Could A New Bill Before The Maryland Legislature Change The Ticketing Debate?

The year dawned with such promise.

When 2023 gave way to 2024, lawmakers and industry insiders were bullish on the prospect of the most substantive federal-level ticketing reform in more than a decade as the Fans First Act had broad bipartisan support on Capitol Hill and nearly unanimous support inside the live business (except from the secondary ticket companies, of course).

National Independent Venue Association  (NIVA) executive director Stephen Parker even laid out for Pollstar a potential pathway to passage — having the bill hitch a ride on the back of funding bills that Congress needed to pass in January and February.

But a historically dysfunctional House of Representatives has kept Congress from passing much of anything. House and Senate leaders did hammer out a stopgap plan that kept the federal government funded through early March, but it was passed clean, as it was intended merely to keep the lights on until a longer-term solution can be found.

In an election year, something like Fans First should be an easy legislative lift. It’s easy to digest, sellable as pro-consumer and backed by everyone from rock-ribbed Tennessee Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn to the Marx-curious members of The Squad. 

But this is the actual world, not a perfect one, so Fans First seems likely to join the smorgasbord of sensible legislation sent to the graveyard by the most frustrating Congress in a generation.

So that puts the onus for reform on the states.

“It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country,” Associate Justice Louis Brandeis wrote in his 1932 dissent in New State Ice Co. v Liebmann.

Brandeis may have had something more high-minded than ticketing reform when he coined his famous phrase (though since the case in question was about the licensing of ice companies, maybe not) but his formulation makes perfect sense for the task at hand.

There’s a patchwork of laws on the books already — some stats bar scalping, some protect it, for example. Advocates for federalism would count the variegated approach as a win; economists pushing for efficient markets would disagree.

The hope, of course, is that in the marketplace of ideas, a solution developed in one state will prove effective and be copied throughout the country. That was Brandeis’ whole point.

There’s no shortage of ticketing reform proposals circulating in statehouses from Juneau to Tallahassee, poking at the problem in various ways, from bans on spec ticketing and scalping to limitations on resale restrictions. Some set different rules for sporting events than other live entertainment, some have blanket rules. Some states have unique proposals, others have virtually identical ones. A not-so-well-kept secret of state legislatures is that, since the overwhelming majority are part-time with a limited number of working days, many pieces of policy legislation are based on models provided by suprastate groups or else written by lobbyists.

Maryland’s legislature is working on a proposal that caused the most tongue-wagging at Pollstar Live! The bill — officially SB539, sponsored by Dawn Gile, an Anne Arundel County Democrat — would ban spec ticketing and scalping outright and cap a secondary ticketing market’s fee at 10%. It also codifies that a ticket is a license and not property. 

The bill is still in the early stages: it was only filed at the end of January but has received committee hearings in both houses of the Maryland legislature. 

During her testimony, Audrey Fix Schaefer, communications director for I.M.P. which operates Merriweather Post Pavilion in Columbia, Maryland, said StubHub has Hozier tickets listed for nearly $25,000 on a face value of $99. Vivid Seats, she says, is selling parking for $125, when MPP doesn’t charge for parking at all.

“Who does this gouging harm? The fans, of course, who then can’t afford to see as many shows or won’t be able to buy a concert T-shirt because no one has limitless resources. Who else is harmed? The artist on stage, whose fans often perceive these scalped tickets and gouged prices as being the artists’ fault without recognizing that they were deceived by a third party. Who else is harmed? Other artists who won’t be discovered because fans can’t afford to go to more shows. Finally, venues like ours are also harmed, because fans can’t afford to attend additional shows or spend on food and merchandise when with us, and because we’re the ones who have to try to help an emotional fan when they realize they’ve been duped,” Fix Schaefer, who is also vice president of the NIVA Board, told the Maryland Senate’s finance committee Feb. 14.

The consumer protection division of Maryland’s attorney general’s office supports the bill. Venue and promoter groups both in Maryland and throughout the country co-signed a letter calling for its passage.

Perhaps predictably, the biggest pushback came from the biggest players in the secondary market.

“Which means State Senator Gile got it right,” Fix Schaefer says.

Still, there was some pushback from legislative Republicans. Senate Minority Leader Steve Hershey said  the proposal was merely “protecting Marylanders from themselves.”

“At the end of the day, consumers have the right to look around at a number of different platforms and make a decision,” he said.

In any event, Democrats have a supermajority in both chambers of Maryland’s legislature.

Maryland runs out of legislative days in April so the bill would have to move quickly to get to Gov. Wes Moore’s desk before the clock runs out. Still, Fix Schaefer believes other states will see Maryland as a model.

“This proposed legislation is nothing short of groundbreaking. I predict, when turned into law, it will be the national gold standard for consumer protection and artists will choose to play in Maryland over neighboring states as a result. It’s just that good.”