advance at c-span.org and let us know what you think of the programs you're watching. 202-6263400 or e-mail us at comments@c-span.org. join the c-span conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> the senate commerce committee held a hearing recently examining college sports programs. academics and potential exploitation of athletes lose some of the areas covered included, campus sexual assaults, and the idea of compensating student athletes. it includes n.c.a.a. presidents and the one who discussed his changes. this is 2 hours and 45 minutes.

>> this hearing will come to order. i want to thank all of you very much for coming here. you are a bit squeezed in. but water is on the house. become portable and the black. college sports has an absolutely extraordinary position in the culture of our country, not only college sports inspired incredible fan passion across the country but provided a very important way for young men and women as is britain, both to athletics as an avocation and get aunt in education, we are

doing some talk about that today. and providing an avenue to college, as they would otherwise not have existed and it is important to understand that. college athletes and athletics are rooted in the notion of amateurism. the history of that is interesting going back to the founding of the n.c.a.a. in 1906 and going back to the greeks's concept of amateurism. college sports is supposed to be an avocation. students play college sports for love of the game, not for love of money. many people like the notion of college sports as undermined by the power and influence of money. i remember a meeting i had in my office with the three top executives of espn. it was one of those meetings in which i didn't say a word

because they went around in circles, each talking about what a great business model they had and how they had control, no other broadcast system would ever have or where they were and how they were going to make it even stronger. there is a growing perception college athletics particularly division 1 football and sketbalt all. what they really are is highly profitable commercial enterprises. critics of big-time college athletics say the goal of these programs is not to provide young people with a college education but to produce a winning program that reached national boards for the athletic departments and their schools. it is not, however, about students.

they are part of what generates of money. it is about capturing billions of dollars of television and marketing revenue college sports do generate and will generate even more. colleges at universities say these revenues benefit college athletes and their student bodies at large. but i think we have to consider whether such riches could corrupt the basic mission of athletic programs. winning teams get higher pay offs than losing teams which creates a strong incentive to win. an incentive which land grant public universities and others are more unhappy to follow. and win at any cost. much of the money is often funneled right back into those sports programs in the form of multimillion-dollar coaching salaries and state-of-the-art facilities, many of them paid for by taxpayers to perpetuate

the cycle of winning. i think somewhere in my reading here, about $40 million of all $900 million n.c.a.a. gets from their broadcasting march madness and the rest of it, a very small portion goes specifically to academics. that is hard to figure. because nobody has the figures. mr. abbott works for them. they make the decisions. he carries out what they want. and yet the subject of the discussion is how does he carry out what they want. what powers do you have for actually carrying out what you think is a dud idea. different places, i would think

your passion for education would need to show itself which athletics to me a man to serve schools and the public duty to educate students, not the other way around. that is the way it is always put forward and the way it should be. dr. mark emmert is here to present colleges and universities that belong to the n.c.a.a. i can't wait to thank you for testifying. you could have declined to do so. some do. but you didn't and i am grateful for that. you are at the helm of the n.c.a.a. because you have academic credentials, sterling reputation. and i think we all appreciate that you are well compensated. your commendable individual qualities are not troubling. i am very skeptical that the n.c.a.a. can live up to the lofty mission you constantly talk about, which is written and printed in speeches and

statements and responses to penn state business, something that the mission, nothing comes before education is always there, but the actions don't appear to be. i don't see how the n.c.a.a. will ever be capable of making a safe, good education experience students, their number one priority. i want you to tell me that i am wrong. that i am wrong and i am particularly wrong about the future but that will be a tough sell. i think we believe the n.c.a.a. has been left to send to determine what reforms are appropriate and how to accomplish its mission. as we learn more about what goes on in some universities, we want to know if the n.c.a.a. is considering how college athletes are fairing and did this system

not just living as they do, but injured as they often become, racked by poverty if they don't do well, maybe their stipends are come off. and mandated for scholarship. all of these things are put in play. how are young men this track on their helmets on a football field in front of 100,000 passionate paying customers, how are they doing? how are young men who lace of their shoes and play basketball for march madness which consumes the nation is deliberately spread out over a long period of time so that no kid 12 years or 10 years or older can ever hope to do any homework because it is always basketball. colleges and universities living up to their end of the bargain and providing them with a good

education? are these young athletes in title to any of the billions of dollars reeked from their athletic services. when young men and women put their bodies at risk, playing sports for their schools whether women's lacrosse for men's soccer do they have adequate health insurance? i don't know. i don't know. and i never go into a restaurant or barber shop for anything without asking sometimes to their discomfort if you have health insurance because i know the answer is going to be no. i care about health care and i am very unhappy with people who work in places those like a lot of money, don't have health insurance please do the schools and athletic leagues minimize the risk of concussions, what happens to a student who is injured before graduation and he or she finished out their studies or does the scholarship run dry? a couple of months ago we all

heard the deeply troubling comments at the talented university, in the basketball tournament. it generated hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue for the n.c.a.a. and its members, talked about how sometimes there was not enough to eat during college. how did college sports benefit? you can look at that two ways, picking out a sensational example of what famous athlete and another problem. and the safety net and sense of confidence, and point guards. and drop scholarships or what

happens. the title of the hearing that, and academic success of college athletes, i want objective frank discussion on this subject and i will try my best. the n.c.a.a. has the same bowl as i do. mark emmert will tell us the n.c.a.a.'s abusive practices and exploitation to promote college sports as a means towards achieving academic excellence. i will explore whether the n.c.a.a. is here to inspire a mission. we gear too many reports of fraudulent academics and too many tragic stories, nothing to show for services they provide even though they helped generate millions and millions of dollars. the subject is often discussed but i am here to tell you if

pretense the democrats should control congress next time and no one is quite sure of that, john thune has one idea, bill nelson has another idea comments and you, okay. i think we want to continue this and make this a continuing search of this oversight committee. we have jurisdiction over sports, all sports, all sports and we have the ability to subpoena, the ability to -- we have created a special investigation unit, we are very into this subject. i think our members are. and this is part of the process here. i will add some tough questions for the panel, the n.c.a.a. and its member, is a legal cartel? have college sports become a

multibillion-dollar commercial enterprise which is no different from corporate witnesses who have appeared before this committee or is the n.c.a.a. truly different and does a 1 here but hundred-year-old organization have the best organization of college athletes. large questions important to be answered. i turn now to my very distinguished ranking member, senator john thune. >> thank you for holding the hearing today. i want to thank our panelists for examining the state of college athletics. like you, look for to hearing from our witnesses including the president of the national collegiate athletic association, how member institutions are fulfilling commitments made to our collegiate student athletes. i am an avid sports fan and many members of committee are as well. as a former basketball player, high school and college and proud father of a daughter who competed at the division i level

i certainly recognize participation and organized sports, not only requires physical and mental strength but teaches teamwork and other skills that serve use throughout life. however college student athlete is and should be a student first. colleges and universities remember and prioritize academic obligations. and popularity of college sports has grown, predictably college football and men and women's basketball, so has the profitability of many collegiate and athletic programs. in the current environment the stakes are raised for the student athlete who wants to succeed and a financial interest in winning games. increasing revenues for some schools and conferences lead to lucrative contracts for football and basketball games that become more common. revenues for tickets sales and rich and dies in efforts for some schools are significant and alumni want to see their teams win. maybe inspired to contribute to

winning programs. the n.c.a.a. is a member driven organization whose stated mission is, quote, to integrate integrated athletics at a higher education so if the educational experience at the student athlete is paramount. however major criticism of college sports in some institutions appear unable to balance the core academic mission of the university and commercial considerations that often accompany college athletics particularly in high-profile sports. many feel the commitment to the student athletes is falling short. another point of contention involves athletic scholarships and whether the practice of offering annual as opposed a multi-year scholarships unfairly places student-athletes at risk of losing their scholarships as a result of poor performance or injury. multi-year scholarships may benefit student-athletes but the disadvantage smaller schools to can't match resources of larger institutions. collegiate athletics in america is not without controversy and we will hear from some of the n.c.a.a.'s most vocal critics today. i am sure today's hearing will

highlight the host of important issues. i hope we will not lose sight of the positive impact amateur athletics have made on the lives of countless student-athletes. we must remember college athletics is not just about football and basketball. director of athletics at south dakota recently shared the results of the student athlete exit interviews he conducted annually to evaluate the school athletic program from the vantage point of the athletes themselves. the underscored two stories that stood out. the athletic director reiterated how this of more diver recovered from open-heart heart surgery to qualify at the n.c.a.a. zone championships. a feat that would not have been possible without the work of a dedicated training staff, academic support, coaches, a team and family and noted the moving story of a sophomore swimmer who leaned on friends, family and teammates to help the the tragic loss of her father had passed away earlier in the

season. with this support, hannah was able to return to the pool and achieve lifetime best times in of a swimming advances at the summit league championships. as usc athletic director puts it, quote, these two are just a sample of what college athletics should mean. if you strip away the money, fancy locker rooms, charter flights and large budgets you are left with student-athletes who often have to overcome personal, social, economic, academic, and athletic adversity just to compete but they frequently do with passion and determination in that makes us all proud and that is from the athletic director of the university of south dakota. recognizing challenges existed is my hope the n.c.a.a.'s member institutions, student athletes themselves and other stakeholders will seek solutions that promote the education, health and well-being of student athletes and seek to preserve amateurism and collegiate athletics. this is an area where congress can provide a forum but the solutions are most likely to

come from those directly involved in the education and development of student-athletes. thank you again for holding this hearing and i look forward to hearing and having an opportunity to question our witnesses. >> what we are going to do now is we are going to hear that testimony and both senator mccaskill and cory booker are wonderful people, will get very angry at me because i am going to charge into the regular order and i am going to allow senator dan coats to ask the first question which violates all the rules of the committee. >> the most junior member of the committee, the senate rules allow me to be mad at you, chairman. >> for what it is worth, i was of the impression all so that we

were on the first to arrive and ask questions in order so i arrived at 2:10. i didn't want to put you in a bad spot or breach the rules. >> you never do and you are wonderful so ask the first questions after the two of us. >> thank you for being here. and don't be nervous. wonderful opportunity to say what is in your heart and on your mind. >> i want to thank you and the committee for inviting me here today. to share my experiences and knowledge on this important subject. very complicated subject. i had many conversations with fellow student athletes on this issue about the current roll of student athletes today in this scheme of college athletics and we often walk away from those conversations with more questions than answers so i hope

today is the first step toward answering those questions and providing a context and clarity to this discussion so the we can see student-athletes receive maximum edification and all aspects of their present be it a student, athlete, leader and a man and woman, very important to me. i wanted to start my remarks by beginning the genesis of my store. my parents are from the bahamas, i was born in the states and raised in new jersey. i went to high school in princeton, new jersey and after my school days at princeton i would go over to the university and i saw a big poster, statue and trophies of this guy who became my hero, bill bradley. he was a rock star in my opinion, and the epitome of what a student athlete should be, best player in college at a school like princeton, in be a hall of famer, rhodes scholar and first-time i heard the words road scholar in the same

sentence:finished high school in princeton i had 84 scholarship offers to go anywhere i wanted to end number one high school prospect in the country, i decided to go to florida state and when i got to tallahassee the first thing i did was go to the office of national fellowship and tell my wanted to be a rhodes scholar like my hero bill bradley and i wanted to do it as well as a three years later i was fortunate to earn a scholarship and then i went to see my teachers and academic advisers and tell from my want you guys to help increase my intellectual capital to be an outstanding pediatric neurosurgeon like another of my influences dr. ben carson. now i am a second year medical student hopefully able to do that in the future and last i went to my athletic trainers and football coaches and told my wanted to equip my body and get me ready for a career as a national football player and fortunately i've been able to be drafted to play for the steelers as well. it may sound like my story is

pristine and i deal and may be used as poster child for what you want a collegiate student athletes to experience but i will say my story is quite rare and unique and some people call it an anomaly because that side senator corey booker the last major division one football was pat hayden in the 1970s playing at usc and the los angeles rams as a quarterback. there are few student athletes that have had the same infrastructure as i have had and family support and the foresight, not come from a broken school system or broken family, able to engage in their college experience and maximize their time. many more of my teammates and friends and fellow student athlete struggled in the college environment, struggled mightily, struggled economically because now with the scholarship stipends they received they became the main breadwinners for their families. sending their scholarship money home to take care of their

immediate and extended family and also struggled academically as well. lot of them would go through the academic machinery in their colleges and the spit out at the end of the machine, left for, warren and asking questions and with no directional guidance on where they should go, no purpose or idea of their trajectory and left with a degree in hand that didn't be to their future interests so i hope today we can shed light on this aspect, that we are poor in energy and life and money and exposure and violating on t v life of the athlete. but i believe we are falling a bit short of edifying and improving, augmenting the aspect of the students, the person, the man, the woman and even the philanthropist and if we can do that we cannot only 7 student-athletes at major schools go on to be productive that leads but more importantly be productive leaders and citizens that go on to the

