admirer of the senator and i would like to thank you for all that you have done not just in the hearing, but throughout your career. i wish you the best. in regard to the directors, they happen to have the same last time in as i do wanted to be at the hearing for a long standing. the hearing was next week or yesterday or even this morning. they would have been able to attend. he would be happy to meet with you in the offices or a future hearing. there could be advantages and disadvantages going last. i'm not going to read from the prepared statement and appreciate that it's a little too long. not only what and this sight set on the baseball player.

they are often taking the nhl that pressures in their time. many of you expect it to be role models. they have done little to assist. in light of this, they have worked we believe our efforts is a success, but it's never ending. it starts with education and we stress for the players beginning at a young age. services are available to all players and all that can be involved with the situation and domestic violence that includes families and girlfriends. i asked staff if it was

appropriate to say that word. trained medical professionals are available for coupling and other services on a 24-hour basis. we have the rookie orientation program which has been in place for two years now with the league. it is based on a model by mlb. the executive director as the executive director. we stressed the training from the league on many subjects including domestic violence. on the subject of discipline, they do give the commissioner to discipline for what we call off ice conduct that includes the situations involved in domestic violence and such discipline goes to an arbitrator who is asked to review whether the discipline imposed was supported

by substantial evidence and proportionate to the gravity of the offense. this right it appeal should encourage the fair and consistent disciplinary policies and of results that can with stand objective groups. the fact that the arbitrator is independent, that is not an employee of the nhl or a representative of the nhl adds considerable credibility and strengthens the perceptions that any penalties are just. i should add as i said the discipline in this area can be complex, particularly when there is interplay between criminal charges or actual criminal charges and proceedings on the workplace. finally as the commissioner said last week in a letter to the house committee, there have been very few incidents that came to light in recent years involving nhl players.

doi not say that to minimize or downplay the issue. obviously it is a very important issue and even if there is one, it is one too many and we need to continue to work until there none. much thank you for holding the hearing and i look forward to answering the questions. >> thank you very much. to make an document, it is very, very difficult if the leadership holds votes at 4:00. for us to have a reasonable hearing. i am trying to get them to postpone the votes for at least a half hour so that all members have a chance to speak and ask questions. it's much too important to let a comb of votes get in the way of it. senator? >> as we discussed, the former

federal judge, you heard ray rice's appeal of the suspension ruled that mr. rice had not misled roger goodell in her 17-page opinion, the judge discusses the meeting between ray rice and roger goodell, stating that and i quote at the time of the meeting, the nfl knew there was a camera in the elevator and thought it was likely there was a video from the camera. various sources including nfl security reported the existence of such a video. rice received this video and discovered it and they never asked rice for the second video. that's from the judge. the question is how did the commissioner not know that there was a second video in the elevator at the time of the june 16th meeting with mr. rice? worry worry with jones's decision and our opinion, i thought it made it clear that

the commissioner first imposing and disciplining and coming back and imposing discipline again was a deficiency in the system. as we read through our opinion letter, she made it obviously if the commissioner had imposed severe discipline on the on set, it would have made it difficult for her to rule any differently. we acknowledged those mistakes. this is all part of the evaluation as they look at the conduct policy. we failed. the commissioner failed to impose a proper discipline in the ray rice case in the beginning. the question is whether or not the second video, how do you not know that? i assume that it was there. ray rice had it. >> senator, the first video. heartless, gutless, despicable. i don't think there was a need

for a second video to impose a proper discipline. we failed in that particular area. the commissioner acknowledged that. our office acknowledged we made a critical mistake. >> what efforts are they making to ensure that all the relevant available evidence is there before making a decision on whether and how to punish a player that is involved in the domestic violence or sexual assault case? >> i will begin with stating having the right people at the table and the right voices to evaluate and investigate these horrific crimes, i thought at the time, we know the right people were not at the table. listening to our experts across the country, we have learned that the right voices, the right discipline, the right process was not in place. we learned from those mistakes and we have begun implementing at minimum having the right

people and the right discussion and the right system. one, by protecting the victims. first and survivors. then secondly, working towards a fair process for firm discipline. per are when might we expect the to conclude? >> at any time. we have been put on notice in our office as mr. mueller gives us a call or he wants to speak to be cooperative. we are expecting that report to come to closure shortly. >> will that be a public report that will detail the results of that investigation? >> i believe so. >> i want to ask a question and this would be of the player's association reps and i will try in the interest of time to give frths an opportunity to ask questions. answer yes or no. a lot of the focus is on finding the right penalty for domestic violence. would you agree that at its

core, the solution will require athletes to take support for their conduct and use the same self discipline that allowed them to excel at sports to renounce and end this ugly violence? to the player responsibility, ms. patterson? >> i would say it's a multifacetted approach that includes personal responsibility, but it also includes medication and counseling and some of the other efforts that miss roberts specifically spoke about, particularly before players come into the league. we certainly acknowledge that accountability for your own actions is important is and significant, but we do have to acknowledge that players ares and brothers and fathers, husbands. we just have to assist in that development. >> yes or no? >> i would say accountability is a critical part of any solution. >> ms. roberts?

>> i would concur with both responses, yes. >> i think players are and expected to be held accountable in many ways. >> thank you. >> thank you. i'm going to ask one question and not a second question. just one question. we will have the second round if we are so lucky. this is directed to ms. barrons and ms. roberts. the policy on domestic violence is a minimum of tep-game suspension for felony violent acts. as i understand the policy, the league does not impose penalties when there is no conviction. that becomes important. many domestic violence cases do not result in conviction because of some of the fact as we have -- the culture of silence and the rest of it, people withdraw and don't press or whatever. too often victims don't cooperate with law enforcement for a variety of reasons. so the charges are mysteriously dropped and defendants will

plead no contest. when i hear no contest, red lights go off in all directions. this has a very different effect. in the last two years, i am aware of six players charged with domestic violence and the league did not impose penalties because there was no convictions. my question is, are you prepared to develop uniform policies to address conduct by players charged with domestic violence, but there no convictions? >> mr. chairman, i think as i submitted to the committee an opinion that the commissioner released about two weeks ago relating to the suspension of one of our players, in that the commissioner acknowledged that we needed to do more in this issue in terms of discipline going forward. both in terms of our due process and not really relying on the criminal justice system. one of the things we learned is

that a number of the members talked about it and certainly senator mccaskill mentioned it. domestic violence has gone for to go under report and under prosecute and under sentenced. we are committed to making sure we are not just relying on the criminal justice system going forward. we are independently investigating charges that might be brought against a player and as such are making sure that the commissioner who does have discretion beyond the ten games thaw mentioned in the collective bargaining agreement does have discretion to impose a suspension that is longer as in the recent case of jeff taylor. they have process for the players and making sure that the suspensions are firm, but fair. >> i would add, senator, that in the existing, there is in fact language that allows the

commissioner in the absence of a conviction. if there is a reasonable basis to conclude that a player has been engaged with the domestic violence and coupling has been ordered and there is a basis to impose discipline. it's in there. having said that, i agree with ms. barrons. we are continuing to have discussions about ways to tweak and improve the system to the extent that there is any absence about the ability to impose fair discipline. >> you are both indicating that you are moving away from the necessity for conviction before action can be taken? >> i am suggesting that there is language that does permit if there is a reasonable basis to conclude that a player engaged in violent conduct including domestic violence subject to investigation. if that is substantiated, there is an ability to exact a punishment. >> exactly. >> thanks for holding this

hearing. also to the witnesses, thank you for taking time. ms. patterson, most of my questions will be directed towards you. "the washington post" reported that the nfl and the player's associations are still at odds. regarding changes to the personal conduct policy and how players discipline is handled. is that accurate? >> i would say yes. that is correct. >> the union is taking the position that a player should have the right to determine. is that also accurate. >> i wouldn't say that is accurate generally. >> can you be more specific? >> well, it's hard with the hypothetical. >> i'm just taking the article. is it true that the union's position is that a player should determine for itself under certain incidents like sexual

