    [House Hearing, 119 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                   GAME CHANGER: THE NLRB, STUDENT-ATHLETES,
                      AND THE FUTURE OF COLLEGE SPORTS

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   Before The

                              SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH,
                           EMPLOYMENT, LABOR, AND PENSIONS

                                     OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE
                         U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                 HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, APRIL 8, 2025

                                   __________

                                Serial No. 119-8

                                   __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Workforce

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            Available via: edworkforce.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov

                                    __________

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    61-445 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2025

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE

                        TIM WALBERG, Michigan, Chairman

    JOE WILSON, South Carolina           ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT,
    VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina            Virginia,
    GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania           Ranking Member
    GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin            JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
    ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
    RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
    JAMES COMER, Kentucky                MARK TAKANO, California
    BURGESS OWENS, Utah                  ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
    LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan            MARK DeSAULNIER, California
    MARY E. MILLER, Illinois             DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
    JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana              LUCY McBATH, Georgia
    KEVIN KILEY, California              JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
    MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio               ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
    JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam                HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan
    ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri       GREG CASAR, Texas
    RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania         SUMMER L. LEE, Pennsylvania
    MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington      JOHN W. MANNION, New York
    MARK HARRIS, North Carolina          VACANCY
    MARK B. MESSMER, Indiana
    VACANCY

                         R.J. Laukitis, Staff Director
                  Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

            SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EMPLOYMENT, LABOR, AND PENSIONS

                         RICK ALLEN, Georgia, Chairman

    ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri       Mark DeSaulnier, California,
    JOE WILSON, South Carolina             Ranking Member
    VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina        JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
    JAMES COMER, Kentucky                DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
    BURGESS OWENS, Utah                  LUCY McBATH, Georgia
    LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan            JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
    MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio               GREG CASAR, Texas
    RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania         SUMMER L. LEE, Pennsylvania
    MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington      JOHN W. MANNION, New York
                                         MARK TAKANO, California

                              C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Hearing held on April 8, 2025....................................     1

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

        Allen, Hon. Rick, Chairman, Subcommittee on Health,
          Employment, Labor, and Pensions............................     1
            Prepared statement of....................................     3
        DeSaulnier, Hon. Mark, Ranking Member, Subcommittee Health,
          Employment, Labor, and Pensions............................     5
            Prepared statement of....................................     8

                                   WITNESSES

        Nash, Daniel L., Shareholder, Littler........................    10
            Prepared statement of....................................    12
        Wynne, Morgyn, Former Softball Student-Athlete, Oklahoma
          State University...........................................    27
            Prepared statement of....................................    29
        Huma, Ramogi, Executive Director, National College Players
          Association................................................    37
            Prepared statement of....................................    39
        McWilliams Parker, Jacqie, Commissioner, Central
          Intercollegiate Athletic Association.......................    44
            Prepared statement of....................................    46

                             ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS

        Chairman Allen:
            Letter to Congress from the NCAA Division I Student-
              Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC)......................   124
            Letter to Congress from the NCAA Division II Student-
              Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC)......................   128
            Letter to Congress from the NCAA Division III Student-
              Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC)......................   130
            Letter dated February 17, 2025, from HBCU commissioners..   133
        Lee, Hon. Summer, a Representative in Congress from the State
          of Pennsylvania:
            Article dated May 6, 2020, titled ``Survey: Nearly A
              Quarter of Division I Athletes Face Food Insecurity''..   106
        McBath, Hon. Lucy, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Georgia:
            Ways and Means Committee memo............................    52

                            GAME CHANGER: THE NLRB,
                      STUDENT-ATHLETES, AND THE FUTURE OF
                                  COLLEGE SPORTS

