available for‌ those who see the‍ benefits it provides for youth development and discipline.

The passage⁤ of AB 734 would have marked a significant milestone⁤ in the⁢ ongoing debate surrounding ⁢youth football and player safety. However, Governor Newsom’s stance has effectively halted the⁤ progression of the ‌bill, at ⁢least ‌for now.

The issue of whether full-contact football should be banned for children under 12 is far⁢ from settled. It ‍is likely to remain a contentious topic in California, as⁤ well as in other ‌states ‌grappling with the same ⁢concerns. Hopefully, this debate ⁢will spur further research, discussion, ‍and action to ensure the well-being of‌ young ​athletes while⁣ preserving the value of ‌sports in their⁣ lives.