assault taking place determine for themselves whether or not they should play. >> i would not say that's accurate. >> what is accurate? >> that we want to have confidence in a process in terms of discipline if an incident does occur. we would like to collectively bargain with the league on how that discipline is applied. >> you are saying that the article in the pausch "washington post" is inaccurate. >> the question that is posed and it sounds narrowly such. i wasn't asked to be a part of it, but that part that you asked me about is inaccurate. >> i'm trying to get to the point as to whether or not the association is saying it's okay to knockout a woman with one punch on wednesday and still suit up for a team on sunday. >> absolutely not. we do not condone domestic violence. i stated that earlier and will keep stating it. what we do is defend players and defend the process. >> was it 12 game suspension

appropriate for knocking out his fiance with one punch in the ray rice case? >> i don't know that that was appropriate. what we think is inappropriate is inconsistent and unfair handling of players and their issues. >> what would be appropriate? you are eluding the question. what would be an appropriate suspension for an individual that knocks out his wife. >> i'm sorry for appearing to elude the questions, but the union is not in the business of applying discipline. we are in the business of representing them you should the law and the bargaining agreement. >> you are either fore stopping sexual assault and domestic abuse and child abuse or you are not. >> right. i am not suggesting we are condoning. >> let me ask you this question. do you believe sexual assault and child abuse are far more

important than the unions issues of collective bargaining? >> i would agree that they are far more important, but that's outside the scope in terms of labor. i agree that issues are more important, yes. >> i have no more questions. >> you have done a very good job on the ones you asked. senator? >> thank you very much. i grew up with professional sports. i think i'm the only senator that has all four teams in the leagues in our state. i'm not competitive. my dad as many of you know is a sports writer and became a general columnist and i would get tickets and get an extra ticket to the game and i would go to watch him when i was 12 and stand outside the locker room and wait for him and he would be the last one out and there would be rather inebriated fans. he is only 5'6", but they would tap him on the back and say

great game. he would always say it was a team effort. i looked at sports that way. i look at it from another way and that is a prosecutor. knowing what it's like when our office took on a difficult case against the late kirby puckett who is an icon in our state. we didn't win that case, but i could understand that culture and how difficult it is to win those cases and the court of law. i appreciate the questions that were asked beyond the courtroom. i also understand what it's like to take on domestic violence cases. mr. vincent in our office we had a poster outside of my door and it was a woman with a band-aid on her nose holding a little boy and the words under it said beat your wife and it's your kid that will go to jail. i so appreciated your personal story and willingness to stop that cycle of violence in your own life. i know how difficults that. thank you very much. my question is really about how

to make sure that these criminal cases move forward. i was disturbed by reports that the teams may be discouraging women that come forward to them, wives or partners of players from going forward to law enforcement. the only way you stop the cycle is not only what i hope you are all doing now with the new approach to the issues as having tough penalties, but you have to make sure people are not discouraged from going forward. i would like to ask this question of the four league representatives that are here and that is, do your teams ever discourage people that come to them, the owners or the coaches from going forward with domestic violence cases to law enforcement and do you have a policy in place and can you control these owners of coaches from doing that to make sure going forward that this does not happen again? i would start with you.

>> we hope that doesn't occur. that is the culture that we have to break as we look at implementing our new policy. we have been talking about personal accountability. we have also been talking about club accountability. we want to make sure the victims and survivors have the proper support. that these women, these children that we can break that silence. that they have a place they can go to. they have support confidentially that they are safe when they go home. we have embedded with our critical response teams in making sure the local support is in place -- >> but i have a very focused question about not stopping people from going forward to law enforcement. not discouraging them from going -- from discouraging them. is there a way to control the coaches and the team owners by saying you cannot do that.

if someone comes forward, you have to engurcourage them to go law enforcement. >> that's something we are educating them on. >> yes, senator, i wholeheartedly agree with you on not discourage iing the victims from coming forward because that would be the worst thing that could happen. i hope that doesn't happen in our support. i know winning games are very important, but to me being a good human being, certainly surpasses that. >> and there a policy in place? >> we are discussing with the players association. >> why would the players association influence whether or not you tell someone to not go forward to law enforcement? >> i misunderstood that. >> i don't think that's a negotiable issue. >> we have general managers meetings, we have owners

meetings and i speak to every manager. it's about doing things the right way and certainly being a human being. >> i appreciate that. i just think you have to think of this different than the collective bargaining issue. >> no question. >> this is a criminal investigation. >> senator, yes, we, in fact, as part of our education efforts are doing enhanced training for our team staff. one of the things we're making very clear is not only are we saying not to discourage r, but we are encouraging and making sure teams are being proactive in the space and our first line is support victims first and we're making that clear. >> i'm unaware of any discouragement and to the contrary we have a system in place where the security department has contacted every local team where if something like that was going on, i hope we'd be hearing about it because it would violate league policy.

>> thank you. >> are you finished? >> okay. just an order of appearance. >> i refer to senator mccaskill. >> i think i beat you in the room. first, let me correct the record on the nba questions about punishment. i have looked at the articles and the sections on counselling for violent misconduct. let me make sure the record is clear. the most a commissioner can do

for violence without a conviction is counselling, isn't that correct? >> no, that's not correct. >> what can the commissioner do besides counselling if there's not a conviction? >> the commissioner has discretion under our collective bargaining agreement, which is the discretion that he used in the suspension of jeff taylor most recently. that discretion and the language refers to the notion that conduct that is detrimental to the league is not necessarily related to a violation or a conviction. >> thank you. i also handled domestic violence cases for many years. started the first domestic violence unit in kansas city. when i began that unit in the '90s, the detectives told me, you know, we really can't do these cases because victims won't come forward. victims refuse to testify, so why are you doing this? why are you making us go through

the motions? i said, we better shut down the homicide unit. and they looked at me blankly. e we don't have victims in homicide cases, but we manage to put a case together based on an investigation as to what occurred, based on witness' testimony, based on physical evidence, based on 911 calls. and i point this out because i think one of the biggest problems you all have at large is this notion that you all can sit back and wait to see if there's, in fact, a criminal prosecution and conviction. and i think you all know fundamentally the pressure that's brought to bare from the moment an arrest is made or from the moment the team finds out because many times you all know you have a lot of off duty police officers that are huge fans and they work for you all.

and when they find out one of you are in trouble, i know this for a fact, i got the call that car carter was involved in wes port. and i heard about what i should or shouldn't do. before i had even heard from the police department, i heard from the team. . so what we really have to do here is look to see what you are doing independently to investigate these cases. and independently determine what the facts are. because that's how the nfl got in trouble. you didn't see it, roger goodell didn't see it as his responsibility to ask the question, is there another tape and i need to see it before we do punishment. there was not a process in place. let me just give you one example. i think we should say for the record that major league baseball commissioner has never sanctioned an mlb player for

domestic violence. never in 22 years. now teams have. i want to fwo through one example. francisco rodriguez. by the way, i found all this just googling around on my ipad last night preparing for this hearing. this wasn't prepared by my staff. anybody could do this that looked into rodriguez's record that is written in pribt. in 2005 based on sworn court testimony he put a young lady by the name of diane penya, he hit her so hard she was hospitalized in venezuela. he quince vinced her to move to the united states with him and he assaulted her father at the mets stadium pulling him out of the family lounge. at the time carlos belle tron said this is bad, you need to keep it it at home.

he was prosecuted for that. he had an order of protection entered to not contact the young lady or her father. he violated those orders of protection. this is in 2010. violated those orders of protection, was convicted of the assault of her father and given one year anger management. he then goes on to the milwaukee brewers and in 2012 he's arrested, a 911 call at 2:40 in the morning and his girlfriend is huddled in a closet at their home and tells everyone what has occurred, excuse me, that's my phone. tells everyone what has occurred, they arrest him, there's staff there at the home who is also from venezuela. so what happens? the case is not prosecuted because guess where the victim and the housekeeper went? to venezuela.