                                  ----------

                             Tuesday, April 8, 2025

                      House of Representatives,
        Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and
                                              Pensions,
                          Committee on Education and Workforce,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:15 a.m., in
    Room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Rick Allen
    (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
        Present: Representatives Allen, Onder, Foxx, McClain,
    Baumgartner, Walberg, DeSaulnier, Courtney, McBath, Hayes, Lee,
    Mannion, and Scott.
        Staff present: Vlad Cerga, Director of Information
    Technology; Maren Emmerson, Intern; Libby Kearns, Press
    Assistant; Katerina Kerska, Legislative Assistant; Trey Kovacs,
    Director of Workforce Policy; Campbell Ladd, Clerk; R.J.
    Laukitis, Staff Director; Georgie Littlefair, Clerk; Danny
    Marca, Director of Information Technology; Brad Mannion,
    Professional Staff Member; John Martin, Deputy Director of
    Workforce Policy/Counsel; Audra McGeorge, Communications
    Director; Eli Mitchell, Legislative Assistant; Daniel Nadel,
    Legislative Assistant; Ethan Pann, Deputy Press Secretary and
    Digital Director; Kane Riddell, Staff Assistant; Sara
    Robertson, Press Secretary; Ann Vogel, Director of Operations;
    Heather Wadyka, Professional Staff Member; Ali Watson, Director
    of Member Services; James Whittaker, General Counsel; Ariel
    Box, Minority Intern; Ilana Brunner, Minority General Counsel;
    Ni'Aisha Banks, Minority Staff Assistant; Bryan Gonzalez,
    Minority Grad Intern; Stephanie Lalle, Minority Communications
    Director; Dhrtvan Sherman, Minority Research Assistant; Raiyana
    Malone, Minority Press Secretary; Marie McGrew, Minority Press
    Assistant; Ben Noenickx, Minority Intern; Mason Pesek, Minority
    Labor Policy Counsel; Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff
    Director; Elizabeth Tomoloju, Minority Intern; Dylan Dunson,
    Minority Intern; Banyon Vassar, Minority Director of IT.
        Chairman Allen. The Subcommittee on Health, Employment,
    Labor and Pensions will come to order. I note that a quorum is
    present. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to call a
    recess at any time. We are here this morning to discuss a topic
    that is very important to me, and many of the constituents I
    represent, which is the future of college sports.
        As you know, there have been significant changes to the
    landscape of intercollegiate athletics of the last few years
    following the NCAA's updated policy to allow student-athletes
    to receive compensation for their name, image and likeness, or
    we will refer to it as NIL.
        Just recently, a judge held a hearing for a final approval
    of the historic potential settlement agreement in the House vs.
    NCAA case, which will allow schools that opt into the agreement
    to direct a share of revenue with their student-athletes.
        One threat, that still looms large to the foundation of
    college athletics, is efforts by activists and the National
    Labor Board Appointees by the BidenHarris administration to
    deem student-athletes as employees.
        Because of this, there are many unresolved questions
    regarding how college sports will look in the future. Despite
    more money than ever flowing into college athletics,
    universities are supporting fewer sports teams due to a range
    of challenges.
        This reality results in fewer scholarship opportunities for
    young American athletes, many of them will not become
    professional athletes, but rather play sports as part of their
    educational pursuits. At its core, college sports are about
    enhancing student-athletes in their academic experience as well
    as enhancing their careers after graduation.
        Unfortunately, that mission was threatened by President
    Biden's radical NLRB stemming from former General Counsel
    Jennifer Abruzzo's memo providing guidance to all NLRB field
    offices that certain student-athletes are employees under the
    National Labor Relations Act. The mandate to reclassify
    student-athletes as employees would have devastating
    consequences.
        The increased cost of unionization and administrative
    headaches would have threatened the viability of many college
    athletic programs, including many women's sports and small
    school athletic programs, resulting in fewer teams, fewer
    scholarships, and fewer opportunities for our young people.
        Additionally, employee status would have triggered
    unintended consequences for student-athletes, and could have
    led them to receiving fewer benefits, having scholarships
    revoked for poor performance, and having scholarships taxed by
    the IRS.
        While the Trump NLRB Acting General Counsel rightfully
    withdrew the Abruzzo memo in the relevant cases before the NLRB
    have been withdrawn, it is still incumbent upon the Committee
    to discuss whether Federal legislation is needed to ensure a
    future board does not attempt to impose the same wrong-headed
    policy.
        I now yield to the Ranking Member for an opening statement.
        [The statement of Chairman Allen follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to
    thank all the witnesses for being here today. As I mentioned
    during the hearing, we convened on this subject last March.
    College athletics should be--college athletes should be treated
    like people, first and foremost, and students, not just sources
    of revenue for their college and universities.
        We should stand with them, ensure their well-being, and
    reject any effort to strip away their right to organize and
    collectively bargain if necessary. Organizations, like the
    NCAA, boast massive revenues from the hard work of college
    athletes. While these college athletes are often taken
    advantage of and mistreated, college athletes put in long hours
    on top of their classes, homework, extracurriculars and even a
    job, if they are permitted to have one.
        In the 2023 to 2024 fiscal year, the NCAA raked in almost
    $1.4 billion in revenue, a $91 million increase from the prior
    year. In 2023, Division I schools spent over $3.6 billion on
    coach's salaries, making up the largest spending category of
    these schools' athletic finances.
        College athletes are understandably looking for ways to
    level the playing field and gain more of a voice.
    Unfortunately, some of my colleagues have pushed to
    unilaterally prevent any college athlete from being designated
    as an employee. This measure would essentially grant the NCAA a
    blank check to avoid all responsibility for employment
    liability and allow rampant mistreatment of athletes without
    recourse.
        Additionally, providing any special carveout to the NCAA
    where college athletes would be exempt from employee
    classification would inevitably rob athletes of rights to which
    they are entitled, while also creating a new category outside
    of traditional employment that would be ripe for exploitation
    and abuse.
        We should not be in the business of creating loopholes that
    allow athletes to be exploited, potentially harming their
    health and safety. Many of us on this side are not advocating
    to broadly classify all college athletes as employees. We
    recognize that there is a large spectrum of college athletics,
    and that some programs have greater resources and exert more
    control over athletes than others, particularly concerned about
    money and support from the major sports, football and
    basketball, to minor sports, which are such a big part of the
    college environment and athletics.
        That is why in many ways our existing labor and employment
    laws are rooted in a fact-specific analysis. This is a
    complicated issue that only grows more complex as the years go
    on, and the college sports industry gets bigger and bigger.
    That being said, if an athlete meets the legal standard of
    being an employee, as set out in the Fair Labor Standards Act
    and the National Labor Relations Act, then that athlete should
    be afforded the same considerations and protections of any
    other employee, including the protected right to form a union
    and bargain for better conditions and a greater share of the
    product, which is enormous, of their labor.
        Even President Trump-appointed Supreme Court Justice Brett
    Kavanaugh stated, ``College and student-athletes could
    potentially engage in collective bargaining or seek some other
    negotiated agreement to provide student-athletes a fair share
    of the revenues that they generate for their colleges,'' from
    Justice Kavanaugh.
        College athletes should be treated with fairness and
    dignity. I hope we can have a constructive conversation about
    this today, and as I have said, it is complicated. One rule
    does not apply, except that if you are clearly an employee by
    Federal law, then you are an employee.
        Finally, I think it is important to acknowledge the broader
    context in which this hearing is happening. Last month, the
    President issued an executive order dismantling the Department
    of Education and cutting its workforce in half. This decision
    seems bound to impact the Department work administrating
    student loans and Pell Grants among other key areas.
        In the coming weeks, my Republican colleges on this
    Committee are likely to cut critical student loan programs--
    hopefully they will not--to help finance their multi-trillion-
    dollar tax cut for the wealthy. In the next month or so,
    college students will be graduating and entering a working
    world that is currently being thrown into chaos, thanks to the
    administration's regressive tariffs that economists fear could
    spur a recession.
        College athletes and all college students and their
    families could suffer real harm from these decisions. We must
    be thoughtful when we make these decisions, and we cannot
    divorce the conversation we're having today from the policies
    being pursued by the administration.
        I thank the Chair, and I yield back the balance of my time.
        [The statement of Ranking Member DeSaulnier follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Allen. I thank the Ranking Member. Pursuant to
    Committee Rule 8-C, all members who wish to insert written
    statements into the record may do so by submitting them to the
    Committee Clerk electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5
    p.m., 14 days after this hearing.
        Without objection, the hearing record will remain open for
    14 days to allow such statements and other extraneous material
    noted during the hearing to be submitted for the original
    hearing record.
        I will now turn to the introduction of our four
    distinguished witnesses. The first witness is Daniel L. Nash, a
    Shareholder of Littler, a law firm here in Washington, DC.
        Our second witness is Ms. Morgyn Wynne, a former Softball
    Student-Athlete at Oklahoma State University in Stillwater,
    Oklahoma, and I understand you all won a lot of championships
    there, thank you. I congratulate you on that.
        Our third witness is Mr. Ramogi Huma, the Executive
    Director of the National College Players Association in Norco,
    California. Our last witness is Ms. Jacqie McWilliams Parker, a
    Commissioner for the Central Intercollegiate Athletic
    Association in Charlotte, North Carolina.
        We thank the witnesses for being here today, and we look
    forward to your testimony. Pursuant to Committee Rules, I would
    ask that you each limit your oral presentation to a 3-minute
    summary of your written statement. The clock will count down
    from 3 minutes, as Committee members have many questions for
    you, and we would like to spend as much time as possible on
    those questions.
        Pursuant to Committee Rule 8D, and Committee practice,
    however, we will not cutoff your testimony until you reach the
    5-minute mark. I would also like to remind the witnesses to be
    aware of their responsibility to provide accurate information
    to the Subcommittee. I will first recognize Mr. Nash for your
    opening testimony.

