>> and what they're asking for. oh, now you run a location service. that's new information we can ask for. >> yeah, i mean, frankly, law enforcement is sometimes a little bit slow on the uptake, but the services are public. they do get on and use them, and they eventually figure out sort of how they operate and what data would need to be stored to operate the service. and so i think, you know, they're becoming more and more sophisticated. in terms of the types of investigations, i don't think that's changed much since so much of it is tied to the legal authorities, and now that we're in a rorschach, post-rorschach world where we require a search

warrant for content in all cases, it tends to be things that you have to be able to get a search warrant to investigate. so that sort of drives a lot of it. but, you know, the data types and the data fields that are provided are sort of incumbent on what data there is in existence and how long it's stored and what specifically they ask for. you know, we typically require them to be very specific in saying what types of data they're seeking under a request. they can't just issue a search warrant and say give us so-and-so's data. they have to specify what fields and things they want. >> both of you -- or both companies get quite a lot of requests for information for transactional data or activity logs or other kinds of subscriber information, so that takes up the bulk of the requests. i'm wondering what those tend to

look like and whether that's something that usually is fairly focused, or whether -- the number of accounts, obviously, are going to be larger than the number of requests to both companies, and so i wonder if that's general requests for a couple accounts, or do you occasionally see what one might consider egregious attempts to rope in a whole lot of people at once? >> yeah. with the caveat that we can talk about what we did on the domestic side of things under eppa, you mentioned sort of the bulk of requests we receive tend to be transactional information. it's not particularly exotic. it's basically subscriber information that users provide to us, for example, when they sign up for a google account, so that could be name, gender, information like that, and

that's the information that generally can be obtained under eppa with a subpoena. there is a specific percentage, somewhere in the neighborhood of 20, 25% that we tend to get that does ask for content in which case we'll ask for a search warrant. but it's not, you know, generally speaking the type of information that we get is pretty run of the mill stuff that you tend to provide when you sign up for our services. if i could just actually build upon what i think greg and katie were alluding to before, because i want to be clear in terms of the civil agency side of things. a warrant for -- there is a perception that a warrant for content leaves the civil agencies without a remedy to do the sort of things that civil agencies do. in the case, for example, of the securities and exchange commission, the sec, to investigate and prosecute securities fraud.

typically speaking, in civil litigation, and i think nate was alluding to this before, when you're investigating someone or initiating litigation, you're going to serve a demand or legal process on the target of the investigation. so you won't be going to a third party service provider. that is, generally speaking, how civil litigation works. so, you know, if there is a person that's being investigated, that they're the target of an investigation and informations with is within the custody and control, they'll have a legal obligation to provide that information. to the extent they're intransient, the sec has remedies to push the search warrant. they can be prevented from pursuing claims, there are all sorts of remedies that civil

agencies have to sort of ensure that bad actors can't be perpetrating fraud sochlt i. so if we focus on how that happens, by providing end means to service providers, i think we're missing the boat. but i also think there are other remedies, too, some of which exist under eppa, to the concern of destruction of evidence. you don't have to have any legal process at all to come to google or microsoft and serve a preservation request. that will freeze the account and ensure that any information that is destroyed isn't really permanently destroyed. and, look, a lot of the examples i think we've heard where this may actually end up being a problem where civil agencies don't have a warrant requirement tend to be sort of edge cases, and they tend to be framed in hypothetical or theoretical

terms. there are actual examples of actual cases where these things tend to cause problems. you can imagine a situation where, you know, x person is doing y thing, but without sort of real world examples of how this is impacting civil agencies, it's really difficult to crack a solution that would address the problems they've been raising. we think they are adequate remedies under existing law, and that's why we think there should be a bright line for content standard. >> going off of that again, we're talking about criminal versus civil. on the criminal side, you have the probable cause warrant standard which would be used to go to the third party. i would also be notified as the target. on the civil side, there is no warrant authority, so you go directly to me as a target. remember, this side over here, life, death, limb, children, women, all the scary words go over here.

money and white collar things and, i don't know, other kinds of fraud goes over here. so there are emergency exceptions for when someone is missing. there are emergency exceptions when someone is getting hurt. that is taken care of. and the law enforcement, domestic law enforcement, has agreed that that makes sense. but if we want to find out stuff about you like, i don't know, who is your affiliation as an organization when you file your taxes for status? just read some e-mails. if you look at some of these things that this, having the ability to circumvent the target and subpoena the third party by civil agency, what kind of door that opens and what kind of authority that gives the executive branch. what kind of authority that gives an independent -- my favorite is the fcc, but maybe

your favorite is the fda or the epa or maybe labor consumer protection bureau, i don't know. but this wouldn't apply to just one of these agencies, it would apply to all of them and not just federal ones, either. this would apply to state ones as well. so let's talk about local law enforcement that can read your e-mail now. so we're looking at if electronic communication privacy act reform that is in the house right now, the section about warrant for content that congressman hill was talking about. there is a bill straight up for content, there is a bill straight up for warrant in the senate. if there are changes, no, we're not good to go. it becomes worse than what the law is right now. >> there are a kind of dizzying array of bills out there. some are warrant for content.

what bill or mix of bills do you guys see as moving the ball furthest? which of the ones are the best prospects right now which are less likely to move? >> i think i'll jump in on that. i think the ones with the best prospects are the ones that are straight up warrant for content right now. and the reason i'm saying that is because it's a relatively simple concept, it's been well debated on both sides. the house judiciary committee has had a couple hearings, though they haven't yet moved a bill. the senate has had hearings and has moved a bill. but honestly, the other piece of data that i most want to protect, location information, it's not yet right, particularly at this point in the calendar to have that kind of legislation moving. too many hypos will come up.

it's too hard to account for all the hypos that will come up and it's just going to weigh things down. so if i had my druthers, it would be that the bill in the house has 220 co-sponsors as katie was saying, straight up warrant for content, the bill advances. it's the counterpart. it's identical to the bill that went through the senate judiciary committee. just to respond to one of the questions that was asked of representative poe, the question is you're doing e-mail, what about all these other ways to communicate? you had asked the question? he covers those other ways to communicate. because his bill goes to all content, and content is defined as substance, meaning or purport of a communication. so it doesn't matter kind of the electronic structure, if you will, it's all content. he's covering all of it. it would be a warrant required for all of it. >> you guys have this weird

puzzle of saying is it a facebook message -- it functions cannotly li exactly like an e-mail, does it matter if it's a facebook message? >> no. >> one of the things that -- the thing i find particularly troubling is the growing popularity of what are called tower guns, where people don't want to say we have a suspect, we think he did the crime, we want to confirm he either was or wasn't or his cell phone was or wasn't at the scene, but rather, we have three robberies we think were committed by the same person. give us every phone that was near each of those locations and we'll look for anyone who was at all three different places. obviously, gathering huge amounts of information about a lot of people's location in a way that obviously is not linked to a particular suspicion about

any of them. is that something that either of you are aware of having been attempted with respect to location data retained by google or microsoft? >> i'm not aware. >> i'm not aware. >> i don't mean to give you any ideas. just kidding, don't do it. obviously, they're most concerned about content. there are a lot of ways in which, for example, let's say the irs which, until very recently, had in their manual a section saying, by the way, if you're investigating and you want to read a tax filer's e-mail, you can do so by subpoena. they finally agreed they shuc t shouldn't do that anymore. for a lot of things, what's your affiliation? are tea party people having too

much communication? a lot of this can be confirmed by metadata. if you're particularly concerned now that you see as, at least in some quantity, requiring some additional protection. >> so for me personally, and just speaking for myself as -- probably more as katie at digital liberty, i personally care much more about content and about location than i personally do about metadata at this point, because metadata is one of the checks law enforcement can use to be sure you turned over all the e-mail that has been sent. so when they say don't get rid of anything, they can look at what the provider has and say, you deleted this from so-and-so and i need to see that. that kind of thing is important, especially when we're talking about protecting content.