leaders of industry and really have in double impact. think you for having me here and i look forward to joining the freshman. >> thank you very very much. now to devon ramsay. >> thank you. good afternoon, chairman rockefeller and members of the committee. it is a pleasure to be present to share my story on college athletics. let me thank you and your staff. i was born and dec. eighth 1988 in red bank, new jersey. my mother was always strong into education and went to country day school which is a private school that cuts kindergarten through eighth grade. i excelled in classroom and participate in athletics. by the time i was ready to leave had the opportunity to go to the

school down the road in princeton, played against martin. i decided this would be the best academic environment for me. if successful academic and athletic career, graduating in 2007 i decided to sign my letter of intent to go to the university of north carolina chapel hill. not only existing reputation as talk of academic institution but the new head coach. davis showing the university had an all-around commitment to excellence. my career at the university of north carolina is filled with adversity. i have undergone five surgery's, in three head coaches and been asked unwanted to transfer or take a medical registry. despite all this time managed to succeed as offensive starter

every six years. the top three in my position but most importantly got my degree in public policy. and red bank pursued my hopes of making an nfl team. and happened at tampa bay. in the summer of 2010, two teammates violated n.c.a.a. rules and attended a party. the university of north carolina had been launched, there investigations with several accounts of academic fraud. as a final practice of the week, bred in for price questioning and university officials. the fourth began, the conversation, if i would need a lawyer. i thought i could find more

leads for the investigation. send a asked me about my definition of academic assignments, and a 20-year-old e-mail correspondence between myself and two more. i asked the university tutor for help in the paper and she replied by adding four five sentences to the paper. they asked me if this paper -- if it is the same paper i turned in. i couldn't remember since it was two years ago. in the competition they sent me to the university honor for. the attorney-general said there was no case, there wasn't enough evidence. they had no final version of the paper, it wasn't submitted electronically and most people don't keep papers from two years ago. as it was being held out by unc

an official from the compliance office, if i were to plead guilty after being held for so many games that the n.c.a.a. would allow me to play. at this time i believed the un c compliance was well versed in n.c.a.a. policy. however it was a shocking blow that rules be guilty of academic fraud which strips away my remaining eligibility and tarnishes my reputation. after coming to the realization unc was more concerned with penalties than losses and colleges than protecting one of its own mother and i set out to find lawyers that would hopefully have my best interests at heart. however 1 did to stand against the n.c.a.a. or its membership. fortunately for me, the state supreme court judge reached out to my mother after reading an article in the news and observer. without legal knowledge and tenacity i had no one to turn to. as we went through the appeals

process, which was possible with the endorsement of the university of north carolina the leadership once again wanted to take a plea for reduced sentence but my mother and i needed to have my name unsullied. by going back and looking at the original interview the lack of residents with guidance testimony, n.c.a.a. reinstated my eligibility. my first game of the season night for three ligament's after receiving a six year eligibility, i was not able to return to the civil play until my final game which institute plays. .. to the final game of the season. now, one of the things that was, looking back at my career, that i wish i could have par taken in, was intermships. a few of my friends from laurenville went on to play at the ivy league, and with the their -- it's not as demanding as, you know, high level

division i football, they were allowed to go and pursue other things in the summer. and upon graduation, some of my friends got great job offers. an internship gives you direction, teaches you valuable life lessons and prepares for you professionalism. a competitive football school, competing an internship is almost impossible. one must be enrolled in a number of credit offers. i have seen fellow athletes get hours, most ended up quitting their internship because of the sheer level of exhaustion on any given day. only one was able to compete his internship because he wasn't required to go to any classes. at the university of north carolina, football players were one of the only teams not allowed to participate in university camps that would create another source of income.

in fact, during a panel discussion about the documentary school, the price of college sports, head coach of the george mason men's basketball team, paul hewitt, stated his team has to do an internship before they graduate, a mandatory one. i think this is a great practice. if the ncaa truly wants to develop student athletes and prepare them for success in the field, they should mandate that all athletes complete an internship. the reason is it needs to be mandated is because of the existing culture that demonizes any activity that won't directly help a program. players that go home for a semester, and i have friends who have done this, are labeled as selfish and lazy and almost a cancer to the team. but in fact, he's just going home, he's still working out, just trying to improve his own value for the likelihood he's not going to make the nfl. i have come to realize there's a void in college athletics.

the incaa as an institution no longer protects the athlete. they're more interested in signage and profits. i wasn't aware that i needed to defend myself against my university and the ncaa, and as a student, i lacked the resources and knowledge to defend myself. against an 80-year-old institution. my family lacked the resources to hire a lawyer, and if i refused to be interviewed i would have been held out until i testified. in the ncaa, college football players have a very small window of opportunity to prove our worth to the nfl. therefore, every game you miss is a lost opportunity, and a means to devalue worth. there needs to exist an entity that quickly works to help the student. it terrifies me how many students might have had their eligibility unjustly taken and the reputation damaged. the student athlete has a short career and is an amazing renewable resource, and because

of that, the ncaa is able to take advantage of naive young men and women. there needs to be an organization that will in fact protect that college athlete that has no ties to the financial being of the universities or the ncaa. allowing the ncaa to continue to intimidate schools and athletes is dangerous and unfair. to quote a famous poet, who will watch the watchmen. thank you for the opportunity to be before you today. >> thank you very much. i appreciate it a lot. mr. taylor branch is from baltimore. he's an author and historian and has written one of what i call five best books ever written in terms of my own reading preferences. about the civil rights movement and the development of it. and he's also an expert on this subject and has written extensively. we welcome you, sir. >> thank you. thank you, senator rockefeller, thank you, senator thune. thank you, members of the

committee. guests, sports fans, educators. i'm honored to be here. a subject for your hearing today, college sports and the wellbeing of college athletes, is full of minefields and myths. i hope to offer some summary comments for a possible discussion under three headings, amateurism, balance, and equity. amateurism has become a distinguishing feature of ncaa governance. it is identified an official pronouncement as the bedrock principal of college athletics. the ncaa bylaws define and mandate amateur conduct as follows. student athletes shall be amateurs in an intercollegiate sport and their participation should be motivated primarily by education and by the physical, mental, and social benefits to be derived. student participation in intercollegiate athletics is an

avocation, and student athletes should be protected from exploitation by professional and commercial enterprises, close quote. that's ncaa bylaw 2.9. the word amateur reflects conflicted attitudes about money, youth, and the purposes of recreation. its broad ambivalence has opened a muddled flexibility in public habits, allowing the united states to become the only nation to create commercialized sports at institutions of higher learning. even the major universities involved which were founded to uphold intellectual rigor routinely ignore or excuse the contradictions of a multibillion side industry build on their students. confusion and mythology begin with themselves. dictionary definitions for amateurs go from a devoety to a

bumbling rambler. the people running the company are a bunch of amateurs. accordingly, the same word expresses praise and scorn without distinction. this ambig uty gains re-enforcement in our uniquely designed world of sport where fans are encouraged to cheer and boo without thinking objectively. the ideal of ancient greek amateurism has always been misleading because the athletes of olympus actually competed for huge prizes. aristotle researched well rewarded champions back to the earliest festivals and modern scholars have shown high stakes victory and loss. ancient amateurism is a myth, noted a scholar. purists who refuse to mix money with sport did not exist in the ancient world, and victers of

success as much as victory in the sacred contest. golf legend bobby jones is enshrined in modern sports history as a model amateur and gentleman who declined every championship prize he earned. his reputation fits the true definition of amateur, which is derived from the latin amateur or lover, specifying one who chooses to pursue a skill out of subjective devotion rather than the hope of financial gain. some non-college sports still allow athletes to declare and renounce amateur status. significantly, students themselves call themselves amateurs when they invented intercollegiate sports after the civil war. until 1905, students retained general control of the new phenomenon in everything from scheduling and equipment to ticket sales. they recruited alumni to construct harvard stadium in 1903 with zero funds from the

college. neither the faculties nor the other critics assisted in building the structure of college athletics, declared walter camp, yale class of 1980, who became the father of college football in his spare time. the ncaa created in 1906, slowly transformed the amateur tradition inherited from college athletes. its board declared a goal of total faculty control as late as 1922, and the weak ncaa organization could not hire its first full-time staff member until 1951. after that, however, burgeoning revenue from television contracts allowed ncaa officials to enforce amateur rules as an objective requirement rather than a subjective choice. this is problematic because attempts to regulate personal motivation and belief commonly run afoul of the constitution. even if internal standards were allowed and could somehow be

measured, ncaa rules contradict the key requirement that college sports must be an advocation or calling which comes to call and vox, voice, by denying athletes an essential voice. ncaa rules govern the players by fiat, excluding them from membership and consent. balance. checks and balances are required for sound governance, and the ncaa structure is unbalanced in at least four basic respects. first, ncaa enforcement suffers an inherent conflict of interest between alleged violations in football as opposed to basketball. because the organization lost its television revenue from college football and is almost wholly dependent on a sole source broadcasting contract for the march madness basketball tournament. second, the structure creates a false impression of common practice between the very few schools that aggressively commercialize college athletics

roughly 100 to 150 of some 1200 ncaa members, and the vast majority of schools with small crowds and negligible sports revenue, an elastic ncaa amateurism stretches all the way from a division iii cross country race to notre dame football on espn. third, ncaa officials resolutely obscure differences between commercialized sports and the academic mission on campus. in the classroom, colleges transfer highly values expertise to students, but this traditional role is reversed in big-time sports. there, athletes deliver highly valued expertise to the colleges. this distinction is basic and fundamental to your committee's stated purpose of promoting educational integrity. college athletes are or should be students in the classroom and competitor players in the athletic department. they face multiple roles and

careers like many americans, but their conflicting demands cannot be managed or balanced unless they're squarely recognized. the ncaa undermines this logical definition by saying they're a supplement for this creation called the student athlete. universities implicitly concur by off-loaded some of their academic responsibility to the ncaa. fourth, the ncaa and its member schools strip rights from athletes uniquely as a class. no college tries to ban remunative work for all students, and no legislature could or would write laws to confiscate earnings from one targeted group of producers in a legitimate enterprise. on the contrary, universities sponsor extensive work study programs and student citizens everywhere exercise freedom to market skills everywhere from book store jobs and pizza delivery to the entrepreneurial

launch of facebook. unless they're athletes. for college athletes alone, the ncaa brands such industry unethical. equity. basic fairness requires attention to the rights and freedom of participants above the convenience of observers. applied to college sports, this principle would mean that no freedom should be abridged because of athletic status. while i am neither a lawyer or professional economist, i find ample historical evidence that experts object to collusion in the ncaa's regulatory structure. in microeconomics, a prominent text book, two professors make the ncaa a featured example of an economic cartel. which reaps anti-competitive profits. the courts have agreed in two landmark cases, in ncaav. board

of regents of oklahoma in 1984, the u.s. supreme court struck down the ncaa's exclusive control of college football broadcasts as an illegal restraint of trade. overnight, the major football schools won the freedom to fill every broadcast their markets would bear without having to share proceeds with the smaller schools through the ncaa. we eat what we kill, bragged one official at the university of texas. in law, the ncaa 1998, assistant coaches won a $54 million settlement along with an order vacating the ncaa's $16,000 limit on starting salaries. the compensation of assistant football coaches has cracked the $1 million barrier since then, with salaries skyrocketing even in nonrevenue sports. by 2010, the university of florida paid its volleyball coach $365,000.

but, the supervisors of college sports have one economic freedom. and they enjoy enormous largess by the most vital talent, the players. to reduce bargaining power by student athletes, the ncaa creates and enforces rules regarding eligibility and the terms of compensation. ncaa officials, of course, steadfastly assert that their whole system is devoted to the educational welfare and benefit of the college athlete. football will never again be placed ahead of educating, nurturing, and protecting young people. ncaa president mark emerick, sitting near me, vowed when he announced ncaa sanctions for the recent scandal at penn state. such professionals must be reconciled somehow with ncaa ruled that systematically deny college athletes a full range of

rights. these rules can turn words on their heads like alice in wonderland. the ncaa's bed rock pledge to avoid commercialization of athletes aims to prevent them from getting paid too much or at all, rather than too little. exploit, to use selfishly for one's ends, as employers who exploit their workers. in closing, i would suggest one hopeful precedent from the past work of your commerce committee. this is not the first time that the governance of amateur sports together with the education of college athletes has presented a daunting tangle of passions and vested interests. 50 years ago, an early bonanza in sports revenue fueled a bitter feud.