        STATEMENT OF MR. DANIEL L. NASH, SHAREHOLDER, LITTLER,
                            WASHINGTON, D.C.

        Mr. Nash. Thank you, Chairman Allen, Ranking Member
    DeSaulnier, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you very
    much for the opportunity to testify today, particularly
    concerning the question whether students who participate in
    intercollegiate athletics should be treated as employees of
    their schools.
        I am a lawyer that has practiced labor and employment law
    for over 30 years, particularly in the sports industry,
    including in matters both involving professional sports and
    college athletics. Until recently, the question was well
    settled under our labor and employment laws.
        Historically, participation in college athletics has never
    been deemed to create an employment relationship between the
    students and their schools. Rather, intercollegiate sports have
    always been viewed no differently than the many other
    extracurricular activities in which students participate as an
    important part of their college education.
        However, as this Subcommittee knows, in recent years the
    colleges and universities have faced considerable litigation.
    Some of it existential, claiming that college athletes should
    be paid and entitled to join labor unions. In my view, there
    has been a great deal of misunderstanding in these cases about
    the law and their implications for student-athletes and their
    schools.
        In that regard, let me just suggest a few points worth
    keeping in mind during today's hearing. First, and perhaps most
    importantly, we should be clear about which students we are
    talking about, and which student-athletes have been largely
    ignored in this debate.
        It is no secret that the effort to reclassify student-
    athletes have primarily concerned two and only two sports, and
    that is football and basketball. The argument in these cases
    has been that the law should be changed for these student-
    athletes because the amount of revenue in those sports has
    changed.
        It is unfair for those students not to share in that
    revenue in the same way that professional athletes do. The
    argument has been they are really professional athletes.
    However, as a matter of labor and employment law, revenue has
    never been a factor, never, in determining whether someone
    should be classified as an employee.
        The arguments about fairness, ignore that unlike a
    commercial business whose revenue is distributed to its
    shareholders as profit. The revenue received by colleges and
    universities related to sports, like football and basketball,
    helps provide scholarships and other financial support to all
    of their student-athletes, including the many Olympic and
    women's sports programs.
        Second, the suggestion that student-athletes should be
    permitted to engage in collective bargaining under a
    professional sports model simply misunderstands how collective
    bargaining works under the labor laws.
        The NLRB recognized this in the Northwestern case in making
    it clear that a single school's team having collective
    bargaining would not be viable, and there would be no plausible
    way to have a broader unit of collective bargaining because
    many of the colleges and universities are public, are
    religiously affiliated and are outside of the NLRB's
    jurisdiction.
        Finally, I want to emphasize one important point. I do not
    believe that it is helpful to frame the arguments surrounding
    the status of student-athletes under the labor laws as either
    pro-union or anti-union. I have worked very closely with, and I
    respect the unions in the professional support leagues who ably
    represent those athletes.
        The young students who attend college and participate in
    extracurricular activities, including intercollegiate sports,
    are not remotely equivalent to professional athletes. Treating
    them as such would not solve the issues facing college sports.
    In fact, I believe the opposite is true, and that Congress
    should make clear that students who participate in
    intercollegiate sports are not employees of their colleges and
    universities.
        I look forward to the Subcommittee's questions.
        [The statement of Mr. Nash follows:]
       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Allen. Thank you, Mr. Nash. I now recognize Ms.
    Wynne for your testimony.

    STATEMENT OF MS. MORGYN WYNNE, FORMER SOFTBALL STUDENT-ATHLETE,
            OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY, STILLWATER, OKLAHOMA

        Ms. Wynne. Chairman Allen, Ranking Member DeSaulnier, and
    distinguished members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify before you today. My time as a softball
    student-athlete at Oklahoma State was about more than just
    athletic success. It was about the relationships I built, the
    lessons I learned, and the constant support system that shaped
    me into the person I am today.
        I fear that shifting student-athletes into an employment
    model would erode the very essence of what makes college
    athletics so transformative. My experience as OSU was rooted in
    a culture of academic support, athletic excellence and personal
    development, values that should be protected and preserved for
    generations of student-athletes to come.
        As an underclassman, I struggled not just on the field, but
    in ways beyond the game, especially as a 17-year-old first
    generation college student. When I entered the transfer portal,
    I saw an environment where I could thrive, not just as an
    athlete, but as a student and person, and OSU provided exactly
    that.
        I found a coaching staff that prioritized our academics and
    our futures, ensuring that our education remained the
    foundation of our experience. Unlike some programs where
    academic choices are restricted, my teammates and I were
    empowered to pursue any major and career path we desired.
        Practice schedules were built around our class commitments,
    demonstrating our coach's genuine care for our futures beyond
    the game. Because of this I was named an academic all American
    and graduated in the top 1 percent of my senior class in 2023.
    More than just academic and athletic success, what defined my
    time as OSU was the culture of trust, respect, and open
    communication.
        Our coaches curated a sense of family and camaraderie that
    is something I cherish, and I deeply fear may be lost if
    student-athletes transition into an employment model. As former
    Co-Chair of Division 1 Student-Athlete Advisory Committee, and
    a current Board of Governors voting member, I have visited with
    hundreds of athletes across the divisions virtually and in
    person on this subject.
        I have truly witnessed firsthand the fear and uncertainty
    this conversation brings to athletes across the country. It is
    easy to frame this issue as one of fairness, and of athletes
    getting what they deserve, but the reality is that many mid-
    major institutions and non-revenue sports simply do not have
    the financial resources to sustain an employment model.
        This conversation is not just about the implications for
    current student-athletes. It is about the generations of
    student-athletes who will come after us. If schools are forced
    to cut sports to afford employment costs, we are losing life-
    changing and transformational opportunities for thousands of
    aspiring NCAA athletes.
        The collegiate model, while unperfect, has provided so many
    of us the chance to pursue both an education and the sport we
    love. We should be working to enhance support and resources for
    student-athletes, not implementing a system that could limit
    access and opportunity. I urge decisionmakers to truly listen
    to the voices of those who will be impacted the most.
        College athletics should not be dictated by financial gain
    alone, or reduced to a business transaction, silencing the
    voices of the majority. We cannot afford to lose what makes
    this experience so invaluable. The education, the growth, and
    the chance to be a part of something bigger. It should be
    protected and preserved with this at the forefront of our
    minds. Thank you.
        [The statement of Ms. Wynne follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Allen. Next, I will recognize Mr. Huma for your
    testimony.