he then becomes a free agent and guess where he is back in 2014, he's back at milwaukee pitching and pitches in the all-star game. and nothing has ever happened to him in terms of baseball. now i know i have taken all my time, but i wanted to get that story out there. what i would like for the record and i'm going to stick around for another round if the chairman is willing to do it, because i want to know from each of you how serious is your league about an independent investigation into the facts or how content are you to sit back and go, well, maybe she won't go through with it. maybe she won't come forward. if there's not a conviction, we're off the hook. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator mccaskill. the votes start at 4:10. >> my question is for mr. vincent. we know commissioner goodell recently changed the nfl's

domestic violence policy to require a six-game suspension. after he changed that policy, mr. goodell personally called ray rice. what was the consent of that conversation? >> i wasn't aware of him calling mr. rice. >> this has been widely reported and my understanding is that it was to reassure him that this would be applied perspectively rather than retroactively. and you're not aware of this? >> no, sir. >> i'd like to offer these questions and you can get back to the committee. my question to you about that is is this normal? does the league consider this appropriate? does the commissioner, as a general proposition, interact directly with player who is are subject to disciplinary proceedings, or was this a one off? i think it goes to the culture that senator heller spoke of in

his opening statement. i found it odd and i found nothing in your policies and procedures that would indicate that it was appropriate for the commissioner of the football league to call an individual player to reassure him that everything was just fine. >> senator, i will investigate that and get any information back to you. >> thank you. the nfl's handling of domestic violence is illogical in my opinion, especially when you look at the strict treatment of athlete who is violate the drug policy. take josh gordon. mr. gordon was suspended for an entire season for testing positive for marijuana during the off season. this imbalanced treatment happens all the time. espn analyzed cases of players found guilty of domestic violence between 2000 and 2014. the analysis showed in 88% of the cases the nfl suspended

players for only one game or not at all for domestic violence while in comparison an 82% of substance abuse cases the nfl handed out suspensions of four games or more. does the league consider that to be an inconsistency that has to be corrected? >> yes, sir, senator, and that's one of the things we have been looking at, have been evaluated. i think now our staffers, the commissioner, when you learn the complexities and the severity of child abuse, domestic violence and sexual assault, we felt we failed in that area to punish, to hold one accountable. i know recently in the players association most recent proposal, and this is one of the complexities that we have, when is it the appropriate time to take someone off the field. you need a conviction. we strongly disagree with that. we disagree there needs to be a felony or conviction to remove someone off the field.

>> where are the owners in all of this? we have sort of touched upon this issue, but in particular with the nfl, a lot of the leverage is with the individual teams and the difficulty is within the individual teams and the teams aren't represented, if i'm not mistaken, at this table. i'm wondering what leverage you think the nfl can exercise with respect to its interactions with the owners because certainly in the ray rice case, the problem was system wide, but it was in particular with the baltimore ravens as an organization, and i'm wondering how those interactions are going. others are referring to the collective bargaining process. that's part of it, but really a lot of the challenges that the financial incentives of the owners are to get the player u back on the field and figure that the fans will forgive them in the end. >> yes, and our last two owners meetings, we have one coming in the next two weeks, it's been the focus of our discussion, some uniformity to make sure we

are consistent with penalty process and how we see. >> so what leverage are you prepared to exercise in your exercise actions with the owners because i understand that by revenue rgs the owners are bigger than the league, and i'm wondering what you're prepared to do to try to get the owners to participate in this new system of accountability. >> we're looking at all options. one of the things when we start talking about club accountability, maybe the removal of draft picks. you have to do things to really hit the club, to hold the clubs accountab accountable, but aum things are on the table. we're making sure everyone is held accountable, the player, the staff, local law enforcement working with the team as well as the clubs themselves. >> thank you very much. >> i'm going to go vote. it has not been called yet.

who's next? >> to educate young people. proactive approaches to end iin the cycle of domestic violence like your foundation are critical so thank you for taking that on. can you tell us about the experience with your foundation and what strategy have you found to be most effective in preventing domestic violence before it starts and what can be incorporated from your foundation into the leagues? >> i just feel our safe at home foundation when we first started the foundation we were deciding on which way to approach. because growing up in that environment, i really didn't find out until later on in life that a lot of my insecurities came from what was going on in my home when my dad was abusing

my mom. and having been a child growing up that way, i was lucky, i got to play baseball so i had a place to hide. not a lot of youngsters are that lucky. i went to a middle school to start talking to youngsters not about baseball, i said we'll talk about baseball in a minute, but i want to explain this camera crew behind me because we were going to have our first gala. in speaking to the youngsters about what was going on in my home, i looked out there and six or seven of them are shake iing their heads like this. so the most important thing shs we have a level of counsel in our rooms. we named it after my mom. what we do is let the kids know that first of all it's not their fault and they are not the only ones going through this. i was embarrassed to share it with anybody. and we have had a number -- as i said earlier, close to 50,000 youngsters that have come through our programs. we have pure leadership

programs, we just don't reach enough kids. that's our issue for me. i don't believe they are bad kids. i think kids do bad things. and just from my experience with the attorney generals task force going around and listening to so many different gang members, tribal communities, you realize how many layers of domestic violence our violence period that there are and what we try to do with these youngsters that come through our program is to make them think that their future and make them understand their future is out there. it's not like when they leave school and they are sort of helpless just go with the first strong personality they see. we educate them to the point of making them feel pretty good about themselves. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

one thing i wanted to note up front is that all of you are here, we're appreciative you're here today testifying, but commissioner goodell, commissioner silver, commissioner betman, they were all asked to be here and leadership does start at the top. and i do think that it's pretty convenient that none of them were able to appear today. and it does say something about where does the level of commitment come? because i think they should all be here today, and while i'm appreciative that you have been willing to appear in their stead, i think it does say something about how big a commitment is there going to be on this and that does need to lead to the owners as well who have to take responsibility for what happens here. i want to associate myselves with the statements from senator

mccaskill. you need to establish an investigative process for these cases that do not result in criminal conviction. and this is imperative because you have to hold yourselves to a higher standard and the bottom line is that in many of these cases, victims are not going to come forward because of the financial pressure that they face, the social pressure that they face and the terror that they face. but that does not alleviate your responsibility to get the facts, to look at the evidence, and to still impose discipline even if a victim is too terrified to come forward. in the same regard, i wanted to follow up on senator's statements on those discouraged to come forward.

senator mccass sill said one was flown to another country. i believe that as you look at your policies, the sanctions should be as severe for this type of witness tampering as it should be for the underlying violent acts. because that's what this is, witness tampering. and that, if you put those sanctions in place, will make very clear that if someone is a victim of sexual violence that neither the coaches nor the players, nor anyone else should be interfering with their ability to come forward or sbeer fe interfering with the way they need to feel safe. i wanted to ask specifically a follow-up question on an issue. as i look to you, ms. roberts

and ms. patterson, one of the things i'm concerned about as i list listened to the testimony today that in terms of the players side of this, that they not hide behind the collective bargaining process or agreement when it comes to basic responsibility for not kmilting crimes. because this is what they are, crimes. crimes of violence against women, sexual violence against women or as we have seen in some instances violence against childr children. and so o as i look at -- i want to use an example, ms. roberts, the recent situation of the imposition of discipline against jeff taylor on the schacharlott hornet player. i understand he received 24-game suspension for a conviction for domestic violence for beating a girlfriend. and what i saw was the union's