aau leaders accused and quote unpatriotic ncaa of sabotaging u.s. chances to win medals. they claim that college athletes already were paid and therefore not amateurs at all since the ncaa approved athletic scholarships in 1956. ncaa officials retorted that aau coaches were parasites on college training facilities. these two sides nit-picked, boycotted, sabotaged, and disqualified each other until president kennedy, no less a mediator than douglas macarthur, to foster hopes for the tokyo olympics. the exhausted macarthur who recommended blue ribbon commissions that brought proposals eventually to this committee. your predecessors shaped the olympic and amateurs sports act of 1988. one key provision of that law secured for active athletes a 20% share of the voting seats on

each of the new olympic committees. though small, this representation soon transformed amateur sports, granted a voice, athletes tipped the balance on governing committees in the united states and inexorably around the globe. marathon races, then tennis tournaments, recognized the proith for players to accept prize money and keep their olympic eligibility. new leagues sprang up to popularize volleyball and other games with corporate sponsors. olympic officials came to welcome professionals in every sport except for boxing. by 1986, when the nrtd national olympic commit expunged the word amateur from the bylaws, they modified every definition of disaster. most people scarcely recognize the change. some of you helped recognize the success in the ted stevens amateur sports act of 1988. this example suggests a good place to start.

wherever possible, make athletes true citizens rather than glorified vassals in college sports. where markets extend into college sports, make them fair and competitive. recognize the rights, uphold the rights of college athletes. give them a voice and challenge university in turn to make wise, straightforward decisions about the compatibility of commercialized sports with education. thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. branch. and i want to be very critical of myself. because what, the general rule around here is witnesses speak for five or six minutes, but i failed to make that clear. and so we just got -- >> it says five minutes here, but i wasn't watching, sorry. >> so just keep it to five or six minutes, that would be the best, and i thank you for my

testimony. and it was my fault. mr. bradshaw, who is a former director of athletics at temple university, we welcome you, sir. >> chairman rockefeller, ranking member thune, ladies and gentlemen of the committee, good afternoon. your invitation to testify today about promoting the wellbeing and academic success of our student athletes is much appreciated. it's an honor for me to represent the 1600 plus institutions and 11,000 plus individual members of nafta and its athletics administrators who are the practitioners of our enterprise and represent in excess of 500,000 student athletes across the ncaa divisions as well as the naia and junior community colleges. they serve as the professional association for those in the field of the athletic administrations. it serves for networking the exchange of information and advocacy on behalf of the association. my career in higher education

include positions as an assistant baseball coach, head baseball coach, director of alumni, and 36 years as a division i athletic director at three universities. my athletic career includes three years as a student athlete, one as a walk-on, followed by three years in the washington senators baseball organization where two broken ankle ankles kro s created a professi change. these experiences proved valuable to my 36 years as a director at la salle, depaul, and other university. during the five decades of my career, i have seen significant improvements in the commitment by universities to the kaementdic, athletic, and personal experiences of athletes. from state of the art support services, elite coaching and training, athletic equipment and

emerging permissive benefits, our student athletes have never had it better. and yet we know we can do better. we have as educators are charged with helping our athletes. it's important to exam our university's performances and trends in the areas of academics, financial security, health, safety, and life skills. academics. over the past 20 years, graduation rates by any metric have drastically improved for student athletes. in 2013, the graduation success rate measure for all student athletes in division i was 82%. including 71% for division i fbs football participants and 73% for men's basketball student athletes. among the reasons for this

dramatic improvement in graduation rates are, increased ncaa requirements for initial eligibility and continued eligibility, and universities' proactive response to the academic progress rate metric instituted by the ncaa to monitor teams and individual performance each semester. >> health and safety. while universities strive to use best practices, we can never do too much to insure the health and safety of our stuth athletes. the prevention and detection of concussions remain one of the highest priorities for every athletic director at every level. best practices that have become common place include hiring strength and conditioning coaches, dieticians and nutritionists. required seminars for all student athletes to discuss drugs and alcohol, assault, date rape, and gambling as well as comprehensive regular drug testing and follow-up. financial security. as we all know, the real cost to

attend college have risen above inflation for years, causing many student to have massive debt upon graduation and proving too costly for others to even attend the college of their choice. currently, division i student athletes receive $2.1 billion in athletic scholarships, and this total will continue to escalate with anticipated ncaa legislation covering real costs of education combined with the annual increases in tuition, room and board, books and fees. in addition to the value of a real scholarship, a college graduate on average earned $1 million more over a lifetime than a nongraduate. other financial benefits for student athletes include universities health insurance, ncaa catastrophic insurance, multi-year athletic grants and student assistance funds available through conference offices. the vastly improved conditions afforded student athletes have

resulted in their unprecedented performances in the classroom, on the playing fields, and in preparation for life. few other campus activities or clubs produce such natural viversity as intercollegiate athlettic, bringing together young men and women from various religions, athnisties and beliefs. less than 1% of division i student athletes will ever participate in professional sports, and that professional career on average lasts only a few years. this reality underscores the value of a college education, an education many young men and women could not afford without an athletic scholarship. in our professional of intercollegiate athletics, the student athletes under our care are the center of our university and had nothe most important peo consider. if we always asked ourselves before allocating resources, building buildings or hiring coaches, is this decision in the

best interest of our student athletes, then i believe that answer has helped us arrive at the best answer. thanks again for inviting me to be with you this afternoon. >> thank you very much, mr. bradshaw. now dr. richard southpaw, a director at the university of south carolina. welcome, sir. >> thank you. chairman rockefeller, ranking member thune and distinguished committee members, thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today. my initial draft of my comments was only 35 minutes, so thank you for giving me the advice. as director of the college sport research institute at the university of south carolina, my comments today are not off the cuff remarks but informed by soclogical, educational studies and empirical study drawn from ncaa documents, they reflect not only my work but also that of numerous colleagues and scholars. while i'm well aware there are

distinct differences within ncaa divisions as well as between ncaa revenue and olympic sport, my testimony today will focus on how within big-time college sports, ncaa members have sought to protect their business interests at the expense of the well being and academic success of ncaa profit athletes. for several decades, the ncaa was aware that as the scale of revenue generation and spending continued to grow, there is a general sense that big-time athletics is in conflict with the principle of amateurism and increased governmental and public scrutiny is likely if graduation rates do not improve in underperforming sports. consequently, in 2003, the ncaa embarked in a two-phase organizational rebranding strategy that was part of a public relations agenda that addressed critics and provided an alternative to what the ncaa described as the cynics.

first, the ncaa created a term of art, the collegiate model of athletics, as a better understood definition of amateurism that isolates the principal to the way in which college athletes are viewed without imposing its avocational nature on revenue producing opportunities. notably, division i revenues have more than doubled since 2003. tellingly, internal ncaa documents reveal protecting the collegiate model is nearly by definition the primary focus of the office of the ncaa president. concurrently in an effort to maintain the perception of a clear line of demarcation between college and professional sport, and offer support for the effectiveness of its new academic progress program, the ncaa developed the academic progress rate or apr, and graduation success rate, or gsr. since 2003, the ncaa has consistently sought to utilize these rates as proof that

big-time college sport has one clear focus -- education. however, several items are noteworthy. one, neither the federal graduation rate, fgr, mandated by congress, nor the ncaa's gfr, is perfect or inherently a more accurate metric. they utilize different sampling and statistical analysis to exam different cohort. in short, they're different graduation rates. two, the gsr consistently returned to rate 12% to 25% higher than the fgr. as far back as 1991, they knew removing drop-outs, transfers or athletes who leave school in good academic standing from the gfr cohort, would result in a remarkably higher success rate. three, since there's no comparable national level gfr for the general student body, to

report gfr and fgr data simultaneously in press releases or data set tables invites inappropriate comparisons and fosters confusion among the general public. while the national office has sought to protect its collegiate model, academic support staffs label in a system that too often depends on an amorms process, and results in athletes often clustering or being steered to majors conducive of their practice or competition, or in other words, work schedule. tellingly, several authorities in the ncaa and the university governance structures recognize clustering and scheduling of easy courses as a problem. in addition, contrary to the ncaa's public posturing that they're just normal students, profit athletes tend in important respects to be physically, culturally, and socially isolated from the

campus community. they live in a tightly controlled parallel university indicative of total institution. through the steady drum beat of sophisticated and subtle institutional propaganda, the ncaa has sought spontaneous consent to a mythology that big-time college sport enhances the educational experience of quote/unquote student athletes. propaganda is effective because it exploits people's reluctance to intellectually engage with any oppositional or alternative view. since 2003, while the ncaa has successfully embedded its model of college athletics including the graduation success rate into the public's consciousness, there has been little progress in insuring profit athletes have equal access to educational opportunities afforded other students. in conclusion, there is clear evidence the ncaa's collegiate

model of athletics naument only systematically inhibited access to a world class education but also exploits profit athletes by denying them basic bargaining rights, due process, and standard forms of compensation. i want to thank the committee members for the opportunity to visit with you today. >> thank you for your excellent testimony, and finally, dr. mark emerick. who -- well, you all know who he is. >> thank you, senator. good afternoon to you and to senator thune -- >> is your microphone on? >> thank you. i appreciate that. is it working now? >> no, no difference. >> as a recovering university president, i learn to project, so thank you very much. good afternoon to all of you on the panel. i'm mark emerick. i serve now as the president of the ncaa since october of 2010. following 30 years as a

profess professor, a university administrator and a university president. i certainly appreciate the opportunity to appear before all of you today and discuss what i agree are very important issues, and i particularly want to thank you, mr. chairman, for working with us on the timing of this hearing. it's good that we're able to be here. the ncaa' core purpose as has already been pointed out is to promote the well being and success of more than 460,000 student athletes as they enjoy both world-class athletic experiences and receive access to top-notch educations. that's why i have been working diligently with the division i board of directors, our member universities, and all of the stakeholders to drive policy changes that support student athletes success and indeed, address many of the issues that have already been raised here today. during my tenure, we have enacted more than a dozen key reforms, two notable examples are raising academic standards and adding the opportunity for

multiple-year scholarships. as we discuss how to improve college sports today, it's important to understand that the ncaa is a democratically governed membership led association of nearly 1100 colleges and universities. as such, neither i nor any member of my staff have a vote on association policy or infractions decisions. it's important to note that appropriately in my opinion, university presidents themselves are the ultimate decision makers within the association. members make rules through a representative process much as you do in congress. it is challenging, obviously, to bring together coaches, athletic administrators, faculty members and presidents to achieve consensus on much of anything, let alone college sports. and while a change of pace is not what i or members would like, division i schools are working diligently, even as we speak, to create a new decision making structure that will yield practical and i hope timely results on all of these issues.

before we discuss the challenges at hand, let me be clear. college sports in my opinion work extremely well for the vast majority of our 460,000 student athletes. and while it can and should be modified, the collegiate model should in fact be preserved because of all of the good it provides for so many. nonetheless, i agree there are very important changes that need to be made, and many university presidents happen to agree with me. let me describe the most important ones. first, student athletes in my opinion should be given a scholarship for life. so they may complete a bachelor's degree, even if their education is delayed for any reason unrelated to a lack of academic progress or serious misconduct. second, scholarships should cover the full and actual cost of attendance, not simply tuition, room, and board, books and supplies. third, ncaa schools must always lead in the area of health and safety. for example, the ncaa along with

a variety of medical experts released recently new guidelines that address the diagnosis, the management, and the prevention of sports-related concussions. fourth, the ncaa must work assertively with all of our universities on sexual assault prevention and support for victims. this is a national crisis, and we could all do better. fifth, while all student athletes today are covered by insurance for injuries and the ncaa covers catastrophic injuries, any gaps in coverage must be closed. sixth, the academic success of student athletes must remain our ultimate priority. this means providing them with the time as well as the resources they need to take advantage of the opportunities at college campuses as our two former athletes here have testified. finally, all changes that are made, these and others, must maintain a support for title ix

and cannot come at the cost of student athletes in women's and non-revenue generating sports. the ncaa provides countless opportunities to men and women, including many from low-income families. in fact, some 82,000 current student athletes are first-generation college students. and at the risk of correcting mr. bradshaw, it is now $2.7 billion in athletic scholarships that are provided to students who make that a reality. further, ncaa revenues are reinvested in our mission. specifically, last year's revenue allowed us to conduct 89 national championships in 23 different sports with nearly 50,000 student athletes participating in those championships from across the entire country. those revenues allowed us to provide $700 million directly to colleges and universities in all three divisions. $100 million of which was used