      STATEMENT OF MR. RAMOGI HUMA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
             COLLEGE PLAYERS ASSOCIATION, NORCO, CALIFORNIA

        Mr. Huma. Good morning. My name is Ramogi Huma. I am a
    former UCLA football player, and the Executive Director of the
    NCPA, the National College Players Association. The NCPA is a
    nonprofit advocacy organization with a mission to protect
    future, current, and former college athletes of all sports. The
    NCPA spearheaded the college athletes' rights movement since
    its launch in 2001.
        First, I would like to thank Chairman Walberg and Allen,
    and Ranking Member Scott and DeSaulnier for inviting me to
    testify today. College sports is an $18 billion a year
    industry, where men's basketball coaches can earn $9 million
    per year. Football coaches can make $13 million per year, and
    even athletic directors now make more than $3 million per year.
    The NCAA conferences and schools are enriching themselves while
    working to strip equal rights and deny basic protections from
    college athletes whose talents generate this revenue.
        The NCPA continues to advocate that college athletes
    deserve equal rights under the law. Ensuring all Americans have
    equal rights under the law should not be a matter of debate.
    This includes labor law. However, it is important to highlight
    that college athlete employment status and collective
    bargaining is not an urgent issue. There are no active NLRB
    cases, and any new case would take many, many years to resolve.
        However, there are urgent issues in college sports that
    Congress should address immediately. NCAA sports is a predatory
    industry that exploits college athletes physically, sexually,
    and economically. To date, the NCAA and conferences refuse to
    impose any consequences for personnel who kill an athlete in a
    hazardous workout, sexually abuse an athlete, or force an
    athlete with a concussion back into the same game.
        I have met too many grieving, devastated parents, like the
    parents of Calvin Dickey Jr. and Jordan McNair who died
    preventable deaths in NCAA football workouts at Bucknell
    University and the University of Maryland. I do not want to
    have to have any more conversations from survivors, like former
    San Jose State gymnast Amy LeClair, whose team athletic trainer
    sexually abused her and other female athletes for 14 years
    under the guise of medical treatment while their university
    failed to adequately respond to the request for help.
        We have all read the headlines of hundreds of college
    athletes at colleges who have suffered the same fate, while the
    NCAA and conferences turn a blind eye. Make no mistake, these
    abuses are not--they are not rare; they are rampant. In
    surveys, half of Division I athletic trainers report being
    pressured by coaches to play athletes before they are ready and
    returning players with concussions to the same game.
        About 20 percent of coaches return athletes to play who are
    deemed medically ineligible, and more than 1 in 4 college
    athletes report being sexually assaulted or harassed by a
    campus authority figure. All legal pathways to address these
    serious problems should be available to athletes: Federal and
    State legislation, judicial action, and a path toward
    collective bargaining.
        The solution certainly will not come from the NCAA, which
    coldly asserts that it has no duty to protect college athletes.
    This is an indefensible position, but it begs the question: who
    is responsible? Because universities that are abusing athletes
    receive Federal funds, it is the NCPA's position that Congress
    shares responsibility in addressing these issues. Instead of
    solving these issues, the NCAA and conferences are now
    demanding Congress eliminate athletes' ability to collectively
    bargain for these protections.
        They are also demanding Congress enshrine into Federal law
    exploitative restrictions included in the House vs. NCAA
    lawsuit settlement. The parties are actually trying to liken
    this terrible settlement to a collective bargaining agreement.
    No pro-athlete union in America would agree to these terms.
    This supposed collective bargaining agreement includes no
    safety standards, no medical coverage, zero dollars in
    guaranteed money, loopholes that can ban all athlete and IO
    compensation from universities, the elimination of about $2
    billion in NIL pay from collectives so schools can re-
    monopolize money from athletic boosters, and a requirement that
    participating universities cut their rosters. It is a
    requirement.
        These unfair terms only underscore why college athletes
    should have a seat at the table, and why Congress should
    intervene to help. The NCAA and conferences need accountability
    from Congress on these issues, not a bailout. The NCPA requests
    that Congress only pass legislation to adopt broad-based
    reform, including the enforcement of safety standards to
    prevent serious injury, abuse, and death among college
    athletes. Thank you.
        [The statement of Mr. Huma follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Allen. Thank you, Mr. Huma. Last, I recognize Ms.
    McWilliams Parker for your testimony.

       STATEMENT OF MS. JACQIE MCWILLIAMS PARKER, COMMISSIONER,
    CENTRAL INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION, CHARLOTTE, NORTH
                                CAROLINA