complaint that that suspension was excessive. as i understand it, the player himself has accepted this suspension. i have to say your response or the union's response to say that this was excessive, to me, highlights the problem that we're facing. and it's disgusting to me that you would say that that's excessive. what do we do in those situations? why do you believe that was excessive? and if we're going to get at this issue, this has to be the players and the responsibility of the officials in the league and the owners and everyone has to have a hand at this. so i'd like to know what you were thinking or not you particularly, but the union. >> i'm happy to answer your question. let me be clear. the players association was not for one second suggesting that some punishment was not

warranted. of course, it was warranted and we expected the commissioner to impose punishment and he did. our position was simply that we have a cba, and we have a disagreement about this, that had precedent to indicate that was an excessive punishment. the commissioner when he imposed the punishment acknowledge d it was a significant departure from prior punishments. so again, our position was that the cba required us to collectively bargain if there was going to be imposition of punishment that belined the cba. having said that, the player was never discouraged from accepting responsibility. it was his right to grieve or not to grieve. he chose not to grieve. i said to him to his face and behind his back and i'll say it again, we absolutely endorse his decision to take responsibility for what he did and the matter has been closed. my only point, senator, is this. while we all agree, and we do all agree, that this is very serious business, and we need to take it seriously, we don't believe that e we need to, at

the same time, abandon due process. and that's the only point. that doesn't mean 24 games may not be appropriate. it meant within the cba, it did go respobeyond the scope. i don't want you, senator, or anyone to assume that the national basketball players association does not take this seriously. we do. i have spent the last two weeks visiting with 9 of my 30 teams. i intend to see the rest of them in the next few months. i make clear to them that we will not tolerate this kind of kulkt. it's not the nfl problem. it's our problem as well. i don't want our position on the jeff taylor matter to confuse our commitment to making sure that this thing goes away. my final point is this. >> i'm sorry, your time is over. >> then i guess i won't. >> senator blumenthal is next. i'm going to go vote. i'll be back and let's just work

it out. we have to keep it going. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you for having this hearing. i want to join in expressing my admiration for your proceeding in spite of the obstacles that have been raised. we have some sports heroes here and we have some professional legal heroes and i'm grate tofl each of you for coming to talk to us today. but i want u to talk about the people who are not here, the owners. and in a certain sense, they are the bosses. they are going to be the ones who make the ultimate decision. let's just talk the realities here and the financial reality is that words and promises are a lot more difficult than action. and i'm looking for a way to impose accountability beyond a hearing, beyond negotiations and accountability that means something in dollars and cents.

right now, the professional leagues represented here are not only the object of public scrutiny, they are the beneficiary of huge benefits in the form of tax breaks, subsidies for teams and stadiums, as well as chief among them, the antitrust exemption. today i am proposing that we end the blank check to the leagues, the antitrust exemption that has enabled the leagues to successfully negotiate together as no other corporations in the united states would be permitted to do under an antitrust law, for literally billions of dollars. that antitrust exemption should be contingent on doing the right thing, really acting, not only talking about acting, but doing it. by acting, i mean investigating comprehensively and aggressiv y

aggressively, imposing sanctions as a consequence of that investigation, adopting a due process that has been so sorely lacking and mr. vincent is the reason why the league was so embarrassed because there was no process and maybe most important looking forward and really it hasn't been mentioned here, aid to the organizations and groups that provide assistance to the survivors and victims of domestic violence within your leagues, in your families and across the united states. i want to thank mr. torrey for his example, because i think men have a vital role, which is the reason why your players can be such role models, such positive role models for others and why the leagues can be such positive role models in providing tangible financial assistance,

which you have not yet done for all the talk here to the advocacy groups and organizations that are so pivotal in fighting dmes you can violence. . so i'm asking for a commitment that you will support this accountability and that you will support the groups that assist victims and survivors. in the interest of time, i'm just going to ask is there anyone here who would not make that commitment? by the absence of a response, i'm going to assume that you would agree with me that that kind of commitment is important and necessary. you've begun doing it, but i'm not asking you to continue what you have done, but for a substantial increase in that assistance to the hot lines and the shelters and all the service groups, and i hope that you will

all join in that commitment. let me ask, mr. vincent, what is the time line for you for the league to adopt a process for imposing punishment within the nfl? >> the commissioner had stated in his earlier press conference that he would like to have a new policy in place by the super bowl. that would be the latest. >> and what is the process that will provide for owners to approve that process? >> next week we actually have our owners meeting where we will begin to talk about some of the things that we have learned. we heard much about the process, accountability, so we're hoping to have within the next two weeks a real clarity and a position on where we are as far as a firm process, a consistent and clear process moving forward. >> the bill that i have proposed

would sunset ts professional sports league antitrust agreements under the 1961 sports broadcasting act and the comparable provisions for the mlb one year after the bill's enactment. it would authorize a commission to congress regarding the league's behavior and it would allow congress to reauthorize exemptions every five years based in, in part, on commit me mentes to aid public service organizations. how much is the nfl willing to commit to aid those organizations? >> well, we have made substantial commitments. we made five years to the domestic violence hot line. >> what is the amount of those commitments? >> i think it's $4 to $5 million a year. >> you have made a commitment to the -- >> national domestic violence hot line. >> would you be willing to make commitments of the same or comparable size to other organizations that do similar kinds of work? >> i cannot make that commitment

today. >> who can make that commitment? >> i want to make sure we're trying to get the rest of the members in, so your time is expired. >> who can make that commitment? >> that's something we discuss with our entire team. who are those leading organizations, the organizations at grass root level that need the support to support our families, to support nfl personnel. so that's a collective decision that was made for us to support the national domestic violence hot line and the national sexual assault resource center. >> thank you very much. >> senator booker? >> i just want to thank the ranking member for we should be revisiting this after the new year when i assume you'll be chairperson. the issue of accountability keeps coming up only can be held by this body should we have the chance to revisit this and see the progress that's going to be made. i'm going to go quickly. you obviously mr. vincent are

saying that you're seeking to held fund and a lot of the charity you numerated in your opening statement was about funding and supporting prevention, treatment, and the like. and that's true you see those organizations often need more resources spp that correct? >> yes, sir. >> real quick, the major league baseball does not have a tax exempt status, is that correct? >> the actual league. >> right. >> does that hurt your financial bottom line? >> i don't think so. >> and so i don't think so either. >> i think we're doing well. >>. the congressional budget office says if we remove those teams, those leagues unlike major league baseball, there's a number of leagues including the nfl that have a tax exempt status. the budget office says if we prove that status it would yield millions of dollars a year annually back to taxpayers. and so my question is o to you,

understanding that these organizations need more funding, why does the nfl need a tax exempt status when we could be redirecting the money to domestic violence prevention programs? >> what i would say, let me make it clear. all league jen -- >> you don't have to numerate that. i'm familiar with individual teams revenues. i'm asking you right now, i have to justify to my constituents why the nfl is multibillion dollar organization has tax exempt status. do you believe that unlike -- that just like the major league baseball, do you believe you should have tax exempt status? >> we're ran just like a trade association, very similar. >> so you think you should continue to enjoy a tax exempt status? >> it's not to enjoy. today that's how we're currently

ran. our clubs, again, all revenues taxed. senator, i saw your proposal. and i do believe that when we combine both public and private resources, we could fund some of the things in your proposal. this is how we both collectively, privately and public resources, we can make a difference in the yarp of domestic violence, sexual assault and child abuse. >> i appreciate that and the charity. my simple point is our professional leagues that enjoy as the senator just said, exemptions to a lot of laws and enjoy tax exempt status should not enjoy a tax exempt status. where that money that the congressional budget office could save taxpayers millions of dollars annually. that could be used to invest in programs that we have to rely on the charity of the nfl.