to cover extra expenses and emergency expenses for division i student athletes. further, those revenues allowed us to cover the $14 million insurance premium for catastrophic insurance policies for our student athletes. college sports are serving student athletes very, very well for the most part. yes, there are changes to both policy and a culture that are needed, and they require frank conversations like the one we're having here and serious action. i'm committed to working with you and our member schools to insure that student athletes have all of the opportunities for success they deserve, and i want to thank you for the invitation, mr. chairman, to appear today. i look forward to taking your questions and working with you in the future. >> thank you very much, mr mr. emerick. i will start. senator thune will follow, and then senator koets and we'll proceed from there. according to your website, and i'm just going back to some

basic stuff, student athlete health, safety, and wellbeing remain our top priorities. yet, in court papers filed for a lawsuit in which a family sued the ncaa after their son died from a brain injury suffered in a preseason football practice, the ncaa asserted that, quote, the ncaa denies it has a legal dp duty to protect student athletes, close quote. i find that extraordinary. now, i know what your answer is going to be, and that's going to upset me. but the question is, how do you reconcile your website's publicly stated priority promoting health and safety with your private legal arguments which you have declared somehow are different? that the ncaa doesn't have a legal duty to protect student athletes? you either do or you don't? >> i will not quibble about the language. i think that was at the very least a terrible choice of words

created by legal counsel to make a legal argument. i'm not a lawyer. i'm not going to defend or deny what a lawyer wrote in a lawsuit. i will unequivocally state we have a clear moral obligation to make sure that we do everything we can to support and protect student athletes. >> see, what i perceive is a web of convenient protection from -- to all parties. you suggested that there are a number of universities. see, what i really want to see is have a panels of subpoenas university presidents from land grant publicly funded universities. up here, and i think it will come to that, because i think it's going to have to. i don't know how we're going to work anything out without it. but you say that was bad language by a lawyer who got confused or was late or didn't

have a good night's rest or whatever it was. so you sort of slosh over that. earlier, you said that there are a number of universities that want to make a certainly number of changes, which you then enumerated three or four of them, but then you have also said frequently in answer to questions at otherfora that you don't have the authority to do anythi anything. you don't have a vote, which you said here. everything is in the hands of the universities. my cynical self says that universities like things exactly the way they are because they're making a ton of money. in fact, they're making so much money, more than they ever have before, not all, but some, that there's about 120 that make most of it. 120 universities. that i don't know how change is possible. how do you make the case for

saying that you can be a participant in this process of bringing about change when you say that they don't have to listen to anything you have to say? >> well, i can tell you, senator, what is going on right now in less than a month now, the division i board will vote on a completely changed decision making structure that will put all of a subjects that we're describing and discussing here today in the hands of the 65 universities that have the largest revenue. the schools that are within the five -- >> i'm sorry, i have to interrupt. why would you pick the 65 schools that make the most money? to me, they would be the ones least likely to make any changes at all. >> quite the contrary, they're the ones who precisely want to make changes. often changes that have price tags associated with them, and they want to make those changes and are often blocked from doing so by institutions that have less revenue.

so if, for example, you want to move toward a scholarship model that covers full cost of attendance, something that the division i board in my first year on the board twice passed, and it was overridden by the membership of the 350 schools in division i, predominantly with the support of the 65 major schools saying this is something we really need, and they were blocked from doing so by the other institutions. so those schools are indeed those schools that i just -- whose interests are the points that i just enumerated. indeed, i was practically quoting from a letter signed by all the presidents of the pac-12 and all the presidents of the big 10, whom have said these are the changes we need to make and we need the authority to make those kinds of changes. >> is this the 65 largest universities, or are these also the smaller ones who you say block progress because it's expensive? >> yes, sir, these are the 65

schools that are members of the five largest revenue conferences, the s.e.c., the big 12, the big 10, the pac-12, and the a.c.c. >> would you agree with me in my final first round question? that college sports has long forgotten the word amateurism? i'm talking particularly about the 120 major -- but you know, there's a lot more than that, that it's just a business? and the more money you can make, i mean, west virginia university signed on to the big 12, which guarantees one thing and one thing only. that means that most of the people of west virginia who are not high income or even moderate income cannot go to any games out in the southwest, but west

virginia university sure makes a ton of money from it. how do you respond to that? is that right, is that fair, is that progressive? >> if i may, senator, there's two questions that are being asked there. the first is, do i believe that the 120 or so dominant schools, fbs schools, perhaps to whom you're referring, have abandoned the concept of amateurism? i would say, no, they have not. i certainly agree with you that the top-line revenue, the expenditures that are going on right now in college athletics have unequivocally moved up very sharply in the past two decades. the fact that schools are investing those dollars back into their athletic program makes it quite clear that the universities themselves are not doing this to, quote, turn a profit. indeed, last year, out of the 1,100 schools, about 23 in all of america had positive cash flow. in other words, invested all of the money that they had in college sports and had some left

over. everyone else in the country put resources into into college spo instead of taking them out. in terms of the changes that occurred in the construction of is the conferences over the past handful of years, i probably agree with you. i was very disappointed in the changes that the conferences sought to make -- to make progress in. they created some significant travel challenges, i believe not just for the fans, but also for the student athletes. when you have to go across country for a football game is one thing, because that only occurs occasionally. when it's your volley balance, basketball or soccer team, it means student athletes senior traveling a great deal at great expense in both time, energy and commitment. i was disappointed in for the all, but many of those changes that occurred i get i thank you and turn to ranking member

thune. >> mr. emert, under your presidency, you've indicated that you've taken the initiative to form some of these committees to address needed changes. >> thank you, senator, first of all, within a month i hope we'll see the board pass a completely new decision-making structure because of the challenges of the past 24 months of making decisions around a very aggressive reform agenda. the leadership of the 65 leading un progress. make progress. they have identified as their agenda many of the items that i just addressed, and a handful of others. so there's a very keen interest in finding first of all, ways to provide greater support for student athletes. we passed twice over the past 36 months a proposal to allow universities to give student

athletes at a bare minimum, an additional $2,000 in their scholarships to cover the miscellaneous experiences. i believer the universities will approve a proposal to do something just like that yet again and i hope an even more robust model to cover the real legitimate costs of being a student athlete. we were able to pass changes for student athletes. prior to three years ago, the universities were literally forbidden by ncaa rules to provide multiyear scholarships. we were able to get a change in the rules to allow them, and i think we're well on our way toward mandating they in fact be multiple year commitments, so student athletes don't have to worry about whether or not they'll finish their degree on time. i think that is extremely likely to happen. as you mentioned also, there's a very strong interest in the same group of leading universities to cover the costs -- fully the

costs of insurance programs. the vast majority of the universities cover all of those costs today, but it shouldn't be a question. it should be quite clear that no stay tuned athlete will ever have to cover insurance or injuries that are inflicted on them when they're a student athlete. finally i think we have to address this issue of time. the demanse that are placed on student athletes are in my eyes and in the eyes of many, including i suspect mr. bradshaw, the demands on judge men and women, in terms of what's required for coaching, what's river for informal coaching, what's required to be simply competitive these days is far too great a time demand. we need to find ways -- i completely agree with mr. ramsey, for example, we need to find ways to take advantage of internships, study abroad opportunities, all the things we know that help prepare them for life, because a very, very tiny

fraction of them will ever play professional sports. for virtual all college players, their last game is in college. their professional life and life in general will be changed by having a meaningful degree and meaningful experiences that go along with that. that means we have to create opportunities for them to dohe ma thing >> mr. raj shah, you bring unique perspective as a former ap and as a member institution taking care of the well being of your student athletes. i'm told it was your practice while a temple to conduct exit interviews and am wondering, sometimes those lead to substantive changes and policy under programs can be improved. you have some examples from those interviews that you can share with us drug improves the way temple to address the needs of the student athletes because we gathered our best information from student athletes about how they're being treated. as many of you might know student athletes are not the most shocking people in the world. they absolutely, they're like my teenagers. they let you know when they're hungry. they let you know when they need

things. the exit interviews were invaluable because seniors were leaving the institution. we also follow up, had questionnaires we sent to seniors a month before the left and then we went over those questionnaires with the student athletes, talk about every facet of their experience at the university. that was helpful. we also had a captains council which was an aggregate of all the captains from every team that got together without the coaches, just myself and some administrators, to everything had to say about their experience so we could use that in recruiting and hope to do a lot better job. we also have team meetings with each team before the season to welcome the freshman and also to gather input from those freshmen about it. we were able to gather very valuable things like we had one team whose their practice facility was maybe about 25 minutes from campus. when they got back in the evening, they were able to get

the kind of quality dinner because a lot of the students had already been in there and things were picked over. we were able to extend that time for the meals for an hour so that the student athletes could eat. we also had football players who were practicing in the afternoon, some of them in premed, and some of the courses they were taking were right up against the practice. we were able to get that football coach to take those practices in the morning when 97% of the classes of the kids were taking were there. so those were very valuable, that was a valuable input. right from the center of our university, the student athletes. >> my time has expired my time has expired my time has expired but from the athletic director standpoint what role do you see the '80s and universities playing in terms of, some of these things you can go above and beyond what is required, correct? a lot of flexibility allowed to member institutions to make decisions in the best interest of the student athletes. >> and wished. we have the responsibility. it's not only the chairman of

the board of trustees, but the president and athletic director should all be on board to have some of the loss of these ambitions and principles about how that works. in concert with all those people because sometimes you need funds to do the things that you need to do, and you need to support from the board and the president. so it's very important that all of us work together to do that. because we're out recruiting other student athletes and that's a brand. we call athletics the front porch of the university. it might not be the most important thing you see when you drive by but it's the most visible messenger of the brand of the university. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you. >> senator coats. >> mr. chairman, thank you. dr. emmert, thank you for being willing to testify. i know you didn't have to do this. i think it's been constructed to hear the reforms that you have initiated and those that you hope to initiate, and it sounds like there's some real positive

things that are happening relative to the issues that, as you've acknowledged, are challenges for the ncaa, and challenges for the universities and challenges for our committee. thank you i want to thank you -- mr. chairman, i want to thank you for following through on their commitment to me and to others that we are going to have a good solid, nontheatrical investigation, and committee process here. because i think we're all on the same page in terms of how can we best preserve the student athlete, best provide for them, how to address some of the challenges that we're facing today with the reference and so forth. and i think this is a very constructive effort that we are undertaking here, and i thank you for it, for pulling all that together. here's what i'm hearing, and i'm leading to a question. but i'm hearing from eyewitnesses that there are many

positive things happening in many positive results coming from being a student athlete, opportunities that are available to athletes that otherwise would not have been able to get a college experience and a college degree in education process. the list of reforms that dr. emmert has basically said these are his proposals, and i think it goes right to what we're trying to accomplish here, scholarship for life, the full and actual cost of attendance payment, leading, taking the lead in areas of health and safety, addressing the sexual assault issue, which goes across all aspects of athletics, but also college experience. it's not limited to just one. medical insurance, dealing with those question, academic priorities.

we talked about the time issue. support for title ix. it's been remarkable what has happened under title nine in terms of the number of women who were able to participate in athletics, i gain scholarships. many of those also would not have had a chance without scholarship help and support. the vast majority of schools, whether division ii or division iii, or not in the top 65, that offer all these opportunities. it's something wan we want to preserve, something want to improve. i think we have a president of the ncaa who is a reformer, known as that. that's why he was hired. he's taken steps already, and willing to take significant steps forward. obviously echoes to this question, doctor imber, of the 65. -- dr. emmert. i was encouraged by the response to the chairman's question relative to their interest in

addressing these issues. now, it's one thing to say that they're willing to do it. another thing to do it. so we wish you success but we understand that you are the proposal. you are the initiator that they are the decision-makers. and so i hope, mr. chairman, over some period of time, hopefully relatively soon we can get a positive result from that effort. because i think that's really where these major issues fall. but doctor amber, would you just give us -- dr. emmert. would you give us one more shot at the ability to address what i think those to the root of the problem? but also to the root of the solution. and that is the top 65 which are the revenue generators. but we don't want to jeopardize is the of the thousand or so that armed, and put them in a situation where they won't be able to fulfill title ix or they won't be able to fulfill the level of sports they give so

many young people opportunities to participate and get a college education at the same time. >> yes, mr. chairman. senator coats, i think you're asking two of the most important questions. first is a recognition that 100 or so years ago when the ncaa was created it was as mr. branch pointed out, created with some impetus from the white house and congress because of all the challenges in college sports. at the time it was determined that college sports should be appropriately self governed, that the universities themselves were capable of providing the right kind of structure and governance and oversight to make college sports work effectively for young men and young women. and we are at a point now where we're going to see yet again whether or not that self-governance system works. i have confidence because i know most of these presidents as colleagues, and i know their

interests and considerations and concerns that provides with confidence that they want to move forward on the agendas that i described, plus more, in the coming weeks and months. now, i think, mr. chairman, this hearing is a useful cattle prod, if you will, to make sure that everyone understands that the world is watching, the u.s. senate is watching and everyone is paying attention to what universities are going to do to address these very real and significant issues. i think all of those things combined give me some very positive belief that we are going to wind up in the right place in a matter of months. if we are not, then we have another conversation that we can have i'm sure, and i've no doubt that you or your successors will make sure we have that conversation. but i have no concerns about this body or any other kind old universities accountable for the things that they need to and should be doing.