        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman
    Allen, Ranking Member DeSaulnier, and distinguished
    Subcommittee members. My name is Jacqie McWilliams Parker, and
    for more than three decades my life has been immersed in
    college athletics, as a student-athlete, a coach, and now a
    Commissioner of the Central Intercollegiate Athletic
    Association, I have experienced a life-changing pattern of
    college sports in so many ways.
        My mission is to ensure college sports continues to create
    opportunities for generations like it once created for me. As
    Commissioner of the CIAA, first established HBCU Conference,
    one of four conferences of historically black colleges and
    universities, it is our responsibility as leaders to be gate
    keepers to protect and advocate for our member institutions and
    student-athletes in our conferences.
        That is why I'm here today, to express my great desire for
    Congress to pass legislation that supports a future for college
    sports that allows athletic departments of all sizes and
    varieties, including HBCUs to thrive. In recent years, there
    has been a massive and long overdue effort to elevate and
    support--the support and the benefits provided to our student-
    athletes, including expanded scholarships guarantees, the
    creation of a new post-eligibility health insurance program,
    and enhanced access to academic and career services.
        Meeting the needs of our student-athletes remains an
    ongoing effort. Progress has been tremendous, and the
    commitment from college sports leaders to driving continued
    change runs deep. As these positive changes have moved forward
    it has become clear that there are limits to what we in college
    sports alone can address.
        I am greatly concerned that without congressional action,
    policies that negatively impact the student-athlete's
    experience and financial viability of our HBCUs are at risk of
    taking hold. In particular, there are two areas where I believe
    congressional action is essential to assuring college sports
    provides opportunities for schools and sports of all types.
        First, we need to confirm that student-athletes are not
    employees, unlike the large institutions that generate
    significant revenue through media rights, sponsorships, and
    ticket sales, HBCUs often struggle to cover the full cost of
    athletic programs.
        Transitioning student-athletes to an employment model would
    exacerbate the strain and deficit on our already strapped
    athletic department budgets, likely leading to downgrading or
    outright eliminating certain sports, or reducing the number of
    scholarships and other resources available to student-athletes.
        Second, we need to ensure that NCAA receives sufficient
    limited liability protections so that it can perform its
    purpose, working with student-athletes, member institutions,
    and conferences like mine to make and enforce basic rules to
    determine student-athlete eligibility limits, and so that
    schools across the country are competing on a level playing
    field.
        Much of my life story is a testament to the power of
    college sports, and it is a privilege to be here today to
    advocate for HBCUs and future generations of student-athletes.
    Thank you for the opportunity to share my voice.
        [The statement of Ms. McWilliams Parker follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Allen. Thank you, Ms. McWilliams Parker. Under
    Rule--Committee Rule 9, we will now question witnesses under
    the 5-minute rule. I will recognize myself for 5 minutes. Ms.
    Wynne, you said in your written testimony that as former Co-
    Chair of Division 1 Student Athletic Advisory Committee, you
    had the opportunity to speak with hundreds of student-athletes
    who expressed fears about what employment status could mean for
    them and the future of college sports.
        What were some of the top concerns you heard from your
    peers?
        Ms. Wynne. Thank you for the question. The top concern from
    the student-athletes I have spoken to is the ongoing threat of
    cutting athletic opportunity for thousands of student-athletes
    to pay for the student-athletes that generate the most revenue,
    which would ultimately create an uneven playing field between
    the athletes.
        Another fear is the potential decline in the prioritization
    of academics, sorry. Most student-athletes who play in college
    do not go on to play professionally and choose their schools to
    pursue academics. We fear becoming employees would put a
    substantial emphasis on job security through athletic
    performance over the current academic eligibility centric
    model.
        Chairman Allen. Thank you. Mr. Nash, like other college
    students, student-athletes must satisfy certain academic
    standards to gain admission to the universities and to
    participate in extracurricular activities, including their
    sport. If student-athletes are deemed to be employees under the
    National Labor Relations Act, could grade point averages or
    course credit requirements become subjects of collective
    bargaining?
        Mr. Nash. Thank you, Chairman Allen. We do not know the
    answer to that and nor do the advocates of converting student-
    athletes to employees and attempting to have collective
    bargaining. It is certainly conceivable that the academic rules
    that apply to student-athletes and how they are enforced, and
    other rules, other rules related to their education, and the
    academic environment would be subject to bargaining.
        Those are things that are just simply not present in the
    professional sports leagues.
        Chairman Allen. OK. Could this unionization undermine
    academic standards? In other words, the young people would
    prioritize, you know, their work responsibilities over actually
    getting an education when less than 2 percent of these young
    people go on to play in professional sports.
        Mr. Nash. I think the reality of that is probably obvious,
    right? I think almost certainly if we are talking about what is
    essentially making the student-athletes on these sports as
    professionals, that is going to be the focus, not academics.
        Chairman Allen. Right. Thank you. Ms. McWilliams Parker,
    fewer than 2 percent of NCAA student-athletes turn professional
    in their respective sports, as I mentioned earlier. What impact
    would employee status have on ensuring these college athletes
    can continue to focus first and foremost on being students, and
    on their academic success to make sure that they have
    successful careers after college?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Look, this conversation about--
    particularly for our HBCUs and our smaller institutions. I mean
    I am highly concerned about employment because the fact of the
    matter our institutions were built in this country to give us
    an education.
        Athletics is an ancillary opportunity to allow our students
    to engage way beyond just getting their degree. Making them
    employees, or changing that status, it really changes the
    opportunities that we get to create at our institutions in our
    smaller schools, being able to give them the resources that
    they need for academic support, for travel, for uniforms, all
    those things that are important and necessary, especially for
    students that are first generational students.
        I hope we never lose the focus on why education was
    established in this country in the first place. Athletics has
    just been the benefit that we all have. It is a privilege to be
    able to be a college student-athlete, and I hope we do not take
    that away from them.
        Chairman Allen. Yes. Many young people have been able to
    get their education, and also participate in their sport of
    choice on the field, and then go on to very successful careers.
    Whatever we do as Members of Congress, we want to keep that as
    the first priority, and I think that is behind the scenes here.
    We are putting other things first, like you know, collective
    bargaining, unionization, and employee status, and you know,
    all these other things.
        I think we have got to work to make sure that academics is
    priority one. I would yield then to the Ranking Member for your
    questions. OK. Ms. McBath, I am sorry, Ms. McBath, I recognize
    you for 5 minutes for questioning.
        Mrs. McBath. Thank you, Chair and Ranking Member
    DeSaulnier, for hosting this year, and to our witnesses that
    are here with us this morning. Thank you so much for taking the
    time to testify.
        College athletics have such an important place in our
    education system and American society. They represent more than
    just a sports team. They carry the legacy of a town, an
    institution, and the past players' dreams and accomplishments.
    These things are incredibly meaningful, and we need to be sure
    that nothing that we do here in Congress will further
    complicate things for folks back home or put these
    opportunities further out of reach for students and their
    families.
        Student-athletes must be treated with the dignity and the
    respect that they deserve. They must be fairly compensated for
    their efforts while ensuring that schools both large and both
    small can continue to provide the high-quality education and
    athletic opportunities for our students.
        Athletic scholarships have, and continue, to play a very
    important role in making sure that every student who wants to
    better themselves through higher education has an opportunity
    to do so without going into a lifetime of debt, regardless of
    how much money their parents make, or whether anyone in their
    family has ever been to college before. They are directly
    responsible for helping people lift themselves up from lower
    income levels and into a better quality of life, sometimes
    breaking generational cycles of poverty.
        While most student-athletes may not go on to play
    professional sports, all of them will be more likely able to
    finish their degree and have the skills that are necessary to
    provide a decent life for themselves after they graduate. They
    are true engines of social mobility, and it would be
    devastating to students, families, and athletic programs if
    athletes had to worry about being taxed on those very
    scholarships. That exact proposal is unfortunately being
    floated by our House Republicans.
        This memo, circulated by the majority, which I would like
    to submit digitally for the record, outlines the potential ways
    that Republicans want to raise revenue this Congress, and you
    can see that this proposal to make all scholarships income-
    taxable--this is right here, written out on page 11.
        This proposal would impose a new tax on students and
    families, and force students and athletic recruits with the
    lowest incomes to reconsider whether or not they can afford to
    accept a scholarship, because of the new tax burden that would
    come with it. Student-athletes should be focused on success on
    the field and in the classroom, not on whether they will have
    to pay a new tax on the scholarships that they have earned.
        Chairman Allen. Without objection.
        [The information of Mrs. McBath follows:]

