vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or wishing to change his or her vote? if not, the yeas are 85. the nays are 7. and the bill as amended is passed. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: is it appropriate to give a speech at this time? the presiding officer: the senator is recognized. mr. hatch: i thank my president. mr. president, i wish to begin

today on a topic of sports betting. in may the supreme court cleared the way for any state to legalize sports betting which had been prohibited all but a handful of states since 1992. i'd like to say upfront that i'm not a fan of sports bet be. -- sports betting. i have grave concerns about gambling in general and sports betting in particular. there's no question that sports betting like other types of gambling and addictive behavior has ruined far too many lives. and to those dell terrous social effect, the threat sports betting poses to the integrity of the game. and you can see why the prohibition on sports wagering in the professional and amateur sports protection act passed the senate 88-5. i authored this legislation and fought tooth and nail to get it

passed because i knew without it, sports gambling would rupt the integrity of -- corrupt the integrity of the game. despite these views, i'm also a realist. with a nearly $5 billion annually in legal sports wagers in nevada plus an estimated $150 billion a year in illegal sports wagers in the united states, we can't put the jeannie back in the -- genie back in the bottle. prohibition is not a possibility or prudent path forward. instead, now, that states are free to legalize sports betting, our goal should be to bring that illegal wagering activity into well regulated legal markets that can better protect consumers and the integrity of sports. as i wrote in sports iltraited -- illustrated earlier this year, sports betting is inevitable. let's make sure it's done right. to do it right, we need to ensure that state regulatory frameworks are not a race to the

bottom. i firmly believe that we need a set of fundamental federal standards that will protect the integrity of the games, that will protect consumers and the sports wagering market. since the supreme court decision in may, sports betting has been conspicuously absent from the public dialogue on capitol hill. a hearing on the issue was scheduled by the house judiciary committee but then postponed and i hope that it will be rescheduled so the congress can explore what a pose pasp would look like. sport r i have been diving into the issues as i work toward draft legislation that will establish some much needed guardrails to protect the integrity of the game. i'm grateful for all of the guidance and insight that many stakeholders have provided and i invite others who are interested

to do the same. let me pause for a moment to discuss integrity, a word frequently used in the sports betting debate but often left undefined. in the context of sports, integrity is used to describe events that are recognized as honest and genuine competition. there is a reason the predetermined outcomes in professional wrestling attract a small fraction of the following enjoyed by baseball, football, basketball, and other sports. the integrity of sport, the sense that the game is a real competition free from outside influence is what attracts fans and keeps them coming back. integrity can be compromised in various ways. take, for example, the doping scandals in cycling that took down lance armstrong and led fans to question whether racers were won by the best athlete or

the rider on the best drug regiment. but there's no greater threat to sports integrity than match fixing. and there is no question that a big payoff in the sports betting market is the leading reason criminals and cheaters get involved with match fixing. this relationship between sports integrity and sports betting including match fixing cannot be ignored. in the world of gambling, sports betting is a unique product with unique risks. when a casino patron pulls the handle on a slot machine or rolls the dice at a crap table, money may change hands but there's little connection to the outside world. when a patron places a sports bet, however, there is the potential and in far too many cases it has been the reality that the sports wagering market is being used to profit off match fixing. there is a connection, not

always a positive one, between the bets placed in a casino and the outcome on the field. the integrity concerns related to sports wagering are nothing new. for years billions of dollars in bets have been placed on sports each year. presenting these very concerns. but the offshore books where the vast majority of these wagers have been placed are under no obligation to take steps to mitigate the threats to integrity. as states move to legalize sports betting and bring that offshore activity into the regulated market, they should be taking reasonable steps to protect the integrity of sports and the marketplace. we can and should expect more from the legal operators than those in the illicit market. and those legal operators are quickly getting in the game. it would be a mistake to think that seeming disinterest in the issue at the federal level has

carried over to the states. states understandably so seek legalized sports betting as a way to bring in much needed tax revenue. it's amazing how quickly things get done when money is a motivator. at the beginning of may, full-scale sports betting was available only in nevada. today you can also place sports wagers in delaware, new jersey, and mississippi. sports betting in west virginia will officially launch on september 1. pennsylvania and rhode island may have sports betting by the end of the year. and more than a dozen other states have taken steps to move toward legalization. all of this progress in just the past three months watching this flurry of activity in the states has only underscored for me the need for some consistent minimum standards to protect the

integrity of sports and the sports wagering market. let's look at a specific example. who should be allowed to place a sports wager? imagine if players or referees were able to place wagers on games in which they were participating. they have the ability to influence the outcome. if players or referees were betting on the game, there could be reasons to question their actions on the field. how could fans have faith that the outcome was the result of honest competition and not an effort to get the biggest payout? i suspect there is a broad consensus that a certain category of folks should not be able to place bets on certain events. players and referees should not be allowed to place bets. but the west virginia sports