>> mr. chairman, my time has expired. >> i want to note for the record mr. goes out in the hallway found out he just had his 10th grandchild. just for the record. >> and i heard he tried. >> i didn't tell her that. [laughter] >> we love that. [inaudible] >> a guy who cries over his grandchildren is very cool. >> we like that. thank you. >> and other form of cartel. [laughter] >> thank you, mr. chairman. hope this doesn't get you into trouble also calling me next. .. >> i have -- i would like to submit an opening statement. your staff has that. >> so ordered. >> as a usc alum, who spoke with pat hayden just before this hearing, i'm pretty sure we usually watch the trojans beat

notre dame on nbc, and not espn. sorry, mr. branch. >> the seven >> if you have to talk about studes having scholarships for life, today you don't have 'em, and i think that's a weakness. it's something that you don't have today. if you're talking about leading in the area of safety, you're not doing it today. if the ncaa's talking about taking the lead in sexual assault, then they're not doing it today. if you talk about gaps in insurance coverage, it means it's not happening today. we can go on and on. managing time demands on these men and women that are in school means it's not happening today. and i'll share with you every

once in a while the chairman and i agree on something. i call that lightning in a bottle. maybe it's -- >> careful. >> maybe the stars are aligning. i'm not sure on this one. but needless to say, i agree with him, and that is that we do have jurisdiction in this congress over the ncaa, and so my question to you is this: if tomorrow there was a bill from the united states senate that would disband the ncaa and for all the discussions and hearings, witnesses that spoke today, give me reasons why i shouldn't vote for that bill. >> well, i'm happy to. the fact is that, first of all, we've been focused already in this brief period of time on the things that aren't happening. but the reality also is that an enormous amount of very, very good things are happening -- >> good, i want to hear those. i want to hear those.

>> -- that we haven't talked about. so when we focus on the issues of college sports, the vast majority of them -- as many of you have noted -- the vast majority of those issues are really focused on men's basketball and football as it's played in the top handful of institutions. if you look at bcs football and men's basketball, you are looking at less than 5% of all of intercollegiate athletics. you're missing 95% of intercollegiate athletics. for that other 95%, there are very few of those challenges or problems that are occurring. indeed, it is serving -- i'm not very good at math in my head, but if it's 95% of 460,000 students, let's just say it's 450,000 or 425,000 students for whom this is working amazingly well. they are graduating at a higher rate than their students, the rest of the student body on their campuses, they're graduating at a higher rate than the rest of the students in the united states.

yes, we can, in fact, have a very good, learned discussion about how we measure graduation rates. but if you use the federal graduation rate, student athletes in division i graduate higher than all of our athletes on campuses across america. if you look at men's and women's basketball, football, the graduation rates, as mr. bradshaw pointed out, have been steadily growing for more than 15 years now each and every year. if you look at african-american men, the african-american men on any given campus have a 9% higher probability of graduating if they happen to be an athlete than if they're not an athlete. the fact is that student athletes make very good students. yes, there are many issues and our two former athletes, i think, have pointed them out very nicely that need to be addressed. but for the vast majority of students, being an athlete also goes along with a better student and more likely to graduate. and also we believe, though the data's not well done and i just

learned from dr. southall that he's working on a study that will be very useful, we believe there's good reason to see they are more successful in life overall as well. so one of the things we all need to work on together is to make sure we don't throw the baby out with the bath water here. intercollegiate athletics is a wonderful part of our society, provides extraordinary opportunities for the vast majority of student athletes. i focused my comments on the things i'd like to see fixed. you just elaborated on them. that should not be interpreted as everything's wrong in college sports. indeed, even if you look at scholarships, in fact, no one is giving a guaranteed -- no one. most schools are not giving guaranteed four-year commitments. usc has just committed to do that, university of indiana, a handful of others are look at that right now -- >> but wasn't that -- >> but the reality is almost no student loses their scholarship.

>> wasn't that prohibited by the ncaa? >> it was. >> when did that change? >> that's one of the things i think will occur in the coming months. >> in other words, schools did offer four-year scholarships until the ncaa prohibited it. >> they did. and i have no idea why that was put in the rules. i have my own notion -- i have no idea when that was -- >> 1974. >> '73. >> and no reason as to what? >> bill, do you know what? >> really don't know, really don't know. >> none of us was in the room. >> in recruiting it's not a good idea not to give -- >> i trust the historian. i'd love to hear what taylor branch. >> the historical record on that was that it was driven by the coaches at the biggest universities, precisely the 65 biggest schools because they wanted more control over their athletes. they're driven to win. you have a better chance of winning if you control the athlete and what time he gets up and how much time he spends in

the weight room and so on and so forth. and if you can yank their scholarship, then you've got more control over them. >> but you can't do that anymore, right? >> yes, you can. >> yes, you can. the ncaa in 1973 at the behest of the big school athletic departments and coaches put in a rule that you could not offer more than a one-year scholarship. in other words, guaranteeing the coaches that control over the athletes. and that survived for 40 years. now what they're trying to do is to repeal that law so that you could at your option offer more. >> excuse me for interrupting. it has, in fact, been repealed. it's one of the first things i insisted on. >> but it lasted for 40 years at the behest of the same 65 schools that are now proposing to do these reforms that you're talking about, and i think they're good. but it's because they can afford them and because the gap between the level of money involved and the needs of these athletes has gotten so obscene that they want to do it on their own, and they can afford -- >> if senator heller would allow

me, because this is such an important point. it has not changed. a student athlete right now who for the reasons of a coach at any time can revoke that scholarship so that that student is no longer able to stay at a university. dr. emmert, that's true right now, right? >> it's variable. so starting last year, schools -- two years ago, pardon me -- schools were provided the option. in other words, this prohibition was repealed so that a school today can offer a multiyear scholarship, and many do. so as i just mentioned, the university of southern california and indiana, for example, have recently announced that that is precisely what they are going to do, is offer full four-year scholarships. many schools in the big ten have been doing so since this prohibition was lifted. i don't know the extent to which -- >> but it's not uniform. >> it is most certainly -- >> and it's not even the majority of schools. >> senator booker, your time

will come. >> we need to remind him that he is junior in this committee. >> i'm calling on senator mccaskill. >> thank you. i would like to offer the roll call of the institutions who voted to reestablish the one-year rule. after it was voted in in 2011 that you could have the option of giving a four-year scholarship, the very next meeting there was an attempt to overrule that decision. they needed a two-thirds vote to overrule the decision to go back to the one-year requirement. i think it would be very interesting for the members of this committee to look at the institutions that voted to go back to a one-year requirement in 2012. they need 63 -- they need 62.5%, they got 62.12 to go back to the one year. and i think you'll be surprised.

it's counterintuitive. some of the institutions that voted to go back to the one year like harvard voted to go back to one year. yale was strong, they abstained. [laughter] we had institutions like texas all wanted to go back to one year, but then there were smaller schools that wanted to go back to one year. >> what'd missouri do? >> one missouri school did, but the university of missouri did not. and i was willing to offer this into the record, and i was nervous when i got this because i was afraid that my university might have voted to go back to one year. but it's very telling that in 2012 -- now, i guess my question to you, dr. emmert, is why wasn't this made public at the time? because i think most of these universities would be embarrassed if they were publicly called out that they were unwilling to give a four-year scholarship to an athlete. so why did it take a request from congress for this roll call for this to ever reach the light of day? and i would ask for this list to be made part of the public

record. >> so ordered. >> well, the data were made available to all of the membership. >> i'm talking about to the public. why don't you put it on your web site? >> i don't know that it -- i'm not debating the fact, i just don't simply know whether it was not put on the web site. the debate was very public. it was, obviously, very disputed case. it was quite -- it's a very interesting debate. i was quite stunned by some of the argumentation. so we have, one of the things i didn't want mention about -- i didn't mention about changes that i anticipate in the coming weeks, mr. branch pointed out something that's part of the olympic movement, olympic tradition now that in the united states that student athletes have to have a very -- not student athletes, olympic athletes have to have a substantial vote in voice, in all of the deliberations of the olympic bodies. i certainly advocate for a model much like that and, indeed, the

proposal that's going to be voted on later in august will include full representation of students as voting members alongside presidents and athletic directors on all of the legislative bodies. but we currently have student athlete advisory committees that we turn to on all -- >> dr. emmert, that's all great. >> but if i might, ma'am, the student athlete advisory committee advised against putting in multiyear scholarships because they happen to agree with coaches that it was a good incentive for their colleagues to remain engaged. so some universities voted to overturn this because their very own student athlete advisory committee said, no, no, no, don't give multiyear scholarships, we like one-year scholarships. my point is simply, ma'am, it was quite counterintuitive. >> okay. fair enough. i would like to talk to those students, because i think they probably felt pressure from coaches if they were all student athletes. >> i was quite surprised. >> i have a hard time believing

that. i'd like to get to handling rape act sayses. >> yes, ma'am. >> in one of the responses to one of the letters i sent to you, you indicated you provided online title ix legal practices, video and best practices. in that material do you make the recommendation to your institutions that they not be allowed to handle the adjudication of title ix complaints involving sexual assault against student athletes? >> i don't know the answer to that. >> well, we've done a survey, and the results came out today, and i was shocked to find out 30% of the division i, ii and iii schools allow their athletic departments to handle the allegations against their athletes. now, we have a big problem with victims being willing to come forward, and i assume you've read the long cover story about the investigation that did not occur with mr. winston at florida state? >> i have.

>> there was no investigation of that allegation. we will never know whether he was guilty or not because nobody ever investigated it because of who he was. if you're a victim and you know your allegation is going to be handled by the athletic department as opposed to any other student on campus who's handled in a different system, why in the world would you think the process was going to be fair? >> i, i read your data this morning, and i was both -- it sounds like equally surprised and dismayed by that fact. i think the concern you're raising is spot on. i think it creates, first of all, an enormous amount of conflicts of interest. i think it creates the kind of enormous apprehension you're describing right now on the part of the victim. as somebody who's spent most of his life on campus and in several jobs had responsibilities for campus safety whenever i was a president, i had to deal with

victims and family members of victims and people who had suffered egregious harm, and i always found it the most difficult problem that i'd ever wrestled with. i think this is something that needs to be addressed. i think your data is shining a very important light on the phenomenon that i think most of the members are going to be very surprised to know exists. >> well, i think that my sense, and is i have a lot of questions about transparency of money and about whether or not things are made public. be i feel for you because part of me thinks you're captured by those that you're supposed to regulate, but then you're supposed to regulate those that you're captured by. and i can't tell whether you're in charge or whether you're a minion to them. the notion that you can't forcefully state i will go after this and i will make sure that no university allows their athletic department to handle a

sexual allegation against one of their team members, you know, i don't sense that you feel like you have any control over the situation. and if you have no control, if you're merely a monetary pass-through, why should you even exist? is. >> well, i think the reality is that while the issue we're talking about here i don't have a vote on and i don't get to set those policies, i can certainly set the tone on it, and i can certainly be someone who voices a very loud opinion and says this is not right, this is inappropriate, these are the conflicts that exist when you have a policy and a practice like this on your campus. when i first took this job, the very first summit i held in indianapolis was a summit on sexual violence. it was a summit that led to the creation of a working group of experts -- not college athletic folks, but of experts from across the country to create a working group and a think tank. we're going to be issuing the results of their work this

summer as a working book, workbook and a guide to best practices. i'm now, thanks to your work, going to go in and make sure that this issue is addressed in that, in that handbook. and i'm going to talk to the leadership at our very next meeting in august about the fact that this is really inappropriate, and we need to find ways to make sure that athletic departments are not the ones who are responsible for adjudication of these issues because of all the obvious concerns that you raise. >> i -- >> i couldn't agree more with you. >> thank you. i'm over my time, and i'll try to come back. i hope somebody else covers the questions about young people from families that can't afford to even travel to see their children play in the games. >> yes. >> because meanwhile, the universities are making gajillion dollars of their children, but the parents can't even get a stipend to watch their child play. there's something wrong with that scenario, and it's going on college campuses across this