       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mrs. McBath. Ms. McWilliams Parker, can you talk about the
    negative impact that taxing scholarship opportunities would
    have on student-athletes if this proposal by my House
    Republican colleagues to tax all scholarships were to become
    law?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Thank you, Ms. McBath, for that
    question. I was a walk-on student-athlete at Hampton
    University. My parents had to pay for me to go to college, and
    I depended on the package to be a student-athlete that year. I
    earned a scholarship thereafter, and I think about that
    question. If we had to tax that scholarship, that is an extra
    burden on my family, one that they could not afford. They could
    not afford for me to go to Hampton, so the fact of the matter
    of being able to get a scholarship and able to get the
    resources that I had on campus was extremely important.
        We are smaller institutions. We are Division II. All of our
    student-athlete and scholarship packages in our division--so
    when you talk about exposure, and what we are seeing for
    football and basketball, that is not the reality of our
    students and our first generational students at our
    institutions. There is a need--they need the support. They need
    the Pell Grants. They need the financial aid. That is part of
    their scholarship package at our Division II schools, and in
    Division I, I would imagine that they depend on some of that
    scholarship money as well, so taxing it is not helping us at
    all.
        Mrs. McBath. Thank you for that. I, too, come from Virginia
    State University. I graduated there--I am not going to say
    when--but that is also a Division II school as well, and so I
    have spoken with our president there several times, and I
    understand unequivocally how devastating it would be if we were
    to tax these scholarships. In the State of Georgia too, we have
    scholarships that are being taxed as well, so thank you for
    your testimony.
        Mr. Onder [presiding]. The gentlelady yields back. The
    Chair recognizes Mr. Baumgartner of Washington for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Baumgartner. Well, thank you Mr. Chair, and I very much
    appreciate the distinguished panel and this hearing being held.
    Trying to restore college sports is one of the reasons I came
    to Congress in the interest of--it is very interesting to me.
        I certainly do not believe that college athletes are
    employees, but I also think many of the aspects of collective
    bargaining should be brought to--the results of collective
    bargaining should be brought to the collegiate athlete system.
    College athletics are highly subsidized public goods, and I
    think they should be regulated as such.
        What our goal should be is we have more money in the system
    now, but we have less athletic opportunities than ever before.
    What our underlying principle should be is to create a new
    opportunity, both for the benefit of the student-athletes, but
    in this day and age as American society becomes more political
    and more partisan, there is an important piece of social
    cohesion and camaraderie and societal benefit that just comes
    from everything that we love about college athletics.
        I think it needs to be restored. Personally, I think the
    NCAA is a defunct and derelict institution. I do not think it
    can be fixed. I think there needs to be a new institution put
    under Presidential control and authorized by Congress for these
    public goods.
        I think there has to be a system of fairness and
    competitive balance across the system, both the athletes and
    the schools, and if all the money goes into SEC Football and
    Big Ten Football, and a little bit to basketball, then the
    Olympic sport athletes are going to be the ones that are going
    to suffer. If we can treat the system equally amongst all
    sports and all athletes, I think we will get the solution that
    is in the best public interest.
        I believe that coaches' salaries need to be capped at ten
    times the total cost of the average student going to college.
    Again, this is not free market unfettered capitalism, this is a
    highly subsidized public good. There is not a lot of societal
    benefit of a football coach making over 10 million dollars a
    year.
        What you want is competitive balance. All of us that
    enjoyed college football, and I grew up watching Power Five
    Football, it was just as much fun for the fans and the students
    when the coaches were making $200,000 or $500,000 a year as
    when they are making 10 million dollars.
        It is this unfettered arms race and this nonsense like
    having slides, and these ridiculous whirlpool baths, and these
    special chairs in all the locker rooms so they can entice
    recruits. There is no benefit to you guys as athletes with
    that. Then finally, the idea that we would have
    transcontinental conferences where student-athletes are--a
    volleyball team is going from Eugene, Oregon to Rutgers in New
    Jersey mid-week, that is insane.
        That is not what the public wants to pay for. Congress has
    all the tools to put this back together. You know, I believe
    that we should put NIL into a pool and share equally amongst
    all athletes. I think we should pool TV revenue for all sports,
    so that your HBCUs are benefiting, and we can create so many
    opportunities for the sons and daughters of American taxpayers
    and restore the system.
        You know, to my question, Ms. Wynne, do you believe, you
    know, the future young ladies like yourselves playing softball
    right now, I mean what needs to happen so that there would be
    more opportunities for young ladies like yourself and not less,
    and do you worry when you watch all the money going into
    football and men's basketball, that there is going to be less
    opportunities for young ladies like yourself?
        Ms. Wynne. Thank you for the question. I do worry about the
    future of my own sport. I worry about the future of all female
    sports in this conversation. I dreamed as a little kid that I
    would get to play at the World Series, and fortunately enough I
    went to two, and I think that every young softball player now
    should continue to have that dream and not have to worry that
    those opportunities will not be created for them or still there
    for them.
        I cannot give you the best solution in my opinion for this,
    just because I am here to talk about how I was--my experience
    as a student-athlete, but I do think that there needs to be a
    balance.
        Mr. Baumgartner. Well, you know, I hope we have a unique
    opportunity, I think in a bipartisan fashion, you know, with
    this President. Again, these are public goods. If we regulate
    them in a public manner, highly sized public goods. We realize
    that if we could have a--and it rises, I believe, to the
    importance of a Presidential appointee, and then authorized by
    Congress.
        We can get the NCAA out of all this business, put the
    proper role with Congress authorizing these things and have
    more money. Again, we have more money in the system, and less
    opportunities than ever before. If Congress takes action we can
    have more opportunities for our athletes, and maintain the
    competitive balance across the system, and I yield back, thank
    you.
        Mr. Walberg [presiding]. I thank the gentleman. I now
    recognize the gentlelady from Pennsylvania, Representative Lee.
        Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will say that I never
    thought that I would hear a Republican colleague call for
    socialism and redistribution of wealth and resources, but I am
    excited to hear that such proposals do exist on the other side.
        I just want to say that if you have been watching college
    basketball's March Madness tournament like I have been for the
    last few weeks, then it should already be clear why college
    athletes deserve the right to organize and bargain
    collectively. In case you have not been paying attention, I
    would like to take just a moment to break some of it down.
        March Madness packed 67 men's and 63 women's basketball
    games into an action-packed 21 days. This year for the second
    year in a row, this college basketball tournament generated
    around a billion dollars in revenue for the NCAA. With such
    high revenue, you might assume that players get a nice cut of
    that action, but your assumption would of course be wrong.
        While the schools behind successful women's basketball and
    men's basketball, or excuse me, women's basketball programs are
    splitting $15 million in prize money, and the schools of the
    successful men's team will share around $216 million, their
    triumphant college athletes will walk away completely empty-
    handed.
        Beyond prize money, many schools will make millions of
    dollars off of these young people's backs. Last year the Power
    Five Conference generated over $3.5 billion in revenue. You
    heard that, a billion with a B. While the NCAA and athletic