which, granted, it's innocent, it's all content, but we're talking about the actual -- the meat and potatoes of the e-mail, right? i think i find that to be the most important, and then i also find location information to be very important and look forward to working on that a lot more. as greg was saying, right now it's become complicated with the raleigh decision that just came out. you're dealing with gps location, you're dealing with tower location -- these are two different types of locations so you need a different type of law. i click this button here so it goes in the cloud, i click this button here so it goes on my phone. so do you search on the phone or do you search in the cloud? these are the types of things that are being discussed, the types of decisions coming down and moving forward in a locations base, that needs to be taken into account before kind of talking about what will be done with location, and also what is the future going to look like, right? so what is perspective and retrospective data going to look like? right now you might say

prospective data, no big deal, retrospective, no big deal. i wouldn't say that about either of them, actually. so you talk about that and move closer and say, just a one-time ping doesn't really tell you that much, but if we keep going down this route that we're going, when is one time going to be too much and we don't know that. so that is a discussion that is ongoing, and that a lot of members are taking very seriously and looking into that. and as things change and aztec no -- as technology progresses and we see that, there will abe a lt more discussion on that. >> i would be surprised if congress got to location information before the supremes did. and i say that because there's now a split in the circuits. the 11th circuit ruled that you need a warrant for location information to store cell site location information, and the

third circuit said you might need a warrant for it depending on the circumstances. and one other circuit said -- i think it was the fifth -- one circuit said you don't need a warrant for it. so there's a split, and it's right for the supremes to weigh in when they want to and when somebody feels a case to them. part of the issue with a lot of ecfa, as congressman poe was pointing out. there is a violation to the fourth amendment. the remedy is you get the evidence excluded. so what does that mean? it means a lot of criminal defendants will claim their fourth amendment rights were violated and you'll get a body of law that develops about whether those rights were violated. ecfa doesn't have a statutory exclusionary rule. there is one in the wire tap act but not for stored communications. and the consequence of that is you don't get the same development of the law, except

when the person makes the fourth amendment claim. if you could make the statutory claim, hey, they violated the statute, and so i get to get this evidence excluded, you would get a lot more cases coming up through the courts. we don't have that many cases because we're only in the fourth amendment land when it comes to the exclusionary rule. >> it is sort of a per verversif law that you don't want a judge shrugging his shoulder, maybe ask another judge. but some judge will issue those orders, so fourth amendment law seems to be exclusively by guilty people trying to overturn convictions which is perhaps not the most healthy, structural condition for the development of protective law. when metadata, when it's

transactional records that are obtained, they don't always require notice to the people whose data is obtained. which means if data is obtained about you, data about what sites you're visiting, data about who you're communicating with, you may never learn that it happened, therefore, have no opportunity to bring, let's say, an action for violation of your federal constitutional rights. they're incredibly there, anyway, but if you wanted to, you would like the opportunity. so i think part of the issue here is there's obviously an enormous amount of data gathering happening leading to charges here. but not as much of a public awareness how incredibly frequent those digital searches, much more frequent than traditional wire taps. before we shift to audience questions, are there any last

remarks anyone wants to make, or can we jump to the audience? >> i would just make one last comment. i've been watching for a long time, and i've never worked on an issue where there was so much consensus. really. i mean, how often do you see google and microsoft sitting shoulder to shoulder advocating the same position? how often do you see americans for tax reform and the aclu on the same ladder? it's extraordinary. there is a website you can read about this coalition. it's www.digitalprocess.org and you'll see just how many people have gotten behind these ecta reform principles, how many political groups across the spectrum. it's really amazing. >> it's worth thinking, google and yahoo, microsoft companies,

and telecommunication carriers that in the last couple years have begun voluntarily disclosing information about the quantity of request for information. it's a positive trend that i hope we see continue, and i'm glad it's something that these companies have been taking the lead on. so, yeah, let's let the audience jump in with questions. i will be less tolerant than representative poe in that i will enforce a three-sentence rule, which is to say somewhere around the end of your third sentence, if not before, i will hope that your voice rises in such a way as to suggest by that inflexion that an interrogative is being posed. let's start there.

>> just picking up on your last point, why does metadata seem to get such a pass? it strikes me that if i have a communication with julian, it doesn't say necessarily much about the content, but if i have the same e-mail that's addressed to the five of you, that is somewhat indicative of what the subject and the content of that e-mail is about. so why the pass? >> i think it's partly in historic artifact that when courts were coming up with rules for what was going to be protected by the warrant requirement -- you know, there is a case smith v. maryland where the issue was how about the numbers you dial on a phone? is that going to be protected by the warrant requirement when that information is stored with the telephone company? and the court said, well, it's not as revealing as the content is. it doesn't even tell you whether the call was actually completed. it doesn't say who you even talked to. it just says you dialed these

numbers. and you know you're conveying these numbers to the phone company to make the call, and so maybe it should be warrant protected. what's changed is that there is so much more metadata out there now about us, and it can paint a much fuller picture of what our activities are. and i think there is a growing consensus that metadata ought to be protected at a higher level than it is. one of the digital process recommendations goes to metadata collected in realtime. i think we're moving in that direction, but in particular the non-content most likely to be first protected by a warrant requirement is going to be location information just because it's so revealing, particularly when collected over a long period of time. >> and so i would jump on that and say metadata is not getting a pass, it's ranking. right? so the content in my e-mail

is -- this is in my mind, right? the content in my e-mail is more revealing than perhaps my gps location, and that is more revealing than perhaps my communications. so this is my personal perspective. and i'm looking at what can be done and what can't be done. if i walk down the street and say metadata to the next ten people, most will think i'm just babbling. you've got to look at education, you've got to look at what people are ready for, you've got to look at where we are and what can be done, and then there's this great universe where everything is perfect. >> i tend to believe that any metadata is indistinguishable from content in the kind of most proximate kind of scenario that you're discussing, it's not as if you send all of us an e-mail,

it's that there are things with no real analog in the telephone context. i might take out a craigslist ad looking for foot fetishes, let's say. craigslist will create an e-mail account corresponding only to that. the fact i take that e-mail address is telling you very specifically what the communication pertains to, because the only purpose for which that e-mail exists is to communicate to that specific ad. there are e-mail addresses that are in themselves a kind of content or action, so i send an e-mail to subscribe at libertarian universalists. that tells you i intend to join a political actions group.

if you're interested in following up on that, professor ed felton of princeton wrote a very interesting data to the teen program discussing how in quantity, metadata can, in fact, be effectively as revealing as content because content is more structured. but this in a sense requires a level of technical understanding of really just how revealing that can be. it may not be there in the courts yet. we've got time for a couple more. in the middle? >> what's the law or situation now with standard mail? if the post office uses electronic sorters, could it collect the addresses and names? because it does have them in the computer forever. >> the cia does that. the intelligence agencies do that routinely.