country every single week. >> i agree with you. >> thank you. senator klobuchar. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. and i just want to start t with one of my favorite stories of the year was coach, the coach, is the coach for the university of minnesota football team who has epilepsy. and as you know, dr. emmert, he had a number of seizures during games, during stressful moments in games. and the university of minnesota president decided we're not going to get rid of him, we're keeping him on. our record has been a little rocky, but they kept the coach on. he had to coach from a box. he couldn't coach on the field because of his condition. and during the entire season, he coached from a box, and i was there when we beat nebraska with him in a box. it was great moment. and it was a great story, but it does make me think as i hear all of this that that kind of compassion, what was so captivating about that story was that it kind of defied what had become of so many of these big

sports games and the kind of cutthroat competition and how people were treated. so i think what you're hearing up here today is the hope that these are deliverables, these are thicks that can -- things that can happen. when you talk about changing the sexual assault policy, making sure the players have the health care insurance, making sure they have the time to do these internships, these respect crazy, hard things to do. i think they're possible. so what i want more than anything as i listen to all this is that we commit -- and i know the chairman will be retired, but he will be here, i'm sure, for this -- that we have another hearing whether it's six months or a year from now to check up with what's happening on these things. these are things we don't have to pass a law to change when i listen to some of these commitments and the possibilities. and i wanted to go with one of the things that we haven't talked about as much, and that is the issue of concussions. we've had several players whether they're at the high school or college level, and i know senator tom udall cosponsor

ised his bill, and we've had hearings on this specific topic already. but i understand that there is some work being done here. i know there's a lawsuit that's going on, but i wondered if you could comment, dr. emmert, and then i'll ask you, mr. rolle, your opinion of it. but if you could talk about what's being done with this issue, because i think it's a very important issue for all levels of sports. >> it's a critical issue, and it's most heavily identified with sports, of course, but it's also the leading cause of concussions for young women in soccer, for example, and it occurs in virtually every sport. there's a number of things going op, i'll be as quick as i can. first of all, as i mention inside my opening comments, we created the -- when i first came into the office, i was a bit surprised to find there wasn't a chief medical officer position in the ncaa, so i created that job and went out, and we hired a wonderful doctor who's a neurologist. he's been working unbelievably

hard to pull together, first of all, a best science. one of the big problems is we don't have good science on concussions. it's not as well understood as we all might think. and so once they've done that, just this past handful of days they released the first-ever consensus among all the medical community on the treatment and the prevention of concussions, especially around football, new football practice guidelines around contact and a variety of other things. we signed with the department of defense about two months ago an agreement to do a $30 million project. we're putting up $15 million, dod's putting up $15 million to track longitudinally the first of its kind ever to track longitudinally young men and women and try and get a legitimate history of to car insurance of and treatment of -- the occurrence of and treatment of concussions so we understand better. we're working with all all of te

youth sports institutions to try and get better practice guidelines, working with the nfl, their heads up program especially in football, trying to get coaches to teach young men and boys how to tackle properly. there's some girls' soccer coaches that are saying now we need to ban any heading until girls and boys are at least 12 years of age. so we're looking at trying to lend our support to those kind of efforts. we're making good, pardon the pun, headway. but the facts are we need a lot better understanding of this disorder and how we can prevent it. i'm pleased where we are, and i'm proud. >> mr. rolle? >> part of the reason actually why i stopped playing in the nfl to pursue medicine and go into neurosurgery was because i saw a lot of my teammates having early onset dementia or traumatic brain injury or some of these things that you often associate with several concussive episodes. i saw anytime the nfl, i saw it

in college, and now as an aspiring neurosur, i would love to add expertise to that discussion. i think at the collegiate level, one of the things i noted in the locker room was a lot of my teammates, you know, we want to be fast, right? we want to be quick, nimble, agile, and so the protective equipment we wear, a lot of guys would choose and select equipment that's ligher and maybe not as protective. so that may lead to more concussive episodes. i think education, as dr. emmert said, is incredibly important. we do have some athletic trainers and doctors who come and speak to us and talk to us about the dangers of concussion, but if you are concussed as a player, sometimes you feel pressured and forced to get back on the field as quickly as possible, and then if you have a risk of getting a second concussion, your likelihood of getting a third, fourth, fifth goes up exponentially, actually. so the pressures and stresses of trying to be on the field, trying to compete, not losing your position, all at the same

time as devon said, if you're not on the field, you're not exposed, and you perhaps lose the opportunity of getting drafted high and getting to the next level. there's a lot of different issues that go on. one way to address this issue along with education is just to, perhaps, change the culture, change the focus of big collision, high velocity hits in the sport of football and the idea that that is a part of the game. it is not a part of the game, actually. if you look at the rulebook, it's just to take a player to the ground, similar to how rugby is performed, but you see all the highlights and all the exposure on these big, high velocity hits where guys are spearing into another player. that's what gets highlighted, that's what gets celebrated, and i think that's the wrong path. as i said, hope through in a -- hopefully, in a few years or so i can administer knowledge, but from my anecdotal knowledge, it is an issue that's not only in the nfl, college, but also high

school and primary school as well. >> mr. ramsay, i thought that was fascinating when you look at the numbers that dr. emmert gave us on where the small proportion of athletes go into pro sports, that's most likely not going to be their career. and if it's supposed to be 20 hours and we have to find some way to measure that and enforce it so that it's across the board, and that's one of the things i'm very interested in hearing the follow-up in a year, and i thank you for bringing that to our attention. thank you. it also has to go down, as we discussed yesterday, dr. can emmert, to the high school so we put some of this in perspective. i do think there's way to change cultures. we've changed cultures in this country before and still have great sports games. thank you. >> thank you, senator klobuchar. senator nelson, i want to say something about you. to me, this hearing so far has been a lot of talk about a lot

of things which have been around for an awfully long time which we all think should be solved, but they're not solved, and i think there are very clear reasons for it, and that is decision making is very flawed, fragile and useless. florida, which has -- everybody recruits in florida -- they have a law, which you would know, senator blumenthal, that transparency how money is spent has to be made public. because they have a law. and so, you know, when contributions and ncaa comes in and only a small portion goes to education and all kinds of things -- that's all available to the public. and so i commend him for coming from a state like that. and i just think that's the path

of so many answers which we just with otherwise seem to be unwilling to deal with. excuseexcuse me. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. and i think a lot has come out of this committee hearing that should enable and help dr. emmert to continue with the reforms that he's trying. now, i would just -- so much has been said about so many of these issues. let me just highlight a couple. i happen to know because i was mesmerized with mr. rolle as a player at florida state. and for him to do his interview for the rhodes scholarship which was in the south on a saturday, his president, t.k. weatherall, had to get special dispensation

so that they could get someone to donate a private jet for him that could fly him somewhere in the northeast when florida state was playing up here. and even so, he made it only in the second half. but the emphasis, you know, that's something that's so common sense that you would want a player to interview for the rhodes, and yet it was a big deal. and it shouldn't have been. the fact of so many of these players are coming from families that are dirt poor, and they don't have the opportunities that others do. it seems to me it's common sense, we ought to have stipends or scholarship, whatever you

want to call it so it equalizes the maying field of the financial -- the playing field of the financial ability if those student athletes are contributing to the financial well being of that university. so, too, with health insurance. that ought to be common sense. if a player is hurt and that is a career-ending injury, the best of medical care ought to be given to that player. and for it to last for some period of time in the future. and, of course, concussions just add another whole dimension to this thing. i thought it was very interesting in at committee that i have the privilege of chairing we did a hearing on concussions including professional athletes. went down the line on the table,

and they would not recommend to their children that they play football. so times are changing. and the ncaa has got to get with the times. and so whatever this committee hearing has done to enable you as a reformer to get those schools to give you the votes that you need to do a lot of these things that we're talking about, the family travel, why should they have to sneak around in the shadows in order to get money to be able to buy a ticket to come to the game and where to stay in a hotel and so forth? i mean, it just, it defies common sense. mr. rolle, you want to make any

final comment? >> sure. one thing that i'd like to say is that when you think about the four-year scholarship discussion and the one-year renewable, a lot of players that i was on teams with kind of felt like it was us versus them. you know, it wasn't a team. we didn't kind of feel like the ncaa was protecting our best interests, wanted to see us thrive and flourish. it was almost as if we had to do everything we could to promote ourselves and to better ourselves against this big machine that was dictating and ordering the steps that we took. and maybe that's not true. maybe it was just a miscommunication, maybe the information wasn't getting disseminated to the student athletes on the field well enough, but that's kind of how we felt. and i think another thing that is quite bothersome today going back to the economic issue and the economic struggles, a lot of my teammates, as you know, senator nelson, i mean, come from poor areas in florida, and

they come to florida state as the first person in their family to be a college student. and they don't have a lot of money to lean back on from their families. so that leaves them open and susceptible to some unsavory things. i mean, these are agents, nfl runners who would come to our dorms and knock on our doors and say, hey, i can take you out to a nightclub, i can buy you a meal, i can give you a suit to wear, i can take you and your girlfriend out to eat, and then these players accept it because they don't have much else, and then they become ineligible, then they don't have any opportunity for financial help in the future, so then they end up back in liberty city, miami, or polk county, florida, and that continues. it's frustrating and discouraging, and i saw it often. >> that is the exact example that we need to use. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator nelson.

i think, is not senator cory booker in attendance here today? it's his turn to ask a question. [laughter] >> finally. >> i apologize -- >> no, sir -- >> you could have run for the senate ten years ago. [laughter] >> i don't want to be disrespectful to senator blumenthal who, i think, was here before me earlier. would you like to -- no. >> i will ask my questions now only because i have to preside -- >> oh. >> and if you would yield for five minutes, i would really appreciate it. >> i've already been put in my place once. you're more senior than me, i will yield sir. >> yeah, but you're bigger than i am. [laughter] let me thank you, mr. chairman, for having this hearing which very sincerely is, i think, a very important one, very significant for the future of academic institutions. i want to thank all of the folks who have come to enlighten us, and thank you to senator nelson,

by the way, for having that hearing on concussions which was very enlightening. i want to begin by saying for what it's worth i think the law here is heading in a very unfortunate direction, as dr. emmert and i have discussed. i think that the law is heading in the direction of regarding athletes at universities more and more as employees. and that is because of the growing asymmetry and inequality of bargaining positions, financial benefit, energy, time, sweat, blood, injury that is involved. that is classically the reason why labor law protections have applied to individuals who potentially are victims of exploitation. whether it's in garment factories or construction sites or universities. and so i think the challenge

here is to diminish that asymmetry, to reduce the inequality and to return truly to the model of student athletes which i think many of us want to be the prevailing model but increasingly is not so, and therefore, the laws will move to protect them as the nlrb ruling reflects. and i say that with regret because i too, as dr. emmert has articulated well, value the student athlete model rather than the employee/employer model. but the more the reality is that athletes, in effect, funk as employees -- function as employees, the more the law will recognize that fact. and my opinion is worth what you're paying for it. i'm just a country lawyer from connecticut. i sincerely believe that that's the direction of the law. i want to first ask you,

dr. emmert, i was absolutely astonished and deeply troubled by the revelation that athletic departments on many campuses investigate campus sexual assaults. i'd like your commitment that you will work to change that practice as soon as possible and as effectively as possible. >> you have my commitment. the -- i obviously want to understand the data more. i simply read a summary. i'm not sure what the facts are on those campuses, but as i said earlier, the data that senator mccaskill's staff brought forward was shocking to me. >> well, i am shocked and outraged by the apart practice on many -- apparent practice on many campuses of, in effect, revictimmizing survivors who may

be, in effect, victims. i want to focus for the moment on health insurance. you know, individual, colleges and the ncaa make billions of dollars on the talents of these young men and women, and i want to ask you, counterthe ncaa -- couldn't the ncaa offer health insurance for athletes for a certain amount of time after they leave college? that seems imminently fair and effective making them better athletes and better students while they're there. so i would ask for your commitment that you will work towards providing for health insurance for these needs and injuries that may extend beyond their playing years on campus or even in professional settings, and i'd like to know what more -- assuming you are committed to that cause -- what more your organization can do to encourage schools to provide

this kind of coverage for its student athletes. >> yes, sir. well, today the coverage that exists right now is provided either by the campus itself or by the student athlete's family, depending upon university policies at most of the high resource schools they provide the insurance so the student doesn't have to. we need to do several things. one, we need to make sure, in my opinion, we need to make sure there aren't co-payment requirements if a young man or woman, especially from a low income family, has an injury and all of a sudden they have a $2,000, $5,000 co-payment, that seems grossly inappropriate. why should they be on the hook for that? so we need to make sure we don't have many of those circumstances out there. we have right now at the ncaa level catastrophic insurance so that if there is long-term disability issues, if there are injuries that require treatment over a course of a lifetime, there is a policy in place.

