and it's going on college campuses across this country every single week. >> i agree with you. thank you. i want to start with -- which is the coach for the for the coach who has epilepsy. as you know, had a number of seizures, and the university of minnesota president said we're not going to get rid of him. we're keeping him on. our record has been rocky, the gophers, they kept the coach on. he had to coach from a box, he couldn't coach on the field because of his condition. during the entire season he coached from a box, and i was there when we beat nebraska with him in a box. it was a great moment. it was a great story, but it does make me think, as i hear all of this, that that kind of compassion, what was so captivating about the story is it kind of defied what had been become of so many of these big

sports games and the cutthroat competition and how people were treated. so i think what you're hearing up here today is the hope that these are deliverables, these are things that can happen, when you talk about changing the sexual assault policy, making sure the players have the health care insurance, making sure thif the time to do the internships. they aren't crazy hard things to do. that we have another hearing, whether it's six months from now or a year from now to check up on what's happening with these things whether they're at the high school level. i know that senator tom udahl co-sponsored his bill. i know there's a lawsuit that's going on, just your opinion of it, but if you could talk about what's being done. >> i think it's a critical issue and most heavily identified. it occurs in virtually every sport. first of all, as i had mentioned in my opening comments, we

created -- when i first came into the office, i was a business sprited to find there wasn't a chief medical officer, so when we went out, we hired a wonderful doctor who is a neurologist. he's working unbelievably hard. we don't have good signs, it's not as well understood as we all

might think. so once they have done that, just this past handful of days they released the first ever consensus among the medical community on the treatment and the prevention of concussions, especially around football, a new football practice guidelines around contact and a variety of other things. we signed with the department of defense about two months ago, an agreement to do a $30 million project. we're putting up $15 million. dod is putting up $15 million to track longitudely, young men and women and the to try to get a leg legitimate history of treatment and occurrence of concussion. we're working with the youth -- all of the youth sports organization to try to get better practice guidelines

working with the nfl, their heads up program, to try and get coaches, especially in football, trained to teach young men and boys how to tackle properly. we have the same issue with s k soccer, girls, we need to ban heading until 12 years of age. so we're looking at trying to lend our support to those kinds of efforts. we're making -- pardon the pun, headway, but the facts are, we need a lot more understanding. i'm pleased where we are, and i'm proud. >> part of the reason why i stopped playing in the nfl to pursue medicine and go into a particular special of neurosurgery was because i saw a lot of my teammates with early onset dementia or some of these traumatic brain injury and some of these things you associate

with several con kusive episodes. i saw it in the nfl, and now as an aspiring neurosurgeon, i would love to add expertise to that discussion, but one thing i noticed in the locker rooms was a lot of my teammates, fellow athletes, we want to be fast, right? we want to be quick. nimble. agile. and so, the protective equipment we wear, a lot of guys would choose and select equipment that's lighter and maybe not as protective, so that may lead to more con cuss episodes. i think education is incredibly important. and talk to us about the dangers of concussion. if you are concussed as a player, sometimes, you feel forced to get back on the field and if you have a risk of getting a second, your likelihood of getting a third, a fourth, a fifth goes up expo nen shlly. the pressures of trying to be on the field, trying to compete, all at the same time as devin

said, earlier if you're not on the field, nfl coaches can't see you, you're not exposed, perhaps you lose the opportunity of getting drafted high and getting to the next level. >> it's just to perhaps change the culture, change the focus of big coalition high velocity hits, and the idea that that is a part of the game. it is not a part of the game. if you look at the rule book, it's to take a player to the ground similar to how rugby is performed, but you see the highlights and exposure on the big high velocity hits where guys are speering into another player. that's what gets celebrated, and i think that's the wrong path. as i said, hopefully in a few years or so, i can add more knowledge to this discussion, but from my anecdotal knowledge, it is an issue.

>> i'll ask questions on the record of the internships of you mr. ramsey. i thought that was fascinating, on what a small proportion of the student athletes end up going into pro sports, that's most likely not going to be their career. they have to have that ability to pursue, and if it's supposed to be 20 hours, then we have to find some way to measure that and enforce is. to me this hearing so far has been a lot of talk about a lot of things which have been around for an awfully long time, which we all think should be solved, but they're not solved, and i think there are very clear

reasons for it, and that is decision-making is flawed, fragile and useless. florida, which has -- everybody recruits from florida, they have a law that transparency, how money is spent, has to be made public, because they have a law.