by statute, one of the first federal privacy statutes was legislation protecting, protecting the privacy of postal communication knowing that people would not use the postal system if they believed the contents would be read indiscriminately. at least with respect to, i guess, snail mail metadata, that is routinely analyzed by the intelligence agencies as part of things we've learned recently. i don't know if greg -- i don't believe it's been challenged. greg, is that -- >> even on the criminal side you get a mail cover and it allows the fbi to get the addressing information on the envelope. i think that it probably hasn't been challenged as of late. i think it's pretty much accepted. the issue that i guess we're

talking about is what's inside the envelope, not what's on the outside. [ inaudible ] >> the theory is you have to expose the address information to the government because you're asking the government to deliver the letter. and the analogy sort of works the same way. on the content side, the theory, i think, being, look, you're exposing the metadata to the company. you're asking them to use that information to convey your communication, whereas they don't really need to inquire into the contents of the letter itself. it's not a record they need to create to wrap your communication. how that works on the internet which essentially has sort of a nest of a set of envelopes one inside the other is a kind of interesting and difficult puzzle. one of the things they're probably doing is essentially looking a layer into the envelope, looking at sort of the

information at the backbone level, but the backbone we normally look at, so there's legal challenges there. there is a whole sort of array of fascinating kind of legal puzzles depending how these analogies apply. the courts are not always sort of super-attuned to the technical details that may make simple analogies break down when you actually start getting into details. i think we can do one more. let's go there. >> it's good to hear the comments that sort of acknowledge the fundamental speechlessness of the metadata versus content divide. but my question is actually about the riley decision which was providing a search in the telephone device just incident to arrest, and so does that

apply specifically only to a device that has a cell phone or radio in it, or, for example, if i had my laptop there in the car, does it apply to that, too? >> it would apply to that, too, yeah. there is a point where roberts says, we could call them phones, we could call them cameras. if you arbitrarily picked one of the thousands of functions these devices serve as the name of the whole device, but the thing i do least frequently is make phone calls. oh, it has an app for that? i didn't even realize. but part of the decision does mention the network capability, but the essence of it is the massive quantity of data stored on it is what makes a difference, and whether it has an lte radio or wi-fi capability doesn't seem to be the core of a logical decision.

>> how about somebody who would try that against just a simple laptop and then another will bring another case to clarify it? >> i don't think that's really necessary. when you read that case, i think there's no question that a laptop content would also be protected. david, you had had some commentary about the case and what it means for the cloud. there was a passage in the court's decision. >> julian actually allude to do this at the outset. i think there is some fairly strong and powerful rhetoric and decision. justice roberts' general admonition, i think, to law enforcement agencies in this context was -- i'm just going to read from it. our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to arrest is simple. get a warrant. but the other thing that he discussed, and again, that juliana le alluded to is most u

of cell phones don't know if the data is being stored locally on the phone itself or in the cloud. he said it generally makes little difference. i think that has enormous implications for the issue we're talking about today. while i think it's unlikely that we'll see a case that comes before the supreme court, in part because we don't see the challenges happening at the lower courts, i think that just underscores the importance of congress caudifying the warrant for content standard. but there's no question, i think, that if you read the decision that it's more broadly applicable than just the contents of communications that might be stored locally on the device. there are implications for the cloud, otherwise that discussion that justice roberts went into in the decision, you know, would be necessary. >> well, as one of cato institu institute's jay-zee would put

it, i know my rights and you don't need a warrant for that. possibly in the future that would be legally in the cloud and physical devices. please thank the panel and thank the windsor garden for drinks and snacks. [applause] today the senate homeland security and governmental affairs committee will hold a confirmation hearing for nominees to serve on the u.s. postal service board of

governors. the hearing follows general patrick donahue's announcement that they will process mail facilities. live coverage begins at 3:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3. coming up at noon today on c-span2, former vice president dick cheney will be joined by his wife lynn and daughter liz for a discussion with politico's chief white house correspondent mark allen. on the conversation on the border and the upcoming midterm elections. again, that's live at noon eastern on c-span2. recently the senate commerce committee held a hearing regarding academics and the exploitation of college athletes. they talked about safety issues and the notion of compensating student athletes. this hearing is about two hours

and 45 minutes. this hearing will come to order, and i want to thank all of you very much for coming here. you're a bit squeezed in there. but water is on the house, so be comfortable and be glad. college sports has an absolutely extraordinary position in the culture of our country. not only do college sports inspire incredible fan passion

across the country, but they provide a very important way for young men and women to, as is written, do athletics as an avocation and get an education. we're going to talk about that today. many young people, however, athletes provide an avenue to college which otherwise wouldn't have existed, and we understand that. college athletes and athletics are rooted in the notion of amateurism. and the history of that is very interesting and important going back to the founding in 1906 and the rest of it, going back, actually, to a greek concept of amateurism. playing college sports is supposed to be an avocation. students play college sports for the love of the game, not for the love of money. that is the ideal. but many people believe this notion of college sports is being undermined by the power

and the influence of money. i remember a meeting i had in my office with the three top executives of espn, and it was one of those meetings in which i didn't say a word because they just went around in circles, each talking about what a great business model they had, how they had control and power that no other broadcast system would ever have, and how thrilled they were with it and how they were going to make it even stronger. there is a growing perception that college athletics, particularly division i football and basketball are not avocations at all. what they really are is highly profitable commercial enterprises. they believe that. critics of big time college athletics say the goal of these programs are not to provide young people with a college

education but to produce a winning spot in the brief financial awards for their schools. it is not, however, about the students. they're part of what generates the money. it's about capturing the billions of dollars of television and marketing revenues that college sports do generate and will generate even more. colleges and universities say these revenues benefit college athletes and their student bodies at large. but i think we have to consider whether the lure of such riches could corrupt the basic mission of athletic programs. winning teams get higher payouts than losing teams, which creates a strong incentive to win, an incentive which land grand public universities and others are more than happy to follow.

and win at any cost. much of the money is often funnelled right back into those sports programs in the form of million-dollar coaching salaries and state of the art facilities, many of them paid for by the taxpayers to perpetuate the cycle of winning. i think somewhere in my reading here, about $48 million of all the $900 million that nca gets from, you know, their broadcasting, march madness and all the rest of it, a very small portion goes specifically to academics. but even that's hard to figure. because nobody has the figures. they work for them, they make the decisions, he carries out what they want, and yet i think

the discussion is how does he carry out what they want? what powers do you have, mr. emmett, for actually carrying out what you think is a good idea? you've been president of three major universities at different places, and i would think that your passion for education would need to show itself. athletics to me are meant to serve schools and their public duty to educate students, not the other way around. that's the way it's always put forward and that's the way it should be. dr. mark emmet is here to present the position of the colleges. some declined to come here, but you did, and i'm grateful for that. i believe you were put at the helm because you have incredible credentials, and i think we all appreciate that you're

tremendously compensated. i think i'm just very skeptical that the nca can never live up to the lofty mission that you constantly talk about and which is written and printed in speeches and statements and responses to penn state this or something else that. you know, the mission -- nothing comes before education -- is always there but the actions don't appear to be. i don't see how the nca will ever be capable of truly making a safe, good education experience for students their number one priority. i want you to tell me that i'm wrong, that i am wrong, and that i'm particularly wrong about the future. but i'll be a tough sell. i think we believe that the nca has largely been left to its own to determine what forms are appropriate and how to accomplish its mission.