i don't think that's adequate. let me shift gears real quick. i feel very fortunate having played college football to have a lot of friends that have played in the nfl, played in the nba, and some friends that are still in the nfl and nba. and i have been described to me that resources is dazzle ling when they let the players know we're here for you. . if you're stuck at a club and can't get a ride, the nfl is there for you. you can call. and the nba, this i know. thank you for shaking your head. and so one of concerns i have when it comes to calling that team for issues of domestic violence that often the incentive, from my experience and what i know about my friends that are players, and i u only know the nba and nfl players, that the objective is to keep that player out of the news, to

keep issues quiet and to me that works against ultimately what the goal is when it comes to domestic violence which is bringing light and attention to a problem. as opposed to creating an environment where it's swept under the rug. one of the big concerns i have is this rapid response that clearly we see that i know about personally that the response doesn't have two different objectives that are contrary to actually dealing with the problem that might be encountered. and i just like in the second that i have left, if you could give me assurances that what i know to be the case from friends who have played and are playing in the nfl and nba, that this system will be changed in way that puts the victim's needs and concerns ahead of that player's ability to remain on the field

and the corporate interests that exist to keep that player being productive. i'd like both nba and nfl representatives to do so and i'm done. >> that is at the core of what we're talking about, what we have been evaluating is to make sure the victims and survivors have the support that they need. we recognize that we have to break the culture of silence. the programs that you mention, the last four years, that was my sole responsibility. player programs and services. it's a shared responsibility. those programs are put in place in collaboration with the players association to assist families. we want to encourage the families to seek out proper help, proper assistance. i can assure you moving forward in the area of domestic violence, assault and child abuse that we want to make sure that we break that silence that the victims and survivors are safe. >> i'll make the same assurance. part of our training and education program that we're roling out with our teams and

have shared at the highest levels is to make sure that this is not something that is discouraged but encouraged both for people to get help, but also to report behavior that's in violation of certainly of any criminal law and any violation of the nba's codes of conduct. >> and just return to the chair, that's the accountability e we need to make sure these systems are changing. i think it's ridiculous that the nfl and other sports teams enjoys tax exempt status. >> thank you, senator booker. thank you for emphasizing that point because i won't have time for questions. i will just submit some questions for the record, but that particular issue is of interest to me and obviously the fact that the baseball oh, and basketball association don't enjoy the status and the nfl continues it. my main point is we saw this

case with donald sterling. and we saw immediate and swift action. in fact, michael jordan praised the nba saying a powerful message was sent that there can be zero tolerance. it's clear that in some cases these organizations can act swiftly u and do act swiftly. the question is in this issue of domestic violence why you don't. i think that what we're hearing from many of my colleagues today is what the is the culture within these organizations that prevent it from acting as swiftly as was in the case of donald sterling. so i'm going to submit some questions for the record, but i also, too, want to be on record that the nfl, i'm hearing from my constituents as i have raised this issue related to what is a very hateful name in negotiation with the nfl, but my constituents now are just flabbergasted that the nfl

continues to enjoy a tax exempt status. for what purpose? and yet on these issues of having a name of hatred for a team and then having these cases of domestic violence to say nothing of the incidents of what happened with players, the nfl is not showing the leadership that i believe it should. it certainly doesn't deserve the tax exempt status. i'm going to submit questions for the record and i want to thank my colleague for her leadership on this issue. . and certainly want to work with her in her role as previously understanding these issues from a perspective of how we can get some cultural issues engrained into these institutions. i want to thank you. >> i'm going to state on the record that i'm going to miss a vote. i think i would vote aye on the

nominee and the record should reflect that. but ooum going to skip that because the questions that need to be asked here in the long-term can have more impact on a problem that's pervasive and important than one more vote in a confirmation that's going to occur with or without my vote. i'm going to stick around. >> thank you, madame chair. thank you all for being here. i'm going to limit my comments to the national football league. all of you, domestic violence is important. i would have played in the nfl had it not been for my lack of size, speed and talent. that was my goal. i want to begin by saying, mr. vincent, i have the highest respect for you. we have a lot of friends in common. your representation among many in league circles is high as anyone i have ever heard. i remember drafting you in 1992 and sorry to see you leave in

'94. in any event, i appreciate your service at both as a player for the nfl and now for the league. i do want to make two points about the nfl that are important and ask you this question. the nfl doesn't just play for three hours on sunday. the nfl is a 24/7 endeavor that wants americans toed admire the people they put on the field. the league has established a

contract with one of the providers and want them to wear those. this is an ongoing endeavor. it wants young people to look up to these athletes, and they do. being involved in youth football, this is very sad, but it is true in some instances. some of the only positive male role models that many young americans today have happen to be the professional athletes they'd see on sundays or at nights on television. this is a sport that's not just played three hours at a time. it has deep impacts throughout society. there are millions of young americans who look up to these players and whatever happens or does not happen with them has a deep impact on them. buzz pa for many of them, it's the only male role model they have in their u lives in the case where is people go wrong. and that's why the ray rice case so interested me. because the situation with mr. rice involved someone that my son actually personally admired.

my sons came to admire ray rice because one of my sons kind of plays a hybrid running back position. he's not the tallest kid on the team, but he's very quick. he looked for someone on the national football league who had the same attributes and that was ray rice. he really looked up to him. a few weeks ago he wanted to know why ray rice wasn't playing. and i had to explain. the impact of that was extraordinary. what happened or didn't happen with him had an impact on him and other young people across america because it served as an example of what happens in society and in life when someone does the wrong thing. that's why i'm so interested in that case. my understanding from the testimony i watched on television a few minutes ago is that you stated that the commissioner nor the league had seen the video but it didn't need to because everything that. is that correct?

>> yes. if i can, senator, again, the commission commissioner had stated he had not yet seen the video and as i mentioned earlier, i think any one of us who had witnessed that saw that despicable act. >> the point is that mr. rice, whatever we saw on the video, he basically had already told the commissioner that whatever that video showed, he admitted to. is that correct? >> yes. >> so basically not having seen the video is the same as having seen it in this instance. that's what you have said here today. you didn't need to see the video because they already knew what happened. >> as i acknowledged in the beginning, we made a mistake. >> i'm trying to understand the process by which, and you may have explained this already, what is the process? i know what would have happened if he tested for marijuana. i know what would have happened if he tested positive for

steroids. what is -- is this a completely arbitrary process based on how he feels or is there are a set model in place for what an action equals, an admitted action. there was not a dispute. he admitted that what he did and described it, to an extent that you didn't need to see the video. what was the criteria used to lay out punishment? >> we failed to impose proper discipline. >> i wanted to know what is the process in place moving forward i suppose as well, but at the time, what was the process if someone came forward, admitted they punched their fiance in the face in an elevator, by what measure did the commissioner decide? why three games instead of ten? was it fully just arbitrary or

was there something he looked to? >> he looked back to some of the past cases when he's actually tried to impose harsher discipline. it was appealed and knocked down. that shows the severity of what we know about these crimes. he went back and -- >> appealed to an arbitrator? >> the players association appeals those -- appealed that offense. the discipline that was handed out in the past was appealed and knocked down. >> so your testimony that if a player comes forward and says to the league, i just punched my fiance in the face and knocked her out and the commissioner decides to spend him for a year, the players union will file an appeal because one year is too long for someone that just punched their fiance? >>. the players association has that ability. >> and they have been successful? >> that's one of our -- that's where we have our challenge.