    conferences raked in billions, the outlook for the college
    athletes who made them their money is grim.
        In a 2019 survey, almost 25 percent of Division I athletes
    reported experiencing food insecurity in the last month, and
    nearly 14 percent were homeless over the last year. A study
    published by Idaho State University in 2022 found that more
    than half of the Division I student-athletes surveyed reported
    eating less often than they felt they should because there was
    not access to enough food. I request unanimous consent to enter
    into the record an article about Wisconsin Public Radio titled
    ``Survey: Nearly a Quarter of Division I Athletes Face Food
    Insecurity.''
        Mr. Walberg. Without objection, it will be entered.
        [The information of Ms. Lee follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Lee. Thank you. Mr. Huma, can you speak about the
    financial strain that far too many athletes face?
        Mr. Huma. You know it is funny, this organization, my
    organization started out as a student group at UCLA when I was
    playing football. I formed the group after my teammate was
    suspended because groceries were left on his doorstep when he
    was broke and hungry. Meanwhile, they were selling his jersey
    in the store. They said it was an NIL violation. You could not
    have any benefit at all outside of what a regular student would
    have received. This entire movement, much of it, at least my
    part and my organization's part, stemmed from food and
    groceries.
        You may have assumed that I played receiver or DB back in
    the day; I was a linebacker, and I needed to eat a lot. I was
    an undersized linebacker. I went from eating five, six meals a
    day at home to three meals a day in a meal cart at UCLA. I
    immediately lost within a month, a month and a half, lost ten
    pounds. You know, I am trying to hit 300 pounders at 210
    pounds. It was tough.
        Fast-forward to the surveys you are talking about.
    Unfortunately, much of this has not changed. You know, we did a
    study several years ago on what a full scholarship, you know,
    the room and board included, what that would provide an athlete
    to live off of, and found that 80 percent of athletes would be
    living below the Federal poverty line on those scholarships.
        In the backdrop, all the numbers you mentioned, all the
    revenue that these athletes are generating, obviously you talk
    about the motivations and people wanting to find some way to
    change the system, whether it be collective bargaining or
    employee status, all options need to be on the table to make
    sure that athletes are treated fairly.
        Ms. Lee. Thank you so much. Despite the incredible
    financial hardship experienced by many Division I athletes,
    NCAA has long argued that the system is fair because they are
    student-athletes and often get the value of educational
    scholarships at their institutions, so the free housing that we
    talked about, the free meal plan.
        However, Mr. Huma, I am not sure if most Americans realize
    that college athletes like Division I football, basketball, and
    volleyball players are managing the equivalent of a full-time
    job on top of their academics. While the public only sees them
    for a couple hours on television, athletes are putting in
    countless hours throughout the week. Very quickly, could you
    just describe what a typical schedule of a D1 athlete would
    look like?
        Mr. Huma. Well, first of all, it is year-round, year-round.
    You see them during the season on game day, maybe on TV, but it
    is year-round workouts, early morning rises, you finish late.
    The Pac-12 did a survey of their athletes, and the average
    athlete across all sports reported spending 50 hours a week on
    their sport alone. Yes, a full-time job, absolutely.
        Ms. Lee. Then a full-time student as well?
        Mr. Huma. Correct.
        Ms. Lee. Thank you. Based on the schedule you described, is
    it realistic to think that most D1 athletes can equally balance
    school and athletics while in session?
        Mr. Huma. No. No. I mean athletics takes priorities, and in
    terms of degree completion, which is one of the goals for us to
    improve, they need more time to graduate on the back end. They
    need less time--less responsibilities put on their shoulders
    while they are athletes. You know, without that, you are going
    to continue to have lower graduation rates than you otherwise
    would.
        Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Huma. As many of my colleagues have
    pointed out, a one-size-fits-all regulatory approach may prove
    difficult, given the diverse portfolio of sports, divisions,
    and athletic conferences the NCAA represents, but giving these
    young people the right to bargain for better wages and hours
    and work conditions is not that difficult. It is long past time
    that we cut the games and start calling out this billion-dollar
    business for what it is: student-athlete exploitation. I thank
    you all so much for your testimony, and for being with us
    today, and I yield back.
        Mr. Walberg. I thank the gentlelady. Now, I recognize
    myself for 5 minutes of questions. I am glad the Subcommittee
    is holding this hearing to discuss the future of college
    athletics. I do not see the future as bright if we do not get
    some control and understanding what athletics are for. As a
    former athlete myself, not at the highest level, but the impact
    in my life was very positive, and athletics encouraged my
    academics, which was the highest priority.
        Ms. Wynne, I appreciated your testimony, that really is the
    essence of athletics and scholarship. Before I ask questions to
    our witnesses, I did want to bring up one college sports
    related issue that I have heard a lot about from my
    constituents. Division 1 and 2 college athletes who are awarded
    scholarships at our universities are increasingly coming from
    other countries.
        According to NCAA data, international student-athlete
    participation has increased by 145 percent since 2001. One
    example is Division 1 men's and women's tennis, where foreign
    athletes make up over 60 percent of overall participants. In
    men's and women's ice hockey, they make up over a third. Sadly,
    college sports has become big business, and there is an
    increasing pressure to recruit foreign athletes to make money
    and win games.
        Unfortunately, these scholarship opportunities have come at
    the expense of American born student-athletes. This is
    additionally troublesome because in the United States college
    athletics partially serve as America's Olympic development
    program.
        In the 2024 Paris Olympics, 65 percent of the U.S. Olympic
    team were current, former, or incoming NCAA student-athletes.
    The increasing number of foreign athletes in college sports
    jeopardizes opportunities for American athletes, and the global
    competitiveness of our athletic programs.
        Having said that, Mr. Nash, proponents of classifying
    student-athletes as employees have cited the substantial amount
    of revenue that certain college sports programs bring in, and
    the potential for revenue sharing with these athletes as
    reasons for employment status.
        What does the law say regarding whether revenue generation
    is a factor in determining employment status?
        Mr. Nash. Thank you. The law has been very clear that the
    amount of revenue that an organization receives is not a factor
    in determining whether someone is or is not an employee.
    Otherwise, if it was, businesses that lose money could claim
    that they should not have to pay their employees. What matters,
    and the Supreme Court has made this clear many times, is
    whether someone meets the test or the definition of a common
    law employee.
        Student-athletes for decades have been recognized as not
    meeting that test. The fact that revenue has increased in
    sports like football or basketball should not be a basis for
    changing that law.
        Mr. Walberg. Appreciate that. Ms. McWilliams Parker, in
    your written testimony you State that reclassifying student-
    athletes as employees would place an even greater strain on
    already strapped athletic department budgets. What are some of
    the measures that athletic departments may have to take in
    response to an employment model?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. For our member institutions, and I
    would just speak for my colleagues as HBCUs, I mean our
    conversation is will we be able to sustain sports? Will we be
    able to continue to give scholarships? Will we have to reduce
    that? I think there is a high concern that we are already
    operating in deficit, so all this money in revenue we are
    hearing about, that is not funneling to smaller division
    schools--Division 2 schools.
        All the gate receipts that you see, we are all running
    deficits, and there would be a concern that we would not be
    able to keep up. Eliminating sports, and as we know, sometimes