as we continue to learn more about what goes on in some major universities and colleges, we want to know if the nca is seriously considering how college athletes are faring under 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 cut off, and is there a mandated four-year scholarship. all these things are put at play. how are young men who strap on their helmets on a football field in front of a thousand paying customers, how are they doing? how are our young men who lace up their shoes and play basketball for march madness which consumes the nation and is

deliberately spread out over a long period of time so that no kid 10 years or older can ever hope to do any homework because there's always basketball on. are colleges and universities living up to their end of the bargain and providing them with a good education? are these young athletes entitled to any of the billions of dollars that are reaped from their athletic services? and when young men and women are putting their bodies at risk, they have adequate health insurance? i don't know. i don't know. and i never go into a barber shop or anything without asking, do you have health insurance, and i know the answer is going to be no. i care about health care, and i'm unhappy when people who work in places where they don't make a lot of money don't have health insurance. do the schools and athletic

league minimize the risk of concussions and injury, and what about if they're injured before graduation, can he or she finish out their studies or does the scholarship run dry? well, a couple months ago, we all heard the deeply troubling comments of chavez pier, the most valuable player in the 2014 basketball tournament in the midst of a tournament that generated hundreds of millions of dollars for the nca and its members, he talked about how sometimes he didn't have enough to eat during college. how did the college benefit mr. napier the nights he had to go hungry? there he is, trying to turn an example of a famous athlete and turn it into a large problem. i'm not trying to do that, i think it is a problem, and the whole sense of giving students a safety net and a sense of

confidence that if they don't turn out to be as good of running backs or point guards or whatever and they don't make the team or they're let off in their third year, are they dropped? do they get scholarships or what happens? i don't know. the title of today's hearing is "promoting the well-being and academic success of college athletes." i want to have an open and frank discussion on this subject and i'm going to try my best to. the nca has the same goal as i do. doctor dr. emmett is going to tell us that the nca's goal is to promote sports as a means of achieving academic excellence. today i want to explore whether the nca is fulfilling its mission. we still hear too many reports of fraudulent academics, we still hear too many tragic stories of college athletes that

have absolutely nothing to show of the services they provided even though they helped generate millions and millions of dollars. this subject is often discussed, but i'm here to tell you that if, per chance, the democrats should control the congress next time, and nobody is quite sure of that. john thune has one idea, bill nelson has another idea -- and you. yeah, okay. and then i think we want to continue this. we want to 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, we have the ability to -- we created a special investigations unit. we're very into this subject. i permanently sonally am, i thi members are. so this is a part of a process

here. so i'm going to have some tough questions for our panel as the nca and its members skoolchoolse they a cartel? have they become an enterprise which is no different than the corporate witnesses who have appeared before this committee or is the nca truly different? and does the 100-year organization in fact have the best interests of our college athletes. i turn now to my very distinguished ranking member, senator john thune, from the state of south dakota. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for holding the hearing today, and i want to thank our panelists for the opportunity to examine the current state of collegiate athleti athletics. and, like you, i look forward to hearing from our witnesses, including the president of the national collegiate athletic association is how the members of its institutions are

fulfilling the commitments made to our collegiate student athletes. i'm an avid sports fan. i know all the members of this committee are as well. as a former basketball player in high school and college and a proud father of a daughter who competed at the division i level, i certainly recognize the participation in organized sports not only requires physical and mental strength but also teaches teamwork and other skills that serve you throughout life. however, the college student athlete is and should be a student first. colleges and universities must remember and prioritize their academic obligation to student athletes. as the popularity of college sports has grown, particularly the popularity of college football and men's and women's basketball, so, too, has the possibility of many collegiate programs. in the current environment, the stakes have been raised both for the student athlete who wants to succeed and for the university who has a financial interest in winning games. skr increasing revenues for some

games and the broadcast rights have become more common. re revenues for ticket sales are also significant and alumni want to see their teams win and may be inspired to contribute to winning programs. it is a driven organization to enter collegiate athletes into higher education so the education of a student athlete is paramount, end quote. however, some institutions appear unable to balance the core academic mission of the university and the commercial considerations that often accompany college at lekts, particularly in high-profile sports. many feel the commitment to the student athlete is falling short. another point of contention involves athletic scholarships and whether the practice of offering annual as opposed to multi-year scholarships unfairly puts the student athlete at risk of losing their scholarships as a result of poor performance or

injury. while multi-year scholarships may provide an advantage, they may disadvantage smaller schools that can't match certain institutions. we will hear from ncaa's most vocal critics today. while i'm sure today's hearing will highlight important issues, i hopewell not lose sight of the positive impact that amateur athletics have made on the lives of countless student athletes. we must remember that college athletics is not just about football and basketball. the general director of south dakota recently shared the interviews he conducts annually to evaluate the school's athletic program from the vantage point of the athletes themselves. he underscored two stories that stood out from this past year of interviews with athletes. he reiterated how a sophomore diver at usd recovered from open heart surgery to qualify for a dive in the championships, a feat that would not be possible without the work of a dedicated

training staff, academic support, coaches, team and family. he also noted the moving story of a sophomore swimmer who leaned on friends, family and teammates to help her through the tragic orphans and teammates with the death of her father who passed agree bay way early in the season. with this support, hannah was able to return to the pool and achieve lifetime best times in the summit leak championships. as the usdaa athletic director put it these are examples of what college means, if you strip away the buck, you are left with student athletes who often have to overcome personal, social, economic, athletic adversity all just to compete but they frequently do wit passion and determination na makes us all proud end quote. that's from the athletic director of the university of south dakota. recognizing challenges exist. it's my hope the member institution the student

athletes, themselves and other stake hold, will seek solutions to promote the education, health and seek to preserve amateurism. this is an area where congress can provide a forum but the solutions are post-likely to come from those most wage involved in the education and development of student athletes. mr. chairman, thank you again for holding this hearing. i look forward to hearing and having an opportunity to question our witnesses. thank you. >> thank you, sir. what we're going to do now is we're going to hear the testimony and then both senator mccaskill and senator booker, both of whom are sterling and wonderful people are going to get very, very anythingly at me because i'm going to charge into the regular order and i'm going to allow senator coach to ask the first question, which rights

all the rules of the committee. >> amen. >> that will make you a better questioner. >> as the most junior member of the committee, the rules will not allow me to be mad at you. >> miss chairman, for what it's worth. i was under the impression we were one of the first to arrive and be able to ask questions in order. i arrived at 23:10 so i could be first. i didn't want to put you in a bad spot or breach the rules eitherer. >> you never do you will ask the first questions after the two of us. and thank you for being here and don't be nervous. okay. i mean it it's a wonderful opportunity to say what's in your heart and on your mind. >> first i want to invite the committee to share my experience of knowledge on this very important subject. it's a very complicated subject as well. i've had many conversations with

fellow student athletes on this issue about the current role of student athletes today in this giant scheme of collegiate athletics. we often walk away from those conversations with more questions than answers. so i'm hoping today is a first step towards answering some of those questions and providing some context and some clarity to this discussion so that we can see our student athletes receive maximum edification in all aspects of their person, be it a student, and at leth, a wasn't and a him who, that's very important to me. i want to start my remarks by the genesis of my story. my parents are from the highlands of the bahamas, i was born here in the states and raised in unl noochlt i went to high school in princeton, new jersey. afterpy school days if princeton, i would go over to the university and i saw the big poster, a statue and trophies of this guy who became my he. >> reporter: his name was bill bradley. he was just a rockstar, in my

opinion. the epitome of what a student athlete out to be, best player in college. at a school like princeton, nba. hall of famer, u.s. senator and a road scholar. that's the first time i heard those roads in the same sentence. once i finished high school in princeton, i had 83 scholarship offers to go anywhere and play football. i watt rated the number one prospect in the country by espn. when i got to campus the first thing i did was go to the office of national fellowships and tell them i want to be a scholar. three years later, i was fortunate to earn that! then i went to meet my teach ertz and tell them i want you to increase my educational capital, so i can be a pediatric furs him now i'm a seccier medical student hopefully able do that in the future. lastly, i went to my athletic

coaches and football coaches and told them i want them to equippy body and get pe ready for a career as a national football player around fortunately i was able to be democrated by the tie tans and play for the steelers as well. now it may sound like my story is pristine and ideal and used as the poster child for which you want a collegiate athlete to have an experience. i will say my story is quite rare and unique. some people call it an anomaly. outside of for cory booker the last to win a rose scholarship was a guy tauld called pat hayden. he played at usc and los angeles rams as a quarterback. there are few athletes i have come in contact with had the same instra structure the family support the foresights, not come from a broken school or family able to engage if their college experience and maximize their team. many more of my teammates,