betting regulations don't say that. they leave it to each sportsbook as to who may undermine the integrity of a sports event. it is odd this decision would be left to the sports books such that an individual may be prohibited from placing a bet from one sportsbook in a state but permitted to do so in another. this is even more concerning when you consider the potential conflict and the duties and motivations of the sports books. operators want to protect integrity so they are not accepting wagers on fixed games. but the west virginia sports betting law also requires sportsbook operators to, quote, assist the commission in maximizing sports wagering revenues. unquote. how many folks will they really be turning away to protect the

integrity of the game if they are also under a statutory mandate to maximize the amount of money coming in the door? other states have been more specific on this point but still leave open questions. mississippi prohibits only coaches or participants from betting on a particular event. what is a participant? does it include referees? maybe they are a participant because they are on the field, but what about an athletic trainer or league executives? while mississippi law does not answer that question, new jersey put in place robust laws that specifically prohibit athletic trainers and members of the sports governing body from placing wagers. there is nothing wrong with there be differences among the states. that is the beauty of our federal system, but it does seem

that when it comes to protecting the integrity of the game and sports betting market, there should be some consensus, at least some minimum standards, about who can place a wager. if states are allowed to fall behind those looking to illegally profit off of sports betting will simply migrate to the areas where there are the fewest restrictions. protecting the integrity of sports from the dark side of sports betting is not a theoretical exercise many we're all familiar with the fixing of the 1919 world series, pete rose's expulsion from baseball and points shaving at boston college. more recently nba referee tim donahe both bet on games -- that -- that he oh, officiated d

passed along tips to bookies. a qualifying match for this year's world cup had to be replayed after it was found that the referee fixed the match. just last month there were signs of possible match finking in a double -- fixing in a doubles match at whistleblower. we must seize the opportunity to put in place world class measures to protect the integrity of our sporting events and the sports betting market. to that end an important part of the legislation i will be proposing is improvements to enforcements that will benefit all are of the stakeholders, sports books, regulators, governing bodies, and consumers. these are complex issues, but i'm happy to announce much progress is being made. i look forward to the engagement with stakeholders and to have a

legislative proposal to kick start the sports betting discussion on capitol hill. now, i'd like to pivot to what would ordinarily be a subject unrelated to sports, the nomination of judge brett kavanaugh to be an associate justice on the united states supreme court. but this is no ordinary nominations. not only is judge kavanaugh an avid sports fan, he also moonlighted as a sports reporter for the "yale daily news," for democrats looking to evaluate judge kavanaugh on the basis of documents other than his judicial record, his writings about college sports are apparently a gold mine. take for example a mid-season game between yale and cornell, it is completely impossible for one team to dominate a game.

prominent real legal scholar and advisor to barack obama, a friend of mine, strained to make a connection between this casual observation and judge kavanaugh's judicial philosophy. he noted, quote, kavanaugh's fascination with single-player domination might be a muscular view of power. i laughed at this. the idea that judge kavanaugh's observations about basketball somehow reveal his views of executive power is beyond absurd. what's next, mr. president? what other hidden insights into the nominee's character can we glean from the most obscure sources? should we do a deep dive on judge kavanaugh's zodiac sign to see what it might say about his

judicial temperament. he's an aqairus, by the way and mars is in retrograde, so we all know what that means, judge kavanaugh's going to destroy america. he's going to burn down the capitol, make himself king, and make confetti of the constitution. the stars have literally aligned for this man to usher in armageddon. the real question is, how am i the only one seeing this? why hasn't the "new yorker" written a think piece about it already? if you want to really understand judge kavanaugh's view on the constitutional separation of powers, you won't read about it in the college newspapers or reading his wife's work e-mails. you will find it by reading judge kavanaugh's actual opinions as a federal judge. of course, democrats know this. but like a kid pro crass

nighting -- procrastinating his homework, playing video games and microwaving bagel bites, they are looking for any distraction to analyzing judge kavanaugh's judicial record. that's because democrats know what they'll find when they do, a nominee who is indeputyably qualified for -- indisputably qualified for the supreme court. when my friends on the other side of the aisle decide they are done procrastinating and want to look at his record on sprailings of -- separation of powers issue, i would put them in judge kavanaugh's opinions on three cases i highlighted here on the senate floor earlier this month, preenterprise fund, loving versus internal revenue service, and p.h.h. corporation versus pfpb.

once you have gone through judge kavanaugh's highly regarded opinions and sterling record and concluded, like i have, that is eminently qualified and possesses the judicial temperament and ability to be a justice on the united states supreme court, you then by all means turn to his college sports writing for a little light reading. you're sure to walk away from the insight of yale's basketball and football teams in the 1980's, i just wouldn't hold out for any insight into his judicial philosophy. while we're on the subject of documents outside his judicial record, i'm surprised democrats have yet to mention professor kavanaugh's student evaluations. it may not predict how he will rule on hot button issues, but