>> what's the criteria now? >> that's what we're developing. to see the case, to hear the case. right now understanding and learning the complexities that are associated has been talked earlier about having internal investigations or parallel investigations with law enforcement, but we're looking at again severe discipline, our august 28th letter to both the owners and also the players, the commissioner spelled out very clearly u first. offense, a minimum of six games. give him the ability to impose more severe punishment. >> my time is up. >> thank you very much. first, i wanted to comment. i have never seen so many women representing major league sports in this country at a moment of high u profile importance for the leagues. i think it's a good thing.

i think it's terrific, and i would tell all of you to go back to the organizations you represent and say that you need to be at the table more often, not less often. but i don't think i ever recall seeing this many women representing professional sports at a moment like this in our country's history, so i wanted to make note of that. i had a question to the national hockey league. in reading about the suspension of the player that occurred recently, i think he's a defenseman for the kings. i won't try to pronounce his name. i noticed in the article that the team was complaining because his salary was going to continue to count against the salary cap while he was punished. i found that interesting because it creates a financial incentive for the team to not punish. so my question to you, yes or no, does the league favor removing a salary -- counting

against the salary cap during a time of suspension? >> when suspension was imposed, it was determined by the league office that the suspension should be with pay, so while the team continues to pay the player, that money counts against the team's salary cap. subsequently, we reached an agreement with the union to change the treatment for the team's perspective for a host of conditions so that it's no longer counting against the cap. >> so are you saying, and is this true with all of you that have caps, that when someone is suspended for misconduct with pay that that pay counts against the salary cap so the team is being financially punished for doing the right thing? >> this wasn't dis plin imposed by the team, it was imposed by the league. so the team doesn't have an incentive one way or the other to act or not act.

>> but the team could impose it and wouldn't it still count against their salary cap? >> only if they were choosing to pay the player during the discipline. >> okay. well, is that true with the other leagues? if someone is suspended with pay, does that count against salary caps? >> we just had our last two when we look at the adrian peterson and greg hardy, they were put on the commissioner's exempt list, the team was penalized. there's a salary cap. so the team is actually being punished because that is a cap hit. >> okay. well, i think you all ought to look at that. you need to remove every disincentive there is to punish players who have bad conduct. if a team is going to have money count against the salary cap even when the player is not playing, that's going to weigh

in favor of a much shorter suspension for the team imposed discipline. i will follow up on that. do any of you have a process in place now to independently investigate the facts? >> yes, senator, i'll answer that question. as we talked about with the recent case involving the player jeffrey taylor, we immediately commenced an independent investigation, retained two outside counsel, including two former prosecutors, one of whom had extensive history in dealing with the kmooesic violence. >> do you have an independent? >> under the cba, we do. >> your own investigators? they are pulling records, pulling 911 tapes, all of that? >> yes, we have an internal process for conducting investigations on all misconduct. >> i can't let the hearing be over. i don't know if they put you hear because they know how much all of us adore you, but as you noticed -- >> i was fired.

>> that always happens after you leave, the affection resurfaces. i want to get that in as a huge cardinal fan, you were a huge part of our organization in many wa ways. does mlb have an independent investigation process? >> yes, we do. it's not my department, but we do have a department of investigation. >> i would like to know what happened on the investigation on the rodriguez case. i would like to know what the outcome of that investigation was. i would like to know if they asked mr. rodriguez if he paid the plane ticket for the victim and the witness to go back to venezuela. >> i would have to get that information. >> thank you. does the nfl have its own independent investigation? >> yes, ma'am, with our internal security department. >> how many of you, yes or no, have an independent program for just wives and significant others where the players are not allowed to attend? whether it is a confidential,

here are the issues you're going to face, here are phone numbers you can call if you're in financial stress, here are phone numbers you can call if you've been abused, how many of you have an independent program like that for spouses and significant others? >> we do in the nfl. >> mlb? >> some teams have them. uniformly, we don't all have them, but it's something we're developing. >> i'll have more questions on that. >> yes, i think as michelle roberts explained earlier, we in the players association have been meeting with our family organizations to determine the best way to provide resources going forward. >> you don't have an independent one now? >> no. >> some of the articles were saying, there was no place for us to go. the teams weren't reaching out to us.

it was all about the playe. >> our program extends to the players' families and our doctors have been accessed by players' spouses. >> do you have an independent program for initiation into the league? an independent program for the spouse of the player? >> to the extent they exist they would exist at the team level. >> i would like to have your league look at whether there should be a policy that's required. what about mandating reporting to law enforcement? do any of you have a policy at the league level that a coach is required or an assistant, any team personnel is required that they learn of conduct by a player that is illegal in terms of a felony assault or any kind of assault that you are required to report that to law enforcement? >> yes, ma'am, we have that in place. >> so right now if a coach, if a player calls his coach and says,

i was drunk, got in a fight with my wife, popped her in the face, i just left the house, she's called 911. when he calls that coach, is that coach then required to pick up the phone and call the police? >> that coach is required to do so, yes, ma'am. >> that is a coach ever failed to do that? how long have you had that policy? >> it's been in place for some time now. i can't tell you the number of years, but he is required to call. >> i would luk to know how many times coaches have called. that's a question i'll have for the record. i don't have time to ask all of you that, but i will for the record. i think you get my drift listen, i think all of you are terrific people and want to do the right thing. but you've got to understand that the status quo is not acceptable. that turning the other way and thinking that this problem is being handled by these players and their families out of the

light, many, many, many families are suffering. and i think you all know that in your hearts. so i'm going to keep following up. there will be more accountability in the future and i'll have a number of questions for the record and thank you for being here. i will turn the hearing over to mr. rubio for more questions. if you finish your questions and senator rockefeller is not here, you need to recess the hearing because he is coming back? no, you can gavel out. i am going to go vote now. thank you. >> i won't keep you, but i wanted to give you the opportunity to respond. in his answer to my question outlined the role the nfl played in the past in defending players accused of domestic violence and other infractions. what's the role if a player -- i wanted to lay the groundwork in mr. rice's story. he game forward and admitted to the facts to such an extent that we have heard here today that the league didn't even need to see the video to know what

happened. they learned nothing new from the video they didn't already know. in a case like that, what is the nfl's role in supporting the player or what role do they play in that process? >> first of all, the players have the option to have us in attendance if they have a meeting or conversation with the commissioner, so we support them in that way. if a player chooses to grieve or appeal after a discipline has been handed down such as in the ray rice case, we do prepare that appeal and represent the player on appeal. i think it's worth noting for the record, under the personal conduct policy, that appeal goes back to the commissioner for his review of his own decision. so that is what was different in the ray rice case because we fought for neutral ash trarbitr. >> so when these instances in the past where mr. vincent outlined the reality that in the past -- his testimony was that the commissioner felt limited by the punishment he could apply to

mr. rice because of previous instances where he had instituted a punishment and had had been successfully appealed. who are those instances successfully appealed to? or maybe you know the cases that you were referring to when you outlined that in your testimony? >> the one that comes to mind is the brandon marshal. >> the one with the instance down in south florida with his wife? >> yes, sir. and the suspension that was imposed was three games. it was appealed and knocked down to two. >> that suspension was appealed to an independent arbitrator? >> no, back to the commissioner. >> so the commissioner lowered his own decision? >> it was actually appealed -- the pa appealed it and the arbitrator knocked it down to two games. >> so based on the brandon marshal incident, which as i

recollect, an instance where his wife was arrested in that case because he had been stabbed in the stomach with a bottle. she was the one that was arsed in that case although the facts now have although the facts hav turned out to be something different and he has clearly stated that she was not at fault, but in that case the commissioner's punishment was three games but on appeal, the independent arbitrator lowered it to two games. >> i wasn't involved in the ray rice situation. >> okay. what is it that the nfl pa looks at when it makes these appeals? what are the grounds for an appeal. does the nfl pa have a criteria where they think that you have gone too far in punishing a player because they punch their fiance in the face? >> we don't have criteria. first we have to see what the player wants to do.