we have some individuals that have been on that insurance policy for 20 or more years. and we've taken a number of steps to make sure that that is as strong as it could possibly be. that policy, though, doesn't kick in until you have $90,000 worth of bills. we need to make sure that, to your point -- i'm saying, yes, i guess, senator. >> i'm glad to hear the yes. >> there are complexities in all of this we need to work our way through, but i agree with you that -- >> thank you. >> -- no one should have to pay for an injury that they suffered as a student athlete. >> i welcome and accept your yes to both the sexual sexual assault and the insurance questions, and i would ask further for your commitment that you'll work with us on sensible legislation that will impose a higher level of responsibility in both areas. thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> go ahead. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman.

first of all, i'm grateful. you know you and i talked about this in my first days as a united states senator, that this was an issue you wanted to cover, and you saw my excitement for doing that. and a lot of that stemmed from the fact that i was, back in the '90s, an ncaa division i football player. and i want to first say it's very important for me to say that i probably wouldn't be here right now if it wasn't for that experience. and i am deeply grateful. i joke all the time that i got into stanford university because of a 4.0 and a 1600. 4.0 yards carried, 1600 receiving yards in my high school years and had lifetime experiences, frankly, that i could never, ever replace, it and opened up extraordinary doors for me. so we could have a hearing that could go on for hours if not days about all the things that are happening, so please forgive me if i'm not giving that appropriate light. but what concerns me and what you and i have talked about, chairperson, for quite some time are the egregious challenges we

have. now, i want to just publicly thank dr. emmert because he was gracious not only to come here, which he did not have to do, but he actually took special time to come see me, to is sit down with me and hear my concerns. and i was taken aback, actually, that you agreed with me across the board. and let me just reiterate those for the record and just make sure we are in agreement. so, number one, you agree a big problem that athletes don't get scholarships to get a b back,. >> yes. >> that is a big problem that we have athletes that pour their lives, 40, 50 hours a week and end up having gone through their eligibility and don't have a ba. that's a problem. >> yes. >> you agree it's a problem that we have athletes, often very poor, coming onto college campuses restricted from working, they can't shovel driveways for some extra spending money, can't meet the needs of travel, buy toy he

tries -- toil he tries, clothing -- >> they're not banned from working. they can, in fact, work, and in many cases do, but the biggest challenge is they haven't the time. >> so in other words, they can't work for whatever reason, you know that's a problem that the scholarship does not cover the full cost -- >> yes. >> -- at the same time they're being expected whether by law or not to work 40, 50, 60 hours a week. >> completely agree. >> that's a problem, right. you agree it's a problem that the health coverage is inadequate and that we have people, many of whom i know and you know, who have blown-out knees, and even though they've graduated now, they're having to go into pocket for co-pays and the like to deal with medical injuries that were incurred, really the root of them was the challenges they had when they were an athlete. >> yes. i agree that the insurance today is much better than most people think, but there's certainly areas that need to be closed -- >> it's inadequate, and it is costing some athletes thousands

of dollars into their lifetimes. >> yes. >> you agree there's a real problem still with time, that as the two athletes at the end of the table, it's not just the practice time. guys, how many hours would you show up i before practice, get your ankles taped, get treatmented? an hour, two hours? sometimes three hours depending on how bad your injury, your strain is? we have athletes putting in upwards of 60, 70 hours a week. >> huge problem. >> okay. and you agree that there is at least ap issue being dealt with to improve the issue of sexual assault. it has to be improved in terms of the way we investigate. >> yes. and i think the way we educate young men and young women and the way we educate people on campuses to handle those issues. >> right. and this we didn't cover, and so it might not be a simple yes or no, but in terms of the due process when a young man like mr. ramsay not even knowing he had, could get a lawyer, not

even getting help, that there are breakdowns in process that are not clear, would you say that process could be improved? >> it certainly could, especially on most campuses, yes. >> so i guess i just turn to you, mr. chairman, not having the time to go through more rounds and deeper questioning to just say clearly this is my problem, is this was a challenge for when i was an athlete some 20 years ago. and athlete after athlete are going through and facing what i consider the exploitation of athletes. let me be very clear. it is exploitation when you have an athlete working 60, 70 hours a week but yet still not able to afford the basic necessities. not just having your parents fly back and forth, but being put in horrible situations where they see their jersey with their name on it being sold, making thousands and thousands of dollars, but they can't even afford to get the basic necessities of life. and if they try to sell their

jersey for $50, they then get penalized and lose their -- that's exploitation of an athlete. to me, it's exploitation when you give your body, gentleman on the end. how many linemen do you know today that played with you that have gone through four, five and six surgeries for their knees? >>. >> a lot. >> yeah. >> and if they're going into their own pocket after giving up their knees to make millions of dollars for the university and then the universities aren't even compensating them appropriately, that's an exploitation of a college athlete. that has to be addressed. if we have guy can -- guys, like was testified by the two gentlemen on the end who i know this because we spent hours. we did the math, my teams, because so many players feel an assault on your dignity that you're putting 70, 80 hours a week, you're giving up internships. you know more about your playbook. i can still tell you

stonebreaker, todd light, i can tell you more about them because that's what i was studying at night that you spend all of that effort, and then your university is not in any way insuring that you get a degree at the end in something like engineering or political science. they're not honoring the fact that sometimes, hey, when you're working full-time, you can't finish your degree in four or five years. in fact, when they can lord over you the removal of your scholarship, because it does still happen. athletes are still exploited. if they blow out their knee, if they somehow don't meet the mandates of a coach, they lose their scholarship. they don't get their degree. and so, to me, this is plain and simple the dark side of the ncaa where athletes are being exploited. and this is why i love that taylor branch is here, because occasionally -- and you used

these words, dr. emmert -- a cattle prod to get us moving. this hearing may be a cattle prod. i wrote that down because i have seen the ncaa move quickly when there is money and reputation on the table. for example, you mentioned his name, napier, says on the highest exaltation of victory he says on national tv what we know athletes, what coaches know is a truth, that some guys don't even have the money to buy shaving cream. to eat at night. but he says it on national tv, and within seven days -- because of the shame and embarrassment -- within seven days, if i'm correct, the laws, the rules changed, and guys can actually eat. >> yes, so i'd like to -- >> so hold on, because i'm already over my time, sir. >> okay. [laughter] >> let me give you another example. cam newtop was going through -- newton was going through the same problems you were at the same time.

his eligibility was being challenged, mr. ramsay. cam newton, a guy who brings millions of dollar into a university, and his adjudication happened quickly. you're not a name athlete, your name's not on a jersey and the like. so what i want to say in conclusion, why i love tailor branch is here -- taylor branch is here. when there's a class of individuals who are being exploited and there's millions and millions of dollars being brought in and guys can't even afford health care, can't afford to finish their degrees, then we have a problem. and i respect dr. emmert in saying, hey, we're going to try to address that, but where is the urgency that this has been going on decades in america? and so i don't trust, like the supreme court when they said we were going to integrate schools. they said do it with what kind

of speed? >> deliberate. >> all deliberate speed. and it took them a long time to get around to doing the right thing by people. these are the young people of the united states of america. and we can't afford to wait for all deliberate speed. there has got to be some level of accountability for fast action on things the ncaa says is a problem. next season b when football season starts, there are going to be kids suffering from the same list of things that somehow, someday is going to be addressed. so i think we need a hearing with the real rule makers, with college presidents lined up here and ask them how fast are they going to address the exploitation of college athletes? mr. chairman, thank you. >> mr. chairman -- >> could dr. emmert respond? >> i have a sacred obligation to senator ayotte. she is next. >> thank you, mr. chairman, i appreciate it. let me just say up front on this issue of athletic departments investigating sexual assault

allegations, that is ridiculous. you've got to fix that right away. i am a proud graduate of the penn state university, and it's obviously we're -- it was so troubling and disappointing to see what happened at my university. i loved the university, but the athletic department is not where you handle these kinds of allegations, so you've got to fix that, dr. emmert. walk out this door and fix that. what i'm troubled about when i hear the testimony today, and i just need to understand, senator blumenthal asked about the change to an employer/employee model. we've talked about compensation, potentially, for athletes today. i don't want to see any athletes mistreated. i want them to be able to have a quality of life that's important as they serve and get the education and be able to be an athlete, student athlete model. but as i think about what, for example, the nlrb did in its ruling -- i know it applies to

private universities allowing unionization at northwestern -- and i think about this compensation model, the employer/employee model, what does this do in terms of the schools where we're not talking about the top athletes that may go on, that are the revenue-generating sports? and what will that do to women's athletics? if we start down the road of a compensation model, what will happen in our schools in terms of the schools that or the sports that respect at the top where those athletes can sell the jerseys, you can make money but are still very important to student life? and when i think about title ix and women and the opportunities women have gotten because of title ix, if you're on campus and this suddenly becomes an employer/employee type model, what does that do for the women's sports if they're not revenue generating? and how do we sustain them if

this model changes? so it's a big question, but i would like you all to comment on it because the last thing i want to see is -- i want to make sure that our athletes are treated well and, certainly, mr. rolle, what you've dope, it's really in-- what you've done, it's really inspiring to see what you've done. and thank you, mr. ramsay, as well for your inspiration of being here. but there's a whole level of athletes that weren't quite at your level, and it's been an opportunity for them to get an and education for women as well that are at your level but don't always, our sports don't always generate the same amount of revenue, and i want to make sure that women still have the opportunity they've had because of title ix. so if you could comment on that, i'd appreciate it. >> i would love to comment on that. i think it's not a zero sum game. if some athletes are profit athletes who have a higher

market value than the cost of their grant and aid, then we should treat them differently than athletes who are not profit athletes. it's not either/or or they must be. if they're employees, as the nlrb found, then we should treat them as employees. that does i not mean that college athletics or athletes in other sports, women or -- it doesn't -- >> well, can i tell you -- >> it's not an either/or. >> can i tell you my university said that if the unionization rule were applied, university of new hampshire, that they feel like this is actually going to diminish the athletic program and would diminish it for women, for non-revenue-generating sports. i understand what you're saying, but that's sort of not what i'm hearing from some other universities. >> well, i would say that probably a university or president by the name of chicken little might have been the first one to say that. because the sky will not, in fact, fall.

by denying profit athletes just compensation in the market, does not preclude colleges and universities from supporting intercollegiate athletics as an educational opportunity. if they're employees, then they should have all the rights of employees. it does not -- title ix does not apply in an employee setting. >> well, i would like to see what mr. bradshaw has to say about what i just said as well. thank you. >> we probably don't have time, but i certainly would like to hear that model that works. i believe it's going to be devastating to all those student athletes, including women who don't produce revenue. who aren't seen as athletes or students who create that revenue. i really would like to see that model work. because as we all know, that's going to mean those who can afford to pay for that will, and those who can't won't.