and so, you know, in the contributions and when ncaa comes in, only a small portion goes to education and all kinds of things go to the stadium, that is all available to the public. so i commend them for coming from a state like that, and i just think that's the path with so many answers, which we just otherwise seem to be unwilling to deal with. excuse me. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. and i think a lot has come out of this committee hearing that should enable and help dr. emmert to continue with the reforms that he's trying. so much has been said, let me highlight a couple. i happen to know because i was messa mesmerized with mr. rolle as a player at florida state. for hi to do the interview for the rhodes scholarship, which was in the south, on a saturday, his president t.k. weatherall had to get special dispensation so that they could get someone

to donate a private jet for him that could fly him somewhere in the northeast when florida state was playing up here, and even so, he made it only in the second half. but the emphasis -- you know, that's something that's so common sense that you would want a player to interview for the rhodes, and yet it was a big deal. it shouldn't have been. the fact of so of of these players that are coming from families that are dirt poor, and they don't have the opportunities that others do it seems to my it's common sense, we should have sometime ends or whatever you call it, so it equalizes the playing field of the financial ability if those student athletes are contributing to the financial

well-being of that university. so too with health insurance. that all to be common sense. if a player is hurt and that's a career-ending injury, the best of medical care ought to be given to that player and for it to last for some period of time in the future. and of course, concussions just add another whole dimension to this thing. i thought it was very interesting in another committee that i have the privilege of chairing, we did a hearing on concussions, and -- including

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

>> sure. one thing that i'd like to say is that when you think about the four-year scholarship discussion and the one-year renewable. a lot of players that i was on teams with kind of felt like it was us versus them. it wasn't a team. we didn't kind of feel like the ncaa was pregnanting our best interests. was looking out for us, one to see us succeed and thrive and flourish. it was almost as if we had to do everything we could to promote ourselves and better ourselves against this big machine that was dictating and ordering the steps we took. maybe that's not true. maybe it's just a miscommunication, maybe the information wasn't getting disseminated well enough, but that's the way we felt. another thing that's why bothersome today, going back to the economic struggles a lot of my teammates come from poor

areas in florida, and come as the first person in their family to be a college student. they don't have a lot of other money to lead back on, so that leaves them open to unsavory things. these are agencies, who would knock on our doors, say i can take you to a nightclub, buy you a male, take you and your girlfriend out to eat and the players accept it because they don't have much else, then become ineligible and don't have anything to gain. black mark or just don't play anymore, so think end up back in liberty city or polk county, and it's frustrating and discouraging. i saw it often. >> that is the exact example that we need to use. thank you, mr. chairman.

>> thank you, senator nelson. i apologize. you could have run for the senate ten years ago. >> i don't want to be disrespectful to senator blumenthal who i think was here before me earlier. no? >> i will ask my questions now only because i have to preside, and if you would yield for five minutes, i would really appreciate it. >> i've already been put in my place once. i will yield. >> yeah, but you're bigger than i am. so -- >> let me thank you, mr. chairman, for having this hearing, which very sincerely i think is a very important one or a significant for the future of academic institutions.

i want to thank all of the folks who have come to enlighten us and thank you to senator nelson. and i want to begin by saying, for what it's worth, i think the law here is heading in a very unfortunate direction. as dr. emmert and i have discussed, i think the law is heading in the direction of regarding athletes at university more and more employees that is because of the growing asymmetry and energy, time, sweat, blood injury that is involved. that is classically the reason why labor law protections have applied to individuals who on potentially are victims of exploitation. or construction sites. so i think the challenge is to

dim minutic and truly -- and therefore the laws will move to and i say that with regret, because i too, as dr. emmert has articulated well value the student athlete model rather than the employee/employer model, but the more the reality is that athletes in effect function as employees, the more

the law will recognize that fact. my opinion is worth what you're paying for it. i'm just a country lawyer from connecticut, but i sincerely believe that that's the direction of the law. i want to first ask you, astonished and deeply troubled by the revelation that athletic departments on many campuses investigate -- i would like your commitment that you will work to change that practice as soon as possible and as effectively as possible. >> you have my commitment. i obviously want to understand the data more. i simply read a summary. i'm not sure what the facts are on those campuses. as i said earlier, the data that senator mccaskill's staff brought forward was shocking to

meivities i am shocked and outraged by you apparent practice on many campuses with the effect of revictimizing survivors who may be in effect victims. i want to focus for the moment on health insurance. you know, individual colleges and the ncaa made billions on the talents of these young men and women, and i want to ask you, couldn't they offer health insurance for athlete for a certain amount of time after they leave college? that seems imminently fair. and making them better athletes and students while they're there, so i would ask for your commitment that you would work toward providing for health insurance for these needs and injuries that may extend beyond their playing years on campus or even professional settings and i'd like to know what more assuming you are committed to