family, friends, struggled in the college environment, struggled minorly, economically. now with the scholarship stipends they received they became believe it or not the main bread winners for tear families and had so send some scholarship money home to take care of their immediate and extended family. they struggled academically as well. a lot would go through this academic machinery and be spit out of that machine, left, torn, warn, asked some questions. we were no directional guidance on where they should go. no purpose, no idea of their trajectory, sometimes it didn't behoove their interests. i open we can shed light as you said chairman rockefeller we are pouring energy and exposure and highlighting on tv the life of the athlete. but i believe we are still falling a bit short of edifying and improving him augustmenting the aspect of the student, the

person the man, the woman and the philanthropist and the leader. i believe if we do that, we can see these athletes at major schools be productive, but more importantly, be productive leaders and citizens that go on to be industries of men and women and really have an indelible impact as they go on to their future. thank you for having me here. i'm looking forward to having this drugs. >> thank you, very, very much and now devonn ramsay. >> welcome. >> good afternoon. devonn. right? >> good afternoon, chairman. >> yeah. >> good afternoon, chairman rockefeller and members ought committee. it is an honor and a pleasure to have this opportunity to be in your presence and share my story and thoughts on the current state of college athletics. let me first thank you and your staff for the invitation. i was born on december 8th, 1998th 88 in red bank, new jersey. my mother has always vowed

anything education and sent me to a blue ribbon school that covered kindergarten through 38th grade. i excelled in the claszroom and participated in athletics. by the time for me to leave, i had the opportunity to go to the lawrenceville school down the road from princeton that played against byron. i decided this would be the best academic and athletic environment for me. i would go on to successful academic and athletic career and i decide to sign my better of intent to go to the university of north carolina, chapel hill. what drew me so that school is not only the esteamed top academic institution but also a new hire with coach davis. to show the university had an all around commitment to excellence. now, my career at the university of north carolina has been one filled with adversity.

i have undergone five surgeries, three head coaches and asked if i want to transfer or take a medical register. however, despite all this i managed to succeed being named and offensive starter four out of the six years by nfl analyst mel kyper. the top three in my position. most importantly i got my degree in public policy, concentration of business. after i graduated, i moved back to red bask, where i will pursue my hopes of making an nfl team. however, i didn't make the team at tampa bay. now, in the summer of 20130, two of my teammate versus violated ncaa rules and attended a party by sports agency. the university of north carolina then launched their own investigation into the merit and discovered several potential counts of academic fraud. after the final practice of the week, ford played clemson, i was told to report to one of the conference rooms and brought

into questioning by university officials. before the questioning began, i was told this conversation would be record and was asked if i feed a lawyer. i thought i'd be called in before they had leads for the investigation. then they asked, began to ask me about my definition of academic fraud, academic dishonesty and plagiarism and that is when they brought umm a two-year-old e-mail correspondence between piefl and a tutor. in the said e-mail, i asked the university's tutor for help in the paper. she replied by adding four to five sentences to a two-and-a-half page paper. they asked me if this paper, if this is the exact same paper i turned in. however, i couldn't remember since it was two years ago. in the final four weeks that i was held out of competition, they sent me to the university's honor court and the attorney general of the army court said there was no case here, there

wasn't enough evidence, they had no final version of the paper. it wasn't submitted electronically him i don't know, most people don't keep papers from two years ago. as i was being held out by the unc, an official from the compliance office proposed if i were to plead guilty after being held out for so many games the ncaa would, in fact, allow many eto play. at this time i believe the unc's compliance was very well versed in policy. however, it was a shocking proceed in the ncaa than ruled me, guilty of academic fraud, which strips away my remaining eligible and tarnishs my reputation. after realizing unc was more concerned about scholarship than protecting one of its own, my mother and i set out to find lawyers that hopefully would have my best interest at heart. however, none wanted to stand against the ncaa or its

leadership. the state supreme court judge reached out to my mother after reading an article she had been involved in as an observer. without judge orr's legal tenacity, i would have no one to turn to. as we went through the appeals process, which was possiblet the endorsement of the university of north carolina the leadership of the unc wanted me to take plea for a reduced sentence, judge orr, my mother and i needed to have my name un -- by going back and looking at the original interview, revealing the evidence, the ncaa overturned its ruling and reinstated my eligibility. unfortunately, the next game i torely the ligaments in my knee. i was not able to return to the field of play until my final game which i participated if two plays. now, one of the things that was looking back at my career that i wish i could have partakeen in,

was internships. a few of my friends from lawrenceville went on to play at the ivy league and with their, it's not as demanding as, you know the high level division 13 football. they were allowed to go in and pursue other things during the summer. and upon graduation, some of my friends got great job offers. the internship gives you direction, teaches you valuable life lessons and prepares you for a level of professionalism. completing internship is almost impossible. in order to be eligible to receive your scholarship stipend during the summer and graduate aid, one must be enrolled in team hours. several work out workouts. most of these athletes ended up quitting the internship because the sheer landfall of exhaustion on an average day. only one was able to complete its internship. it counted toward his credit hours.

he wasn't required to go to any classes. at the university of north carolina, football players are one of the only teams not allowed to participate in university camps, which would hone skills for those that weren't into coaching and create another source of income. in fact, during a panel discussion about the documentary school, the price calls for it. the 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 on the field, they should mandate all athletes complete an internship. the reason is it needs to be mandated is because there exists a culture, it demonizes any activity. players that go home from a semester. i have friends that have done this are labelled at selfish and lazy and almost a chancer to the team.

but, in fact, he's just going home. he's still working out. he's trying to prove his own value for the likelihood he's not going to make the nfl. i have come to realize there is a void in college athletics. the ncaa as an institution no longer protects the student athlete. they are more concerned with signage and profit margins. i wasn't aware 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. if i refused to be interviewed, i would be held down until i testified. in the ncaa, college football players have a small opportunity to prove our worth to the nfl. every game is a lost opportunity. there nodes to exist an entity that quickly and effectively advocates for the student atmosphere lee. i was fortunate judge orr

reached out to my family. it terrifys me how many students had their ability unjustly taken and the reputation damaged. the student at leth is an amazing renewable resource. because of that the ncaa is able to take advantage of the young men and women. there nodes to be an organization that will protect the college athlete and has no ties to the financial being of the universities or the ncaa. they continue to schools and athletes is dangerous and unfair. to quote a famous poet, who will watch the marchman? thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today. >> thank you, mr. ramsay. we appreciate it a lot. miss taylor branch is from baltimore, an author and historian. he's written what i call five best books ever win in terms of my own reading preferences about the civil rooidz rights movement

and the development of it. he is also an expert about this subject and has written extensively. we welcome you, sir. >> thank you senator rockefeller and senator tlun. thank you members of the committee, guests, sports fans, educators. i'm honored to be here. the subject for your hearing today college sports and the well being 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 the distinguishing feature of ncaa governance. it is identified in official pronouncements as the bedroom principles of college athletics. the bylaws defend and pan date am cure conduct as follows. student athletes may be amateurs

in their sport and participation should be promoted primarily by education and the physical, mental and social benefits to be derievd. student par tis spacing an avocation and student athletes should be protected from exploitation from commercial enterprises closed quote. that's ncaa byha 23.39. the word "amateur" has conflicted attitudes about money, youth and recreation. its broad ambivalence opened a muddled flexibility in public habits allowing the united states to become the world only nation to develop commercialized sports at institutions of higher learning. even the major universities involved which were pounded to uphold intellectual rigor, continued to ignore the contradictions of a multi-billion side industry built on their undergraduate students.