>> thank you. >> again, if i could reiterate, and i appreciate the question, and i'm trying to articulate it as clearly as i can. if the athletes are, in fact, employees, then we have a moral obligation and an obligation under the law to treat them as such. if they're not, it does not preclude them from participating. title ix does not have have to e held hostage by this because we're only talking about 5% of the athletes. >> so i know my time is up, and i know others have to ask questions, but so we're just going to have a distinction so some will be employees and some will be -- >> they already are employees. >> i don't know how that works. >> they already are employees. so by being open and honest about what we are using in exploit -- and exploiting these athletes for, honesty is a very good thing. >> so as a woman athlete, if i'm

not a revenue-generating athlete, then i'm not going to be eligible for this employee/employer relationship, so then there's sort of a second category of athletes on campus. >> they already have that. >> that bothers me. >> we refer to them as revenue athletes and revenue sports and olympic sports. and that's fine. it does not mean that if we compensate athletes according to the market, that everyone else has to go away. that is not what has to occur at all. >> mr. chairman? >> so if the universities find that that opportunity is very important, they will still support it. they will still support it. i see no way that women's athletics or olympic athletics is going to go away. it's not going to happen. it just isn't. >> mr. chairman? >> senator scott. >> thank you. dr. emmert, as i listened to

kelly's questions about the cost structure and the likely impact of creating some unions or some employees and some not employees, i think ultimately the cost structure itself would have impact in universities and have impact in athletic programs. i just wonder how significant that impact would be. and let me say this before you answer the question as you think about your answer. to mr. southall, it's good to have you here from columbia, university of south carolina. i would be remiss if i didn't point out that at least you go to the right place, the gameconcludes. i like that -- gamecocks, i like that a lot. my story is very different from cory's story and these rhodes scholars' on the end, and i'm very proud to see your success. my story, i think, really plays an important part of why i'm asking the questions i'm asking about the cost structure.

i'm a kid that grew up in a single-parent household, had it not been for football, i would have not have been able to afford to go to college at all. played football for just a year, earned a christian leadership scholarship which took me to a different school. and i realize that responsibilities and the burden of practice before and after labs and the challenges that i faced and made a decision to go a different route. but the fact of the matter is, had it not been for that scholarship opportunity, i would not be sitting here today because i would not have had the opportunity to finish -- or even start -- my education. so when i think about, and i went to a small school, presbyterian college. so when i think about the cost structure of this conversation on athletes that are not in those top tier schools, there is a senate unintended -- significant unintended consequence, i think we are looking at that kelly really brought to the surface that is hard to deny and perhaps even harder to figure out how to fix it. >> well, i happen to agree with you. i think that the implications of

converting the student athlete model to an employee/employer model would utterly transform college sports into something that doesn't begin to look like what it looks like today. the impact on the -- with all due respect, i completely agree with dr. southall's interpretation of all of this. if you simply look at the definition of an employee as has been provided by, one, nlrb administrator, that if a student is receiving a scholarship and additional benefits, that's compensation. if they are working more as a student athlete than they are in their academic work, then they're working. if they are subject to the oversight of a coach, then they have a boss.

i'm not a labor lawyer, but that's, in summary, the definition of a student athlete. that would apply to virtually every student athlete who has a scholarship. man, woman, doesn't matter. you know, a woman's soccer player -- the difference between a woman's basketball player and a men's basketball player isn't that the men's basketball player works harder. it isn't that they're more or less talented. the only difference is a singular difference, and that is there's more people in the stands. that's it. in terms of the time commitment, their competitiveness, everything. the difference is one plays in front of a lot of people and one doesn't. the difference between a volleyball player and a soccer player is exactly the same. the only difference is whether they're playing on tv or whether they're not. >> yes, sir. and i -- >> so that complete -- >> wrap it up. >> as dr. southall pointed out, title ix has nothing to do with employer/employee relationships. so that would have nothing to do with any student athlete that's no longer a student athlete

that's now an employee, including a women's basketball player. it would be an irrelevancy. >> quick question for mr. bradshaw. i know you played sports a couple of years ago, five or seven years d. >> thank you. thank you very much. >> i think it says four or five years ago, not 45. >> thank you. >> my question is you've had a lot of experience, and you've looked at this opportunity as well as the challenges that come with the opportunity from multiple angles. what kind of progress have you seen over the last three decades or so? as we wrestle with some of the future challenges and certainly present challenges, sometimes we miss the progress that we've made along the way. >> and certainly, all of us think we can do better, there's no question about it. >> and we should. and we should. >> we spend most of our time talking about how we can be better and not patting ourselves on the back. as a former assistant coach back in the day and head coach and student athlete, it's night and day, the changes, the quality of

physicians, trainers. i mean, we didn't know what a dietician was when we were, as student athletes or head coach. i mean, the changes are enormous. they're compelling. and i think one of the things i would recommend is that you get some student athletes to talk to. there's a balance. obviously, there's outliers. there's some horrible stories that have happened, and none of us -- one of those is too many whether it's assault or date rape or whatever it might be, but i would love to see a panel of student athletes come in and talk about everything, a balanced panel of that. .. everything. a balanced panel of that. it's been significant across the line. and i'm retired now. i can talk about it very objectively and be concerned about a college president or a faculty or a board of trustees. it's really an incredible profession we're in.

and the changes that the ncaa is trying to make and again, mark's got to deal with votes. he's got to deal with the institutions. the college presidents. the board of trustees that pressure the college presidents. i think you got something when you want to bring the presidents in here. i think that would be a good move and something that could help everyone. but the changes that have happened, they are just eoh by leaps and bounds, particularly in the last decade. >> final estion >> my gamecock or, mr. southall. as you look at the opportunity for collective bargaining and its impact on the academic environment realizing most institutions, darn near all institutions, primary objective is to cultivate an environment that is conducive for academic achievement. how do you see the impact of the collective bargaining opportunity though i have grave concerns with the personally, on college campuses and its impact on the academic environment, or do you? >> i don't see it would have any

effect. >> good enough. thank you, sir. >> okay, thank you. i want to make, senator coats, i know the questions you want to ask. mr. emmert is answered most of those questions are no, you feel a duty to ask the question that isn't going to be a second round. i'm going to make a closing statement. and then at 5:15 we will be through this very long hearing. i want to say this. i have two impressions. one of them is superficial and the other i think is worrisome of this hearing. and i want each of you to either agree or not agree with me as kind of your closing statement. that on one level this has been an open conversation. we've brought up all kinds of issues. those issues have been

discussed, to a small degree or a large degree. but my real feeling from this hearing is that we haven't accomplished much. and that people have laid down their sort of protective -- i'm not talking about you two gentlemen, but there has been sort of self protection mode. either for one's self or on behalf of others. your point about getting the board of trustees, and that would be kind of interesting, because they do have a big influence over college presidents. but all i know is coming out of this hearing, that i don't think i've learned anything particularly new except some anecdotes that i haven't been hearing for 50 years.

which is how long i've been in this business. and that the answers, you know, of course there's progress. of course, there's progress on concussions and, of course, there's progress on other thin things. but is it anyway concomitant in effective progress to what we should have been doing, all of us, including this committee and this congress, by not exercising our oversight rights? the head of the ncaa at one point said, one of the first things i did was to make sure that -- and i forget what example was, but it was a statement, i got something done. i don't believe that. i don't believe that. i think that the system is rigged so that you are separated from the possibility of getting something done, except as you testified or, you know, you

probably couldn't write articles. you probably would get blowback on that but i don't think of the power and i think it's constructive for the purpose. i'm cynical about it. it's too easy to have complained in the senate hearings or any other kinds of for a, what progress has been made -- fora, progress has been made but does it keep up with what needs to be done? and the answer is absolutely not. this country is now so so in the culture -- so soaked in the culture espn plus a couple of other stations, and watching football, baseball, world soccer, all the rest of it. i mean, it's, i think, my own

view is undermining our values. i'll tell you one thing for sure. i think it's undermining our commitment to education. and dr. southall, i think that your document the different ways of jiggering the students who are not athletes actually doing a better job academically than those who art. it was had by the head of the ncaa that that was true, and it is also in his testimony. i don't believe that. i just don't believe it. now i may be wrong but this, and then the different formula you use, it was very interesting to me as something i would like to know more about. but to me it's been, in essence, an important hearing but not one which points to progress. because i think everybody is going to leave this hearing, they will go right back -- i'm

not, i don't think senator booker is and i don't think a bunch of others are, go back to doing what they do. we got that one out of the way. nothing, no harm there. nobody did themselves any great damage. congress doesn't usually follow through. congress doesn't get that much done. that happens to be true for the last three or four years, and then there's always the question of getting people from, you know, either trustees or heads of colleges and universities from states and then members here that were co-related to that might not want to have that happen. the world works in ways that protects itself. but this is a particularly ugly one. the question of rape and having -- i mean, i voted not to allow the department of defense to

settle rape questions. i think that's ridiculous. it passed, what i did want to pass, pass by a margin, not a great margin. so yes, that's progress. but what we want to do is get there and i don't have a feeling that we are on that path. i think this hearing symbolizes that we might be but the substance is that we probably won't be. react to that. anybody who wants to come and then i'm going to close the hearing. mr. branch, i think you had some -- >> well, senator, that's -- i think that some differences have been, and there are big differences here between talking about the way things work and how to reform and the whole underlying structure but, frankly, i think some differences have been

diminished. i agree wholeheartedly with one thing doctor amberg said, which is a lot of these economic restrictions in ncaa rules, if they were vacated at senator heller's, or abolished or some of vacated for athletes as they work for coaches, it would make a particle of difference 490% of athletes are a small athlete, a recruit at a small division iii school be able to ask for better health coverage or a salary commend university, the little school would be free to laugh at him and say we don't do it. go somewhere else. just like if the piccolo players, i want to play to march in the bed. the schools are free to bargain in that way but it would make an enormous difference in precisely the 65 schools we're talking about where there's gigantic money if an athlete can bargain at recruiting for better health care coverage, for more time to study, for longer scholarship,

it would change things because right now the model is that the schools do that solely at the dispensation. the coaches in these big schools even want to get money out of their own pockets to players, like the tip because they know they don't have enough money to eat. so a model that recognizes that these athletes are trying to manage to very demanding careers at once that are in separate spheres is a step forward, but right now, to me the least helpful thing i heard today is that we are looking to the same 55 schools that are the most commercialized, the engine reform in the ncaa? i really don't see that. they may give higher compensation. they may get more tips, that they are the ones that created most of these problems in the first place. i don't think that the big schools are going to do anything other than be driven more and more by the market and

athletics, and quite frankly those schools exploit their athletes both as players and the students. because i'll go around to all of these big schools and athletes tell me they are pushed into certain majors that are easy. they're not allowed to take certain courses. the sad thing to me, i think that some differences are outlined and may be diminished, i don't see the big 65 schools as an engine for much reform in the future because their record doesn't show that. >> any other comments? >> mr. chairman? i have asked before but i know you want to mr. emmert reply to everything that cory booker said. >> know. i think he deserves the opportunity to do that when so it takes an extra five minutes, and senator booker had every right and he was passionate about what he believes that he

leveled some accusations at the ncaa. i think at least they deserve to be able to respond to that. >> he will have a full chance to do that. i didn't bend over backwards, annoyed some of my members to give you a particular break because you come from indiana where ncaa is headquartered, and i've done that. >> i don't think you give me a particular break. i was the first one here and that's the normal procedure, and yet i had -- >> if you hadn't been, you made very clear to me on the floor that you want to be able to be the first want to ask questions, and i said that's okay. clear it with senator thune spent but then i said i would be the first -- >> i'm not going to bend on that. this is the closing statement and mr. emmert is free to enter in any form the ones. you can write every member of the commerce committee a letter. anybody else want to say anything? >> i spent the last 15 years of my professional career examining

intercollegiate athletics. and after this hearing today, i, like yourself, and very disheartened. because i'm not sure that we, collectively, are willing to take a cold, hard object of look, informed by research, informed by david, at the collegiate a model of athletics. >> all right. that being said, i want to thank everybody for this. this has been a long and interesting hearing. everything is the first step, as neil armstrong said, and we've got a lot of steps to make. as others have pointed out, the world is changing. you know, it's like that jackie robinson 42 movie, and the player comes in and he says, i

want to be traded. and then a couple weeks later he comes back and says, i don't want to be traded. well, what about, are you willing to play with robertson? he said, the world is changing and i can change, too. i think there's an element of that in all of this progress, has its own verities come its own sort of duties. i think there has been progress. my question is in that for my entire adult life i've been hearing about this, and still so many problems, calls into question the way decisions are made and carried through within the upper ranks of the football and basketball community. and that's on my mind, and i'm chairman some going to say that i'm also going to say that that is the last thing i'll say, and this hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] here's what they had today on c-span2. next, a recent supreme court oral argument. the case is nlrb v. canning, which dealt with the constitution of some of president obama's recess appointments. we will show you all of today's "washington journal" again. later, a hearing will look at the possible existence of extraterrestrial life.

here's a look at what's ahead tonight on c-span2 at eight. more booktv. our focus is on the past and future of money. >> c-span2 providing live coverage of the u.s. senate floor proceedings and key public policy event. ended weekend booktv, now for 15 years the only television network devoted to nonfiction books and authors. c-span to create by the cable tv

industry and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. >> more supreme court oral arguments now from this past term. today we're featuring the case of national labor relations board v. canning which deals with the constitution of some of president obama's recess appointment. we will get to that oral argument in a moment. but first some background. >> on january 13, 2014, the supreme court heard oral arguments in the case nlrb v. canning which is a case involving dick cheney company and the challenge of a ruling of the national labor relations board regarding collective bargaining with an agreement with some of its workers. we are joined by mike doyle. what are the oral argument we're going to there? >> this is a case that's all

about the internal struggle for power between the legislative branch and the executive branch. in particular the senate of the united states challenge whether the white house has been probably appointed during a senate recess three members of the national labor relations board, a company to court had ruled against said that wasn't in the decision because these members were never legally part of the board in the first place. >> it's a bit of a roundabout case. have to unpack the details a little bit. there's disagreement, bargaining, collective bargaining agreement and the parallel issue of these nlrb appointees. >> the underlying facts are actually a mother to the constitutional question. the merits or the demerits of the labor argument we can set aside. visited all about two things. the courts facing the question of what is a senate recess and what is the vacancy to be filled. they have to decide whether this vacancy in filled that the ns