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

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

>> thank you, mr. chair. >> go ahead. thank you, mr. chairman. first of all, i'm grateful, we talked about this in my first days as the united states senator, this was an issue you wanted to cover, and you saw my excitement for doing that. a lot of that stems from i was back in the '90s an ncaa division i football player. i want to first say, it's very important for me to say, i probably wouldn't be here right now if it wasn't for that experience. i am deeply grateful. i joke all the time i got into stanford because of a 4.0, and 16 yards receiving yards in my high school year. and had lifetime experiences frankly that i could never, ever replace. it opened up extraordinary doors for me. so we could have a hearing that could go on for hours if not days about all the good things that are happening with the ncaa, so please forgive me if i'm not giving that appropriate light. what concerns me and what you and i have talked about

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

clothing if they're restricted from working, banned from working, you know that's a problem we have to address. >> a minor correction, not banned from working. they can in fact work, and in many cases do, but the biggest challenge is they simply haven't the time. >> so in other words they can't work because of whatever reason, you know that's the problem that the scholarship does not cover the full costs at the same time they're being expected, whether by law or not, to work 40, 50, 60 hours a week. >> completely agree. >> that's a problem. >> you agree it's a problem with the health coverage is inadequate and that we have people, many of whom i know and you know, who have blown-out knees, and even though they have graduated now, they're having to go into the pockets for co-pays and the like to deal with medical injuries that were occurred, really the root was the challenges they had when they were a athlete? >> i agree the insurance today is much better than most people

think, but there's certainly areas that need to be closed. >> and it's costing some athletes thousands into their lifetimes. >> yes. >> you agree there's a real problem still with time, that as the two@lease at the end of the table, it's not just the practice time, guys, how many hours would you get your ankles taped, treatments? an hour? two hours? sometimes three hours, depending on how bad the injuries? we have athletes putting in upwards of 60, 70 hours a week, that's a problem? >> a huge problem. >> you agree that there is a -- at least an issue that hag to be dealt with to improve with the issue of sexual assault, it has to be improved in the way we investigate? >> yes, and i think the way we educate young men and women, and the way we educate people on campuses to handle those issues. >> right. this we didn't cover, so it might not be a simple yes or no, but in terms of the due process, when a young man like mr. ram say, not even know had had to get a lawyer, not even getting

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

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

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

exploited. this is why i love that taylor branch is here, because occasionally -- and you used these work, doctor -- it may work as a cattle prod to get this -- i wrote that word down, because i have seen the ncaa move quickly when there's money and reputation on the table. for example, you messagesed his name shabazz napier. on the higher exaltation of victory, he says on national tv what we know athletes -- what coaches know is a truth -- that some guys don't even have the money to buy shaving cream. to eat at night. but he says it on national tv, and within seven days, because of the shame and embarrassment, one seven days, if i'm correct, the rules changed and guys can actually eat. >> yes -- >> hold on, because i'm already over my time. cam newton was going through the same problems you were at the same time, hi eligibility was being challenged mr. ramsay, cam newton a guy that brings millions into the university,

his adjudication happened quickly. yours did not. you're not a name athlete, names on the jerseys and the like, so it didn't. i want to say in conclusion, mr. chairperson, and really why i love that taylor branch is here, because one of the morse seminal books in my life about the civil rights movement -- that when there's a class of individuals who are being exploited and there's millions of dollars being brought in and guys can't even afterward health care, can't afford to finish their degrees, then we have a problem. and i respect dreamt emmert in saying we're going to try to address that, but where is the urgency this has been going on for decades in america? so i don't trust, like the supreme court, when they said we're going to integrate schools, they want do it with what?

with what kind of speed? >> deliberate. >> it took them a long time to get around to doing the right thing -- these aren't just people, they're young people in the united states of america. we can't afford to wait for all deliberate speed. there's got to be a level for accountability for fast action for things on the head of the ncaa says is a problem. that next season when football season starts, there will be kids suffering from the same list of unfair things that somehow someday will be addressed. i think we need another hearing with the real rule makers, with college presidents lined up, a ask them how fast will they address the exploitation of college athletes. mr. chairman, thank you. >> could dr. emmert respond? >> >> thank you, mr. chairman on this issue of athletic

departments investigating sexual assault allegations, that is ridiculous. you've got to fix that right away, i'm a graduate of penn state university and it's obvious, we're, it was so trouble i troubling -- universities have said we simply have to find a better way to what i'm troubled about and i just need to understand, senator blumenthal asked about the change to an employer, employee model. we've talked about compensation potentially for athletes today. i don't want to see any athletes mistreated. i want them to have a quality of life that's important as they serve and get the education and be able to be an athlete, the student athlete model.