confusion and mythology begin with the word, itself. the dictionary synonyms for amateur range from a wholesome enthuse yft or devotee to a bumbling dabbler or rookie. miriam gives the sting the people running that company are a bunch of amateurs. areadyingly the same word expresses praise and scorn without distinction. this ambiguity gains reenforcement and in our uniquely designed popular world of sports, where fans are encouraged to cheer and bo without thinking objectively. the ideal of ancient greek amateurism has always been misleading because the athletes of olittle pus competed for huge prizes, ar aristotle research and development and modern scholars have evidence of high stakes victory and loss. amateurcism a myth.

purists who refuse to mix money with sport did not exist in the ancient world. victors monuments boast of success in the cash competition as they boast of victory in the sacred contests. golf legend bobby jones is enscharrived as the ideal model amateur and gentleman who declined every championship prize he earned. his reputation fits the true definition of onlyture, derived from the latin as lover specializing one who chooses a skill out of devotion rather than financial gain. some non-college sports allow athletes to declare and renounce amateur status. significantly, students, themselves, call themselves amateurs within they invented intercollegiate sports after the civil war.

until 193035, students contained general control of the new phenomenon and everything from scheduling and equipment to ticket sales. they recruited alittle nigh to construct harvard stadium in 19303 with zero fund from the college. neither the faculties or critics declared walter camp, yale class of 1880 who became the father of college football in his spare time. the ncaa created in 19306 slowly transformed the am cure tradition inherited from freej athletes. its board contained control until 1922 and the weak organization could not hire its first full time staff member until 1951. after that, however, burgeoning renew allowed ncaa officials to enforce amateur rules as an objective requirement rather

than a subjective choice. this is problematic. because attempts to regulate personal belief run afoul of the constitution. even if internal standards were allowed and somehow could be measured. ncaa rules contradict the key rierkt that college sports must be an avocation or calling. it comes from to call or vox voice by denying athletes a voice. ncaa says governing the players by fiauto. considering them for balance. checks and balances are required for sound governments. the ncaa structure is unbalanced in four basic respects. first, ncaa enforcement suffers an end inc. hearn conflict in football as opposed to basketball because the organization lost its television revenue from college football and is almost wholly depend on

the soul source broadcasting contest. second the ncaa structure creates a false impression of common practice between the very few schools that aggressively specialize college athletics, roughly 1300 to 1350 ncaa members and the vast majority of schools with small clouds and an elastic ncaa amateurism stretches from a division threeios country race to notre dame football on espn. third, officials resolutely obscure differences between commercialized sports and the mission on campus. in the classroom, college values highly valued expertise to students. but this role is reversed in big time sports. there, they develop expertise. this distinction is bake and is

promoting educational integrity. the competitor players in the athletic department. they face careers like many americans, but their conflicting demands cannot be managed or balanced unless they are squarely recognized. the ncaa undermines this logical separation by insisting sports are an educational supplement for a hybrid creature under its jurisdiction called the student athlete. universities implicitly concur by offloading some 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 remunnerative work for all students, no legislature could or would confis case earnings from one group in a legitimate

enterprise, on the contrary, universities sponsor extensive work study programs and student citizens everywhere market skills everywhere from book store jobs and pizza delivery to the entrepreneurial launch of facebook unless they are athletes. for college athletes alone the ncaa brands such industry industry unethical. equity. basic fairness requires attention to the rights and freedom of participants above the convenience of observers. applied to college sports, this principles would mean no freedom should be a bridge bus 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 professors make the

ncaa a featured example of an economic cartel, which reaps anti-competitive profit t. courts have agreed in two landmake mark case in ncaa versus the board of regents of oklahoma, 1984 the u.s. stream court struck down the exclusive control with college football broadcasts as in the legal restraint of trade. overnight the major football schools win the freedom to sell every broadcast their markets would bear without having to share proceeds through the ncaa. we eat what we killed, bragged one official at the university of texas. in law, the ncaa, 19 napth, assistant coaches won a $54 million settlement along with an order have a indicating the ncaa inter16,000 will be starting salaries. the compensation of assistant to be coaches cracked the $13

million barrier with salaries skyrocketing in non-revenue sports. by 2010, the university of florida paid its volleyball coach $365,000. thus, the supervisors of college sports have won economic freedom and they enjoy enormous large s from a marketplace that shackles only the most vital talent, the players, to reduceburgening producer by student athletes the ncaa creates rules regarding eligibility and the terms of compensation. ncaa officials, of course, steadfastly assert their whole system is devoted to the educational welfare and benefit of the college athletes, football will never again be placed ahead of educating, nurtureing and protecting young people. ncaa president mark emerratic sitting near me vowed when he announced ncaa sanctions for the

recent scandal at penn state. such professions must be reconciled with ncaa rules that systematically deny athletes a full range of rights from due process and representation to the presumption of innocence, these rawls can turn words on their head like alice in wonderland the bed rock pledge to avoid commercial exploetation of college athletes, for instance, aims to safeguard them from getting paid too much or at all rather than too little in the ordinary usage of the word 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 am cure 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 intensified the bitter feud between the ncaa and aau, which controlled access to the olympic games. aau leaders accused and quote unpatriotic ncaa of sabotageing u.s. chances to win med also. they claimed college athletes already were paid and, therefore, not amateurs at all since the ncaa approved scholarships in 1996. aau coaches they said were parasites on college training facilities. they nit picked, boiktd, boiktd boycotted each other and sabotaged each other for the hopes for the fine 64 tokyo olympics. the squabbling exhausted macarthur who recommended a blue ribbon competitions that brought proposals eventually to this

committee. your predecessors shaped what became the olympic and amateur sports act of 1988. one secured for active athletes a 20% share of the voting seats. those small, this representation soon transformed amateur sports, granted the boy's athletes tipped the governing committees in the united states and inoaksorably around the globe. marathon races and tennis tournaments recognized the players to keep their olympic eligible. new leaks strang sprang up, volleyball and other games, olympic officials came to welcome professional competitors in every sport except boxing. by 1986 when the international olympic committee expunged the word from its bylaws, it dwoe

defied everything from disasters. some of you helped recognize success in the revised ted stevens olympic and amateur sports act of 198. this example suggest as good as place to start. wherever possible, make athletes true citizens rather than glorified vessels 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 calgary universities, inturn to make wise, straight forward decisions about the combatibility of sports in education. thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. branch. i want to be very critical of myself because what is the general rule around here is witnesses speak for five or six minutes but i failed to make that clear and so which just got

it says five minutes right here but i wasn't watching. sorry. >> i'd keep it for thetive or six or seven minutes. >> that would be the best and i thank you for your testimony and it was my fault mr. bradshaw at temple university, we welcome you, sir. >> they were rockefeller, ranking member thune, members of the committee, good afternoon. your indication to me to testify about promoting the well-being and success of our student athletes is appreciated. it's an honor to represent the 1,600-plus institutions and 11,000-plus individual members of nafta and administrators the practitioners of our enterprise in representing in excess of 3500,000 student athletes across the ncaa division as well as the naia junior colleges. nanta serves for our athletic

administration. it provides educational opportunities and serves as a veck for new yorkering the exchange of information and advocacy on behalf of the association. my career in higher education includes positions as an assistant baseball coach, head cable baseball coach, director of alumni, 36 years as a division 13 athletic director at three universities. my career includes three years as a student athlete. one as a walk-on, followed by two years as a professional baseball player in walk senator's organization where two broken ankles influenced a career change and a master's degree. i trust my ankles are safe with you washington as far as today. these experiences prove valuable to my ascent things year as a director at lasalle, depaul and temple universities, retireing from this wonderful profession one year ago. during the five decades, i have seen significant commitment by