they do add actual substance to the mountain of evidence that judge kavanaugh is as 80 of his former students require him, a rigorous thinker, a devoted teacher, and gracious person, unquote. notably the evaluations reveal that judge kavanaugh was fair and balanced in the classroom, the opposite of the partisan hack some are trying to make him out to be. one student wrote that, quote, judge kavanaugh's presentation seemed very evenhanded, unquote. another said that he, quote, presented the other side quite well, even though he likely shared most of those conservative views, unquote. adding that, quote, many of the harvard law school professors could learn from his acceptance of views across the political spectrum, unquote. i'm looking forward to judge kavanaugh's public confirmation hearings now just 12 days away where his judicial record on substantive legal issues will

take the center stage. that is it what matters, but those things that are not front and center, be they his student evaluations or college sports reports remind us there is more to judge kavanaugh than his professional record and accomplishments. and they remind us that he is exactly the kind of standup person we should want on the united states supreme court. of course you wouldn't guess that in judging by the way -- that judging by the way that democrats and the media have treated him over the past few weeks. for example, earlier this week one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle said she would cancel her meeting with the nominee, which, of course, she is free to do. what media reports ignored is that this same senator had announced her resolute opposition before any nominee was even announced. talk about jump pg the --

jumping the gun. another colleague of -- democratic colleague suggested in dark and gloomy terms that the judiciary use was some nefarious tool to hide details about the nominee. in doing so he neglected to inform the tens of thousands who retweeted his misleading message, the committee confidentiality is in, in fact, a practice used by chairmen from both parties. before the media reports these claims, they should apply rigorous fact checking to see if democrats are telling the truth or crying wolf to whip up their base. finally i would like to say a few words about criminal justice reform. we've been at the inpass since the judiciary -- since the judiciary committee took up the

issue earlier this year. but recent reports suggest that negotiations with the white house may soon lead to a compromise. now, i have not been a part of those negotiations, and i understand they are still ongoing and there is no final proposal on the table, but i am concerned that there is no mention of mens rea reform being included. sentencing and prison reform can only do so much if we continue to allow individuals to be sent to prison for conduct they did not know was unlawful. even when congress does not specify that it should be strict liability offenses, sentencing and prison reform must be paired with what addresses the overcriminallization which includes much of the mens rea. my mens rea reform act with

senate judiciary chairman chuck grassley supports that solution. it is supported by a broad range of groups from across the ideological speck truck from the conservative -- to criminal defense lawyers and to be honest, mr. president, i'm troubled that the bill is not part of the current negotiations. i'm likewise troubled that we have not heard any discussion of the legislative fix of the armed career criminal act to ensure that dangerous repeat offenders receive appropriately long prison sentences. real criminal justice reform should be about getting the policy right. that means we cannot look just to ratchet back prison sentences but we must also look to close loopholes that prematurely let armed dangerous criminals back on the street. this is long overdue and i'm pleased to hear that

negotiations are continuing. i look forward to working with my colleagues to address those concerns, and i apologize to the leader for taking so long on these remarks and yield the floor. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i thank my friend from utah, and i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar 504, s. 2511. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 504, s. 2511, a bill to require the under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere to carry out a program and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the committee-reported

substitute amendment be agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar 552, s. 2896. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 552, s. 2896, a bill to require disclosure by lobbyists of convictions for bribery, extortion, embezzlement, illegal kickbacks, tax evasion, fraud, conflicts of interest, making false statements, perjury, or money laundering. the presiding officer: is there an objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the kennedy substitute amendment at the desk be agreed to, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. res. 618 introduced earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 618, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the commissioning of the u.s.s. john f. kennedy. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i further ask the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: now, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 4:00 p.m. monday, august 27. further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning business be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed, and that following leader remarks, the senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of the johnson nomination, and that

notwithstanding rule 22, the cloture motions filed during yesterday's session ripen at 5:30. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: so if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 4:00 p.m. on m >> sunday night on after words, an economist discussing her book "edge of chaos, why democracy is failing to deliver economic growth and how to fix it". she's interviewed by former

chairman of the council of economic advisors during the obama administration. >> you wrote a book which is quite a lot about politics and draws a lot on political science. why did you do that? >> the most important thing i think in terms of motivation for writing the book it is born out of frustration, and i talk about this in the book, you know, my interests and my academic background are in economics. but if you think about the global economy today, there are a whole host of very deeply structural long-term problems that the global economy has to contend with, and i imagine we will get to them in a moment, but things like demographic shifts, what the impact of technology will be for the jobless underclass, concerns around productivity and debt, you know, debt overhang and income inequality, something that when i was doing my phd was never discussed and now it is in the top three big issues on the policy agenda, all long-term structural problems, and yet the people who are charged with overseeing the regulatory and the policy environment

essentially politicians are very short-term in their frame. >> watch sunday night at 9:00 eastern on c-span 2's book tv. >> next a discussion about federal prison sentencing guidelines with a former federal prosecutor, a former counsel to the senate judiciary committee, and people who serve time in federal prisons. >> can you hear me? we're going to start. first of all, welcome to everybody. my name is kevin ring. for 27 years, fam has a fought more a fair effective justice system that respects our american values of individual accountability and dignity while keeping our communities safe. in short we think punishment should be tailored to the crime and to the individual and that