but as i think about what for example the nlrb did in its ruling, know it applies to private universities at northwestern and i think about this compensation model, the employer employee model. what does this do in term os f the school's where we're not talking about the top athletes that may go on, that are the revenue generating sports. if we start down the road of a compensation models, what will happen in our schools in terms of the schools that or the sports that aren't at the top where those athletes can sell the jerseys, make money, but are still very important and when i think about the opportunities women vo gotten because of title 9, if you're on campus and this becomes an employer employee type model, what does that do for the women's sports if

they're not revenue generating and how do we sustain them this model changes. it's a big question, but i'd like you all to comment on it because the last thing i want to see, i want to make sure your ath let leets are treated well and certainly mr. rolle, what you've done is really inspiring to see what you've done and thank you, mr. ramsey, as well, for your inspiration and being here. but there's a whole category of athletes that aren't quite at your level, but are participa participating in college sports and it's been an opportunity for them to get an education and for them as well, that are at your level, but our sports don't always generate the same amount of revenue. i want to make sure women still have the opportunity they've had because of title 9. >> i would love to comment on that. i think it's not a zero sum

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

by denying profit athletes just compensation in the market does not preclude colleges and universities from supporting intercollegiate athletics as an education opportunity. >> i would like to see what mr. bradshaw has to say. >> we probably don't have time, but i would like to hear that model that works. i believe it's going to be devastating to all those student athletes, including women who who don't produce revenue, who aren't seen as athletes are students who create that revenue. i really would like to see that model work because as we know, that's going to mean those who can afford to pay for that, will. and those who can't, won't.

>> again, if i could reiterate, i appreciate the question and i'm trying to articulate it as clearly as i can. if the athletes are in fact employees, then we have an obligation under the law to treat them as such. if they're not, does not preclude them from participating. title 9 does not have to be held hostage by this because we're only talking about 5% of the athletes. >> i know my team is up and i know others have to ask questions, but so some will be employees and some will be student athletes? >> they already are employees. they already are employees, so by being open and honest about what we are using and exploiting these athletes for, honesty is a very good thing. >> so as a woman athlete if i'm

not a revenue generating athlete, i'm not going to be eligible for this relationship and there's sort of a second category of athletes on dam campaign pus. bothers me. >> we have that. we refer to them as -- and olympic sports and that's fine. it does not mean that if we compensate athletes according to the market that everyone else has to go away. that is not what has to occur at all. so with the university's find that the opportunity is very important, they will still support it. i see no way that women's athletics or olympic athlete is going to go away. it's not going to happen. it just isn't.

>> as i listen to questions about the cost structure and likely impact about creating some unions, some not employees, i think ultimately, the -- and let me say this before you answer the question as you think about your answer. it's good to have you here from south carolina, i would be remiss if i didn't point out that at least you go to the right place. the gamecocks. i like that a lot. a fan myself. i will tell you that my story is very different. my story i think really plays an important part of why i'm asking

the questions i'm asking about the cost structure. i'm a kid that grew nup a single parent household. had it not been for football, i would not have been able to go to college at all. played just a year. christian leadership scholarship, which took me to a different school. i realized the burden of practice before and after labs and the challenges i faced and made a decision to go a different route, but the fact of the matter is had it not been for that scholarship opportunity, i would not be sitting here today. i would not have had the opportunity to even start my education, so when i think about and i went to a small presbyterian college. when i think about the cost structure of this conversation on athletes that are not in the top tier schools, there is a significant unintended consequence i think we are looking at that kelly really brought to the surface that is hard to deny and harder perhaps to fix it.

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

koef, then they have a boss. in summary, the definition of a student athlete. that would apply to virtually every student athlete that had a scholarship. man, woman, doesn't matter. woman's soccer player, the difference between a woman's basketball player and a mep's basketball player isn't that the men's basketball player works harder. it isn't that they're more or less talented. the only difference is a singular difference and that is there's more people in the stands. that's it. in terms of their time commitment, come pettiveness, everything. the difference is one plays in front of a lot of people and one doesn't. the difference between a volleyball player and a soccer player is the same. the only difference is whether they're playing on tv or whether they're not. that relationship title nine has nothing to do with employee employer relationships, so it would have nothing to do with