universities to the academic, athletic and personal experiences of student atmosphere leechlts from state of the art support services, elite coaching and training to the much improved equipment, safety requirements and emerging ncaa permissive benefits, our student athletes have never had it better. yet, we know we can do it better. we as educators are committed to the academic and personal potential our talented student athletes bring to our universities. in assessing the well-being of student athletes, it's important to examine our university performances and trends in the areas of academics, financial security, health, safety and life skills. academics. oefr the past 20 years, graduation rates by any met trek have drastically improved for student athletes. in 2013 the graduation succession rate measured for all

student athletes in division i was 82% including 72% for division i sps football participants and 73% for men's basketball student athletes. among the reasons for this dramatic improvement and graduation rates are increased ncaa requirements for initial eligibility and continued eligibility and university's proactive response for the academic progress metric instituted by the ncaa to measure individual team's classroom performs 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 student athletes t. prevention of concussions, for example, particularly in the sport of football remain as the highest priorities for every director at every level. best practices that have become common place include coaches, dietitions and few

tristianistings. required seminars to discuss drugs and alcohol, assault, date rain and gambling as well as comprehensive regular drug testing and follow-up. financial security. as we all foe the real cost to attend college have risen above inflation for years, causing many students to have massive debt upon graduation and proving too costly for others to attend a college of their choice. currently, division i students receive $23.13 billion in athletic scholarships. this total will escalate with ncaa legislation covering real costs, combined with the annual increases in tuition, room, board, books and fees. in addition to the real value in athletic scholarship and according to u.s. scence sus on average the college students earns $1 million more over a lifetime than a non-benefit. others include university 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 if preparation for life. few other campus activities or clubs produce such natural diversity as intercollegiate athletics, bringing together men and women, regions, nations, beliefs, with the common denomination being their academic profiles and skills. less than 131st of athletes will participate in professional sports. >> that lasts on average a few years. this reality underscores the reality of a college education that many young men and women cannot afford. in our profession of inner collegiate athletics, they are the center of our universe and

the most important people to consider in our decision-making. if we always ask ours before allocating resources, building facilities 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 right decision. any of your questions are post-welcome. thanks for inviteing me to be with you this afternoon. >> thank you very much, mr. bradshaw. now, dr. richards, who is a professor at the university of south carolina the director of the college sports research institute. welcome, sir. >> thank you. chairman rockefeller, ranking member thune and distinguished members, thank you for the opportunity to speak for 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 social, logical, organizational

and economic theories as well as empirical studies and drawn exextensively from ncaa documents and my work and colleagues and scholars. i am aware there are distinct sociograbbing differences within ncaa divisions and revenue and olympic sports, my testimony today will focus on how within big time college sport ncaa members have sought to protect their interestss at the expense of the well being and academic profit athletes. for several decades, the ncaa was aware it is the scale of revenue generation and spending continue to grow, there is a general sense that big time athletics is in conflict with the principle of amateurism, increased governmental and public scrutiny is likely if graduation rates do not improve and consequently in 2003, the ncaa embarked on a two-phase

organizational rebranding strategy, a part of a public media relations agenda, that addressed critics and provided an alternative to what the ncaa described as a dogrel of cynics, they created a model of afrt, a collegiate model of am curism that isolates the principle in the way college athletes are viewed without imposeing itsed a vocational nature on 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 ncaa president. concurrently in the effort to maintain the deception of a clear line of demarcation between college and professional sport and offer the support for the effectiveness of the academic progress program.

the ncaa developed the progress rate for apr and graduation success rate for gsr. since 2003, the ncaa has consistently sought to utilize these rates as proof that big time kreej 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 gsr is perfect or inherently a more accurate met trek. they utilize different sampling and afal cease to examine different cohorts, in short, they are different graduation rates. two, the gsr consistently returns a rate 12 to 25% higher than the fgr. as far back as 1991, the ncaa knew that removing eligible dropouts, in other words, transfers or athletes who leave

school in good academic standing from the gsr cohort would result in a markedly higher success rate. three, since there is no comparable national level gsr for the general student bid to report gsr and fgr data simultaneously in press releases or data set tables, invites inappropriate comparisons and posted theers confusion among the general public. while the ncaa national office sought to protect its collegiate model. they labor within a system that too often depends on a special talented admission process, focuses on maintaining eligibility and results in athletes often clustering or being steered to majors conducive to their practice and competition or in other words work schedule. tellingly, several authorities within the ncaa and university govern fans structures, recognize clustering and scheduling of easy course as

problems. in addition, contrary to the ncaa's public postureing, they are 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 universe indicative of total institutions. 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 alternative views. since 2003, while the ncaa has successfully embedded its collegiate model of athletics, including the graduation success rate into the public's consciousness, there has been

little progress in insuring profit athletes of equal access to educational opportunities afforded other students. in conclusion, there is clear evidence the ncaa's collegiate model of athletics not only systematically inhibits access to education but exploits profit athletes by denying them basic bargaining rights due process and standard forms of compensation. i want to thank the xhd members for the opportunity to visit with you today. >> thank you for your excellent testimony and finally dr. mark emerick, who is, you all know who he is. >> dr. mark emmert. >> good afternoon, senator and good afternoon to you and for thune. >> is your microphone -- >> thank you. i appreciate that. is it working now? can you hear me fine? >> i notice no difference. >> as a every roing university president, i've learned to project.

so, thank you very much. and good afternoon to all of you on the panel. i'm make emmert. i serve now as the president of the ncaa since okay of 20130 following 30 years as a professor, university administrator and 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 are able to be here. the ncaa's core purpose as already pointed out is to promote the well being and success of 34 sxikt i 60,000 students athletes as they enjoy world class athletic experience and receive access to top notches educations. that's why i have been working diligently with the division i board of directors, member universities and automatic stake holders to drive policy changes that supports student athlete's success and, indeed, address

many of the issues that have been raised here today. during my tenure, we have enacted more than a dozen key reforms, two notable examples are raising academic standards and raising the opportunity for multiple year scholarships. as we discuss how to improve college sports today, it's important to understand the ncaa is a democratically governed association of nearly 1,100 colleges an universities. as such neither i nor any member of my staff have a vote on policy or infractions decisions. it's important to note that 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 challengeling, obviously, to bring together coaches, student athletes and university presidents to achieve consensus on much of anything let alone college sports and while the pace of change is not what i or many others would like the

division i member schools are working very 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 works extremely well for the vast majority of our 3460,000 student athletes. while it can and should be modified the collegiate model should, in fact, be preserved because all the good provides for so many. nonetheless, i agree there are many changes that need to be made and many presidents 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. sec, scholarships should cover

the full and actual cost of attendance, not simply twirks room, board, books and supplies. 3rd, ncaa schools must always lead in the area of health and safety. for example, the nca, along with a variety of medical experts released recently new guidelines that address the diagnosis the management and 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 can all do better. fifth, while all student athletes today are covered by insurance for injuries and the ncaa covers catastrophic injuries, any gaps if coverage must be closed. sixth, the academic success of student athletes must remain our ultimate priority. this means providing them with a 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 39 and cannot come at the cost of student athletes and womens and non-revenue generating sports. the ncaa provides countless opportunities to men and women, including many from low income family was would not otherwise attend college. in fact, some 82,000 current student athletes are first generation college students and at the risk of correcting mr. intlaud, it is now $23.37 in athletic scholarships provided to students that 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 $3700 million wage to colleges and universities in all division, 100 million was used to cover extra expense for division i student athletes. furs, 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, whoing with you and our member schools to insure that student athletes have all 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.