if the player wants to appeal, we have a duty to do so. we represent him in that appeal and we move forward in the rice case, it wasn't a matter of the length of the suspension, it was the arbitrariness of the second suspension. we felt that mr. rice was in a double jeopardy situation because there was no new evidence that had eemerged. i hate to say that it is case by case. >> he had already received one suspension and when the video came out and the world saw, they added an additional suspension. i understand that. if god forbid we awaken to a new ray rice type case and a player decides to appeal, at that point the nfl pa has the same obviously gon obligations a lawyer would to a

client? >> that's correct. >> what we don't have is an established precedent where we know there is an appropriate suspension that is unappealable. we don't have that set yet? >> that's exactly what we're working on is a criteria and the commissioner spelled that out in his august 28 letter, a minimum with aggravating factors that would allow him to impose more harsh and severe discipline. >> i would just like to say to some of the earlier points, we would like that policy to be collectively bargained. we know what happens if a player has marijuana in his system or we know what happens basically if there is a drug policy violation and this is one of the reasons why. because neither one of us could give you criteria, that's why we need to have this bargained. >> there are players that because they have used performance enhancing drugs, in

some instances, cold medicine that they took without documenting appropriately, they are suspended for more games than mr. rice was. but i do want you to know and the nfl centric nature of it, the take away from today's hearing to be clear, i think is going be talked about in the days to come and for mr. vincent, something the league is going to have to deal with is the fact that your statement here today that the commissioner didn't need to see the video because he already knew what had happened. i know many of my colleagues are going to be concerned about that statement as well because i think some of the perception early on was and i was under this perception that mr. rice had not been accurate and honest with the league about what he had done but in fact today the testimony has been that the league fully understood what he had done because there is nothing that we see in that sid owe ha he had not already told

people about and despite that the sentence or punishment that was handed down was so limited. you -- the league admits that the punishment was not strong enough but i do think it's going to be problematic. >> let me be sure that i am accurate. no one -- the commissioner stated he had not seen the second video. he acknowledged his mistakes on not handing out the proper discipline on the initial round. >> no, i understand. and i guess my point on that is your statement is he didn't need to see the video because he already knew what had happened. >> that's my opinion. and i think that's the general public's opinion. >> all right. i appreciate all of you being here today. i know it's been a long hearing. do we have a script for the comments after the question? the record will be open for two weeks and with that the hearing is adjourned.

>> from capitol hill we are going live to the national institutes of health. president obama is speaking about ebola vaccines. >> secretary to francis collins, tony, your teams, and to all of you, thanks so much for welcoming me here today. it is wonderful to be back to america's laboratory. even if i don't always understand what you're doing. last year i welcomed francis and some of you to the white house to launch our great initiative to unlock the mysteries of the mind and pursue new cures for

disease. and francis promoted me at the time to scientist in chief. which made me very proud although i sort of felt guilty that i hadn't studied more chemistry. but, the work you do here is remarkable. i got a fascinating tour of your vaccine research center. i have to say i was very impressed with how you can clone a virus gene into a vaccine and then subject it to electro-phoresis and pipette the samples and run it through the most advanced multiflow sintometer. [ applause ]

it was impressive. i have been tinkering around the white house setting up a similar system. we use it for brewing beer, but it works well for your work also. now, the last time i was here at nih, early in my presidency, i came to announce an historic boost in funding for biomedical research. because part of american leadership in the world, one of the things that has always marked us as exceptional, is our leadership in science and our leadership in research. and here at nih, you have always been at the forefront of ground breaking innovations. you have helped pioneer new treatments from cancer to heart disease to hiv aids.

as a consequence you have helped not just americans but people around the world live longer fuller lives. you have saved countless lives in every corner of the globe. and so to francis and tony and all your directors and staff and the researchers that you fund across the country and around the globe, you deserve great thanks for your leadership, your service, and your patriotism and your life-saving work. and that brings me back to today. this past summer, as ebola spread in west africa, i told my team that fighting this disease had to be a national security priority, and a priority across agencies and across our government. i realize that here in the united states, some of the attention has shifted away recently. that's sort of how our attention spans work sometimes.

ebola is not leading the news right now. but i wanted to come here because every day we are focused on keeping the american people safe. every day the nih is at the forefront of this mission. nih personnel have volunteered and deployed to west africa. some have served in medical labs testing for ebola. some of your clinicians have deployed to care for health care workers who got infected in the line of duty. winina needed treatment. tony and his team stepped up, and you were ready. you manned shifts around the clock day and night. you remembered training. you displayed great skill and professionalism. you reminded the world that it is possible to treat ebola patients safely and effectively without endangering yourselves or others and all of that has

made an enormous difference. like a lot of americans, i know you fell in love with nina. she was so sweet with optimism and sense of service, and reminded us, she reminded us of the incredible sacrifices that our tireless nurses make every day and we could never thank them enough. i know tony thanks nina for teaching him how to face time. and she was released ebola free, i was proud to welcome nina to the oval office and give her a big hug. she is now back home in texas recovering and getting stronger. throughout this ordeal i put my trust in god and my medical team. we thank everyone on her team at the nih clinical center who delivered such remarkable care to nina. the work that you have done has continued even as the cameras have gone elsewhere. and the urgency remains because

if we. >> going to actually solve this problem for ourselves, we have to solve it in west africa as well. one of the great virtues of what you have done here at nih is reminded people that science matters. and that science works. it's not always going to be immediate. sometimes it's going to be it rative and there will be trials and errors and false starts and blind alleys, but the basic concept of subjecting high po is to tests, seeing if they work and being able to document them and the basic concept of science and making judgment on the basis of evidence, that's what's most

needed during difficult challenging moments like the ones we had this summer and the ones we continue to have in west africa. so last week just in time for thanksgiving, nih and your partners gave us something new to be thankful for. that was news of the first successful step, completion of the phase one clinical trials of a potential ebola vaccine. and on my tour just now, dr.s nancy sullivan and mario ridero showed me how they and their teams did it. and i have to say both nancy and mario were really great teachers, and were very patient with my rudimentary questions, and the lasers were really cool.

[ laughter ] no potential ebola vaccine has ever made it this far so this is exciting news but it's also a reminder of government funded research and the need to keep investing in basic research. [ applause ] >> because nancy as she was talking about the steps that had been taken, showed me -- this is the kind of mo mmentos that scientists keep from back in 1999 in which she had first done some experiments, some trials, on the ebola virus. so this is the product not just

of last year's work it's the product of over a decade of inquiry and work at the time when nancy was explaining when she first had breakthroughs in understanding the ebola virus, nobody really gave a hoot until you do. that's part of how science works. you make investments and you pursue knowledge for knowledge's sake in part because it turns out that knowledge may turn out useful later and you don't always know when. last week's news is still just a first step. there are no guarantees but dr. cliff lane is working with l

lybiran officials. and i know here you are working on potential treatments for ebola. i want you to know you have your president's full support and the administration's full support. you are a vital part of our fight against ebola across our government. today we released an update on our efforts in the united states and abroad. it shows we are more prepared when it comes to protecting americans here at home. we are screening and monitoring arrivals from the affected countries. we have equipped more hospitals with protective gear and protocols. we conducted outreach and training of hundreds of thousands of health care workers. only 13 states could test for ebola and today 36 states can. previously only three facilities were deemed capable of treating an ebola patient and today we are anuancing that we have 35

treatment centers dedicated to care for those with ebola. this is important progress and we will just keep on at it and throughout we are going to be guided by the science. not by speculation, not by fear, not by rumor, not by panic, by science. now part of what the science and ep deemology and experience has taught us, and i have said this all along is the best way to fight this disease, to protect americans is to stop it at its source. that's why the united states continues to lead the global response in west africa. some 3,000 of our service members and civilians are now on the ground manning that air bridge, moving in supplies, building treatment units. i called some of our troops inwet africa on thanksgiving to express gratitude. they were inspiring.

the can-do spirit. has begun discharging parents ebola free. we have helped improve berl practices. we have seen some encouraging news. a decline in infection rates in l lybiria. we have mobilized $2 billion in commitments to this fight. this has to truly be a global effort but that money would not be here had it not been for u.s. leadership so our strategy is beginning to show results. we are seeing some progress. but the fight is not even close to being over. as long as this disease continues to rage in west africa we could continue to see isolated cases here in america.