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

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

trying to make and again, mark's got to deal with votes. he's got to dole with the institutions, the college presidents. the board of trustees who pressure the college presidents. i think you've got something when you want to bring the presidents in here. i think that would be a good move to help everyone. but the changes that have happened, they're just by leaps and bounds, particularly in the last decade. >> do i have time for r a final question? >> my gamecock, as you look at the opportunity for collective bargaining and its impact on the academic environment, realizing that most institutions, primary objective is to really cultivate an environment conducive for academic achievement, how do you see the impact of the collective bargaining opportunity college campuses and its impact on that academic environment or do you see them? >> i don't see that it would

have any effect. >> good enough. >> no. >> all right, thank you, sir. >> okay. >> thank you. i want to make a -- i know the question you want to ask and -- has answered most of those questions and i know you feel the duty to ask the question, but there is going to be a second round. i'm going to make a closing statement and at 5:15, we will be through this very long hearing. i want to say this. i have two impressions. one is superficial and the other i think is worrisome of this hearing. i want each of you to either agree or not agree with me as kind of your closing statement. those issues have been discussed

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

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

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

undermining our values. i think it's undermining our commitment to education. and i think that you're talking about the -- you're talking about the different ways of jiggering the students who are not athletes, actually doing a better job academically than those who aren't, it was said by the ncaa that that was true, and also in his testimony. i just don't believe that. i just don't believe it. i may be wrong, but this -- and then the different formulas, you use, is very interesting to me and something i would like to know more about, but to me, it's been in essence, an important hearing, but not one which points to progress, and -- because i think everybody's going to leave this hearing, they're going to go right back,

i'm not, i don't think senator booker is and i don't think a number of others are going to go back to the way they do things. no harm there, nobody did themselves any great damage, congress usually doesn't tom through, the congress doesn't get that much done, that happens to be true for the last threor four years. and then there's always the question of getting people from, you know, either trustees or heads of colleges, universities, become states and then members here which correlated to that might not want to have that happen, the world works in ways that protects itself. but this is a particularly ugly one, the question of rape and having -- i mean, i'm -- i voted not to allow the department of defense to settle rape

questions. i think that's ridiculous it happened, what i didn't wanting to passed but not by a great margin. but what we want to do is get there, achkd i definitely have the feeling that we're on that path. and i think this hearing symbolizes that we might be, but the substance is that we probably won't be. react to that. anybody who wants to. then i'm going to close the hearing. >> branch, i think you had some -- >> senator, that's a -- i think that some differences have been -- and they're big differences here between talking about the way things work and how to reform and the whole underlying structure. frankly i think some differences

have been diminished. i agree whole heartedly with one thing dr. emmett said, is that a lot of these economic restrictions and the ncaa rules, if they were vacated if senator helder's were abolished as they were for athletes an coaches--a small athlete -- a recruit at a small division iii school would be able to ask for better health coverage, or a salary and the university, the little school would be free to laugh at them and say we don't do it, we're go somewhere else. just like if the piccalo players said i want to be free to march in the band, the school -- precisely these 675 schools that we're talking about where there's gigantic money if an athlete can bargain at recruiting for more health care

coverage, before starting to study, with a longer scholarship, it would change things because right now they do thing solely at their discrimination. a model that recognizes that these two athletes are trying to manage two very demanding careers at once that are in separate spheres is a step forward, but right now the least hopeful thing i would say is that we're looking to the same 65 schools as the engine of reform in the ncaa, i really don't see that. they may give higher compensation, they may give more tips, but they're the ones who created most of these problems in the first place and i don't think that the big schools are going to do anything other than

be driven more and more by athletes and frankly those schools exploit their athletes both as players and as students. i go around to all these big schools and athletes tell me they're pushed into certain majors that are easy, they're not allowed to take certain courses. i think that system differences from outlined and may be diminished, but don't see the big 65 schools for much reform in the future because their record doesn't show that. >> any other comments? mr. chairman? >> i had asked before.

>> we have ample chance to do that. and i have done that -- >> i don't think you gave me a particular break, i was the first one here and that's the normal procedure. >> it hadn't been -- if you h hadn't been, you made it very clear that you wanted to be the first one to ask the questions, and i said okay, clearly it was mr. -- i'm not going to bend on that, this is the closing statement and mr. -- he can write every member of the commerce committee a letter. anybody else want to say anything? >> i've spent the last 15 years of my professional career exam

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

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

videos need to include cspan programming, show very points of view and must be -- go to

student cam.org for more information, grab a camera and get started today. >> next on american history, tv and prime time will look at espionage in the united states. first a visit to the cia museum in langley, virginia, to see some of the collection highlights of. then the life a -- after that, we'll hear about german espionage and the efforts to keep america out of world war i, and later some of the american and soviet spies operating during the cold war. now on american artifacts, a visit to the cia museum in arlington, virginia where krurate for tony highly explains the museum's mission of preserving and preventing the agency's history. >> we're standing