emmert. i will start, senator thune will follow, then senator coach and we will proceed from there. according to your website, i'm going back to some bake stuff. student athlete, health safety and well being 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 the preseason football practice, the ncaa asserted that, quote the ncaa denyles it has a legal duty to protect student athletes. closed quote. i find that extraordinary. now i know your answer is going to be. 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 will declare 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 council to make a legal argument him i am not a lawyer. i am not going to defend or deny what a lawyer wrote in a lawsuit. i will unequivocally state we have a clear, moral obviously gaegs to make sure 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 to have a panel of subpoenaed university presidents from land grant publicly funded universities up here.

i think lit come to. that i think it's going to have to i don't know how we will work anything out without it. but you say that was bad language by a lawyer who got confused or was later didn't have a good night's rest or whatever it was. and so you sort of slosh over that. earlier, you said that there are a number of universities that want to make a certain number of changes, which you then enumerated three or four of them. but then you have also said frequently in answer to questions, that you don't have the authority to do anything. it's, 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. they're making a ton of money, pacific, they're making so much more money than they ever have been before, not all, but some. >> that there is about 120 that

make most of it. 1320 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 say? >> well, i can tell you, for, 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. they will put all of the 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 major -- >> i'm soimplt i got to interrupt. why would you 'ic the 65 schools that make the most money? to me they would be the least likely to make changes at all?

>> quite the contrary, they're the ones that want to make changes, changes often that have price tags associated with them. they want to make those changes and are often blocked from doing so by institutions that have less revenue, if, for example, you have a model that covers full possible attendance, something the division i board in my first year twice passed. it was overriding by the membership of the 350 schools in the 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, whose interested are the points that i just enumerated. indeed, i was practically quoting from a letter signed by all the presidents in the pac-12 and the presidents of the big 130, all of wh -- big 106789.

>> are these the smaller ones 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 sec, the big 12, the big ten, the pac-12 and the acc. . >> would you agree with me in my final 1st round question that college sports has long forgotten the word "amateurism."? i'm talkingt t abouting about tt majors. western university signed onto 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 they have done western university sure makes a ton of.from them. how do you respond to that? is that right? is that fair? is that progressive? >> if i may, senator, there's two questions being asked there. the first is, do i believe that the 120, the -- owe 120, expenditures moved up sharply in the past two decade t. fact that schools are investing those dollars back into the athletic program makes it quite clear the universities, themself, are not

doing this to turn a profit. last year the schools, 23 in all of america had positive cash flow, in other words, spent, invested all of the money they had in college sports and had some left over. everyone else in the country put resources into college sports, instead of taking them out. in terms of the changes that occurred in the construction of the conferences over the past handful of years ago i probably agree with you. i was very disappointed in the changes that the conferences saw 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 okaeshlly. when it's your volleyball team, your basketball team, your soccer team, it means student athletes are traveling a great deal at great expense both on

time and energy and commitment. i was quite disappointed in not all but many of those changes that occurred. >> i thank you. i turn to ranking member thune. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you indicated that you have taken the initiative to form some of these division i subcommittees to address needed changes. i'm wondering if you can discuss what you hope to accomplish in this initiative. >> thank you, senator, first of all, i mentioned, within a month, we'll see, i hope the board passes a completely new decision-making structure because of the challenges of the past 24 hour months of making decisions around a very aggressive reform agenda. the leadership of the 65 leading universities have said we simply have to find better way to make progress. they have identified as their agenda many of the items that i just addressed and a hand. of others, so there is a very keen interest in finding, first

of all, ways to provide greater support for student athletes. we've passed twice over the past 36 months a proposal to allow universities to give student athletes as a bear 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 that allowed but didn't require multi-year scholarships 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 student athlete will ever have to cover insurance or injuries that are inflicted on them when they're a student athlete. i think, finally, we've got to address this issue of time. the demands 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

finds ways young men and women can 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 virtually all college players, their last game is their last game 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 do the many things that are available on campuses. >> mr. bradshaw, you bring unique perspective as a former a.d. and as member institution. taking care of the well-being of your student athletes. i'm told it was your practice to conduct exit interviews, and at sometimes those led to substantive changes in policy, but you have some

programs were improved. do you have any examples from those interviews that you can share with us that led to direct improvements? >> we gathered our best information from our student athletes about how they were being treated. as many of you might now, student athletes are not the most shy. absolutely. like my teenagers, they actually let you know when they're hungry, when they need things. the exit interviews were invaluable, because seniors were leaving the institution. we also followed up, had questionnaires we sent the seniors a month before they left, then we went over those questionnaires with the student athletes to talk about every facet of their experience he university. that was helpful. we also have a captains council, which was an aggregate of the captains from every team that got together without the coaches, just myself and some administrators to hear everything they had to say about their experience, so that we could use that in recruiting and help to do a lot better job. we also have team meetings to welcome the freshmen, and we

were able to gather very valuable things. we had one team whose practice facility was maybe about 25 minutes from campus. when they got back in the evening, they weren't 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 their meals for an hour so that those student athletes could eat. we also had football players who were practices in the afternoon, some of them in premed, and some of the courses they were taking were right up against their practice. we were able to get that football coach to take those practices in the morning when 97% of the classes that the kids were taking were there. so those were very valuable -- that was very valuable input. right from the center of our university, the student athletes. my time has expired, but from the athletic director's standpoint, what role do you see the a.d.s and universities playing?

some of these you can go beyond what the ncaa is required, but there's a lot of flexibility for the member institutions to make decisions in the best interests of their student athletes. >> and we should. 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 and have similar philosophies and missions and principles about how that works. and in concert with all those people, because sometimes you need funds to do the things that you need to do, and you need the support from the board and the president. so it's very important that all of us work together to do that. we're out recruiting other student athletes. 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 coates. >> mr. chairman, thank you, dr. emmert thank you for being willing to testify. i think it's been constructive to hear of 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 are, as you have acknowledged, are challenges for the ncaa, and challenges for the universities, and challenges for our committee. mr. chairman, i want to thank you for following through on your commit me to me and to others that we're 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 and best provide for them, how do we address some of the challenges that we're facing

today with the revenues, and so forth. and i think this is a very constructive effort that we're 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 here. i'm hearing from our witnesses there are many positive things happening and many posit results coming from being a student athlete. opportunities that are available to athletes that would otherwise not be able to get the college experience in the education process. the list of reforming that dr. emert has bakley said these are his proposals, and i think it goes right to what we're, the full and actual cost, 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 questions, academic priorities. we've talked about the time issue, support for title ix. it's been remarkable what's happened under title ix and the number of women able to participate in athletics, gain scholarships. many of those may not have had a chance for scholarship help and support. the vast majority of schools, whether division ii or division iii, not in the top 65, that offer all these opportunities, it's something we want to preserve. it's something we 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.

now, obviously it goes to this question, dr. emmert, of the 65. i was encouraged by your response to the chairman's question, relative to their interest in addressing these issues. it's one thing to say they're willing to do it, it's another thing to do it. we wish you success, but we understand that you're the proposal, you're the initiator, but they're the decision makers. so i hope, mr. chairman, over some period of time here, hopefully relatively soon, we can get a positive result from that effort. i think that's where the -- these major issues fall. but dr. emmerit, would you give us one more shot at the ability to address what i think goes to the root of the problem, but also the root of the solution.

and that is that the top 65, which are the revenue generators, what we don't want to jeopardize are the other thousand or so that aren't, and put them in a situation where they won't be able to fulfill title ix or the level of sports that give so many young people opportunities to participate and get a college education at the same time. >> yes, mr. chairman and senator coats, i think you're asking two of the most important questions. the first is a recognition that 100 or so years ago when the ncaa was created, it was as mr. branch pointed out, with some impetuous from the white house and congress because of all the challenges in college sports. at that 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 guan