in west africa this remains the worst ebola epidemic in history by a long shot. although we have made some progress in lyberia, we still have a lot of work to do. we still have a lot of work in guinea and it has been getting worse in syria leon. this can still spread to other countries as we have seen in mali. every hot spot is an ember that if not contained can become a new fire. so we cannot let down our guard even for a minute and we can't just fight this epidemic. we have to extinguish it. much of the progress we have made and progress we still need to make depends on funding. it is an expensive enterprise.

we cannot beat ebola without more funding. if we want other countries to keep stepping up, we will have to continue to lead the way. that's why i'm calling on congress to approve our emergency funding question to fight this disease before they leave for the holidays. it's a good christmas present to the american people and to the world. [ applause ] the funding we're asking for is needed to keep strengthening our capacity here at home so we can continue to respond to any future ebola cases. the funding allows us to keep making progress in west africa. remember we have to extinguish this disease. this is not just something we can manage with a few cases here and there. we have got to stamp it out.

the funding will speed up testing and approval of any testing and treatments including those of the nih. it's needed to help us partner with other countries to prevent and deal with future outbreaks and threats before they become epidemics. this is something i want to just focus on for a second. tony and i were fondly reminiscing about sars and h1n1. that's what these guys do for fun. and we were lucky with h1n1 that it did not prove to be more deadly. we can't say we're lucky with ebola because obviously it's

having a devastating effect in west africa. but it is not airborne in its transmission. there may and likely will come a time in which we have both an airborne disease that is deadly and in order for us to deal with that effectively, we have to put in place an infrastructure not just here at home but globally that allows us to see it quickly, isolate it quickly, respond to it quickly. and it also requires us to continue the same path of basic research that is being done here at the nih that nancy is a great example of so that if and when a new strain of flu like the spanish flu crops up, five years from now or a decade from now, we have made the investment.

and we're further along to be able to catch it. it is a smart investment for us to make. it's not just insurance, it is knowing that down the road we're going to continue to have problems like this, particularly in a globalized world where you move from one side of the world to the other in a day. so this is important now but it's also important for our future and our children's future and our grandchildren's future. the american people have sent washington a pretty clear message where you agree, don't let the areas where you disagree shut things down. work together and get the job done. i cannot think of a better

example of an area where we should all agree than passing this emergency funding to fight ebola and to set up some of the public health infrastructure that we need to deal with potential outbreaks in the future. how do you ark with that? that is not a partisan issue but a basic common sense issue that all americans can agree on. i have been very encouraged so far by the bipartisan support in our various visits with members of congress. for the most part people have recognized it is about the safety and security of the american people. let's get it done. this can't get caught up in normal politics. we need to protect the american people. and we need to show the world how america leads. i have to tell you i traveled to asia.

we had the g-20 summit. if america had not led, if i had not been able to go to cdc and make a major announcement about the commitments we were going to make, be able to go to the united nations and basically call on other countries to step up and know that we were following through with our own commitments. had we not done that the world would not have responded in the same way. american leadership matters every time. we set the tone and we set the agenda. in closing i want to lead with a story that speaks to what we have to do. nancy is from charlotte, north carolina. she is a mom, grandma, wife, also a christian missionary along with her husband, she went to lyberia. she was doing god's work caring for ebola patients.

it's hard to imagine a greater expression of the christian ethic. and she was then infected herself. she was brought back to emory in atlanta. nancy was released in august. she is ebola free and continues to recover. and she said this about how people treat her even today. you have some people that just totally wrap their arms around you and shake your hand. and then you have other people that stand ten feet away. some people wrap their arms around you, some people stand ten feet away. this disease is not just a test of our health systems but a test of our character as a nation. it asks us who we are as americans. when we see a problem in the world like thousands of people

dieing from a disease that we know how to fight, do we stand ten feet away or 10,000 miles away? or do we lead and deploy and go to help and i know what kind of character i want to see in america. i know the kind of character that's displayed by people here at nih and some of your colleagues that are deployed right now in liberia. that's who we are. we don't give into fears. we are guided by our hopes and we are guided by our reason. and we are guided by our faith. we are guided by our confidence that we can ease suffering and make a difference. we imagine new treatments and new cures and we discover and invent and innovate and we test and we unlock new possibilities. and when we save a life and we

help a person heal, we go up to them and we open our arms and we wrap our arms around them with understanding and love and compassion and reason. that's what you do here at nih. that's what we do as americans. that's who we are. that's who we will always be. thank you very much. god bless you. god bless the united states of america. [ applause ] ♪

>> other news today, according to administration officials, ashton carter is likely to be president obama's nominee for defense secretary. >> i'm obviously vying for the swirl out there in the media environment today about the potential nominee for next secretary of defense. so let me just say right at the outset that this is a decision that only the president can make and only the president can announce. and it's up to the president and the white house to determine the timing of any such announcement.

i have no information to share with you today about who the nominee might be or when the nominee might be announced. for our part here in the pentagon, secretary hagel is dedicated to making sure that our men and women have all the support and resources they need to conduct the missions they have been told to conduct around the world including many in harm's way which is important to remember as we head into the holiday season. >> a hearing this afternoon about how professional sports leagues handle domestic violence. here is a short part of it. >> when i consider these issues, domestic violence was a way of life at home growing up. my brother and i watched helplessly numerous times as my mother was beaten and knocked unconscious and we dialed 911. we saw how she struggled to seek

help and found the courage to say no more. the fear and complexities accompanying this violence remain very real in my life today. i have committed my life work for the last 20 years as an advocate against domestic violence in an effort to keep others from experiencing this lifetime of pain. i relate to the 20 million victim victims, survivors of domestic violence, sexual abuse in every community across our great nation. in addition i had the honor and the privilege of playing in the national football league for 15 years, 12 of those years i served as a union official. four of those years i served as the players' association president. i support the interest of all players in a fair process. i led these efforts. i know the majority of our current and former players are

terrific husbands, fathers and men who have made incredible contributions to their communities. mr. chairman, players know that league standards are not league or management issues. they are issues that concern everyone. in 2007 the league and the players union worked closely together collaborating on a personal conduct policy. i was part of those efforts and today just as in the past the league has invited the nfl pa to assist us in setting the highest possible standards. the nfl is taking a number of steps to improve how we respond to incidents of domestic violence, child abuse and sexual assault the nfl has undertaken a thorough review of our policy. having consulted with other one 0 leading experts across a broad range of subjects. our goal is to set clear rules

for misconduct to establish a fair process for players and employee discipline. we will create a conduct committee responsible for review and recommend changes to the personal conduct policy going forward. experts will continue to advise the commission so that we always have the right voices at the table on educational and disciplinary work. second we are deploying a comprehensive mandatory education program for more th than,000 men and women in the nfl family. our goal is to insure that everyone understands and has a full scope of this behavior and familiar with the warning signs associated with these crimes. education also promotes prevention. help those at risk is another key focus area of our education. third we are training critical response teams to help prevent and respond quickly to family violence and sexual assault.

including safety, medical, league, and financial support. fourth we are leading awareness and prevention groups including the national domestic violence hot line and the national sexual violence resource center. fifth and finally, we are raising awareness of this critical issue, domestic violence, child abuse, and sexual assault. in collaboration with the know more campaign and the joyful heart foundation, the nfl's public service announcements during our game. finally we are promoting programs for those who play, coach, and manage our game at all levels including age appropriate character development, healthy relationship education as well as dating violence, domestic violence, child abuse and sexual assault education. we have learned a great deal

from our mistakes and by listening to experts in domestic violence, child abuse and sexual assault, the more we listen and become aware. we are working hard to balance the issues of a fair process with the goal of preventing and punishing these behaviors. mr. chairman and committee, we believe that wearing the uniform of nfl player is a privilege. it is not a right.