    the Olympics sports and women's sports go first. That would be
    tragic to see when that opportunity for myself and Ms. Wynne,
    those are the concerns that we have.
        We cannot keep up with the masses of what you all are
    talking about. We just want to give these students an
    opportunity like I had, to play their sport, and to be able to
    get their college degree, and to represent like Ms. McBath is
    today and myself.
        Mr. Walberg. As a student-athlete, what did you undertake
    athletics with the purpose of being a student?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. As I heard a student say the other
    day, and as I would say, sports saved my life. It gave me an
    opportunity that nothing else did. I could have done a lot of
    different things, but it was the pathway for my family, for me
    to get a college degree, and to be able to make impact, and to
    be prepared to be a commissioner today.
        I am no different than any of my other colleagues, I just
    have a smaller representation of what you all see on a broader
    side of what you watched in March Madness. The opportunity to
    play a sport, and to have teammates, and to lead and to guide,
    and to go through that strenuous work every single day, has
    been necessary. Thank you.
        Mr. Walberg. Thank you. My time has expired, but I wanted
    to hear that. You wanted to be a student-athlete, but a student
    first.
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Yes.
        Mr. Walberg. Thank you.
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Thank you.
        Mr. Walberg. Now, I recognize Ranking Member Bobby Scott
    from Virginia.
        Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. McWilliams Parker,
    you mentioned the CIAA in terms of revenue. Do the teams make a
    lot of money for the schools?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. No.
        Mr. Scott. Is that typical for D2 and D3 schools?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Very typical.
        Mr. Scott. Do you pay your coaches millions of dollars a
    year?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Absolutely not.
        Mr. Scott. OK. Mr. Huma, you mentioned the schedule for a
    typical athlete. After college, or after their eligibility
    ends, what happens to those students?
        Mr. Huma. Well, it depends. Some graduate, some do not. You
    know, with the--you know, the reality is that universities
    recruit these athletes, some of them are less prepared
    academically than regular students, that is just a fact. Those
    universities still have a responsibility to create a realistic
    pathway for them to graduate. Unfortunately, many of them do
    not.
        You have increased time demands when it comes with
    athletics put on the shoulders of students who are less
    prepared. Oftentimes you get poor graduation rates. Many of
    these athletes that generate all this money in Division I, they
    do not graduate. Although there are a lot of verbal promises,
    there is no teeth for schools to actually allow them to
    complete their degree, and many athletes do not have the
    opportunity, so after that, do not really know, but you know,
    that is kind of the scenario.
        Mr. Scott. If some go into professional sports, how many
    turn pro?
        Mr. Huma. Less than 2 percent.
        Mr. Scott. The other 98 percent?
        Mr. Huma. The other 98 percent, they pour all their heart
    and soul into generating this money, but not all of them
    graduate.
        Mr. Scott. Is it possible to be an employee under the
    National Labor Relations Act and not under the Fair Labor
    Standards Act where you could have a voice as a union, but not
    have the burden on the school for minimum wage, overtime, and
    other things?
        Mr. Huma. It is possible. Every school would have--every
    team would have its own test. You know, just because, let us
    say Dartmouth or USC athletes, football or basketball players,
    are recognized as employees, it does not automatically mean
    anyone on Division II, or other Division I teams or sports
    would be recognized as employees. They would have to--first of
    all, the athletes would have to want to join a union. If one
    team had a union, it does not automatically place everyone else
    in a union.
        Second, if a school did have a team where there was a
    union, say Division II even, the school does not have to enter
    into a collective bargaining agreement if it feels like it
    cannot afford what the athletes are asking for. It is an
    agreement. Two sides have to agree.
        I will also point out that none of the employment issues
    involving the NLRB affect Division II. There are no campaigns.
    Division II really has not been in the, I guess, cross hairs if
    you can say, but if they were at that point--the point is that
    universities do not have to agree to do anything they cannot
    afford.
        Again, athletes have--if a softball player at Oklahoma
    State does not want to be in a union, they do not have to be.
    For those that feel like there is a need, whether it be health
    and safety, whether it be compensation issues, they should have
    the option to do that, if by law--if the law recognizes them as
    employees.
        Mr. Scott. They can bargain for workers' compensation
    coverage for injuries. What happens now if an athlete is
    injured?
        Mr. Huma. Right now, it depends on the school. The school--
    it is always optional. You know, in Division I they passed what
    is another unenforced standard. You know, there are safety
    guidelines that are not enforced. Division I recently said any
    Division I school is supposed to be able to pay for the medical
    expenses while the athletes are there. There is nothing
    enforceable about that.
        We have had athletes for years come to us with out-of-
    pocket medical expenses their schools do not cover. Some of
    those bills go into collections, and they do not find out until
    they are trying to buy their first car. It is a very deceptive
    industry, but a collective bargaining agreement is a legally
    binding agreement. If a school says, ``We're going to pay for
    your medical'', then it is iron clad.
        Mr. Scott. What happens to disability?
        Mr. Huma. That is really--you know, there is nothing there
    for the athletes unless they are catastrophically injured,
    which means $90,000 in deductible payments, which very few
    injuries reach. There have been studies finding that about 50
    percent of Division I athletes across all sports suffer chronic
    injuries. Most of those athletes have no assistance when they
    are done.
        Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Walberg. I thank the gentleman. I recognize the
    gentlelady from North Carolina, Ms. Foxx.
        Mrs. Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank our witnesses
    for being here today. Mr. Nash, in profit generating college
    sports, we already see a trend of student-athletes staying long
    past the typical 4 years of eligibility. This is for some
    athletes the maximum amount of time in college athletics to
    profit as long as possible, as if it were a full-time job.
        How might this problem be exacerbated if all student-
    athletes are considered employees?
        Mr. Nash. Thank you for the question. I think there would
    be a real danger in that problem being exacerbated, because
    there would--one subject of collective bargaining, if it were
    to be allowed, would be to remove the eligibility rules, and
    demand that student-athletes be able to participate as long as
    they like. It would be a potential subject to bargaining.
        Mrs. Foxx. What impact do you believe this trend has on the
    overall educational mission of a university?
        Mr. Nash. Well, I think there is no question that the
    movement to reclassify student-athletes as employees has a
    significant potential to interfere with education. We have seen
    that in the cases that have been brought before the NLRB. We
    saw that in the USC case where the general counsel of the NLRB
    challenged the USC student-athlete handbook, which provided the
    students with guidance on how to deal with interviews and
    social media, and encouraged them to speak positively about
    their teammates, and be careful about not posting things that
    could follow you for life.
        According to the NLRB in the complaint that they issued
    against USC, that violated the labor laws if they were in
    place.
        Mrs. Foxx. Thank you. Ms. Wynne, some have noted that the
    trend of professional student-athletes could lead to fewer
    roster responses for freshman or transfers. As a former
    student-athlete, does this trend concern you?
        Ms. Wynne. I think that this trend does concern me, and it
    concerns my counterparts, other student-athletes because we are
    not in favor of cutting athletic opportunity.
        Mrs. Foxx. In your written testimony, you mentioned the
    importance of academics during your time as a student-athlete
    at Oklahoma State University. Can you discuss your academic
    experience as a student-athlete, and as part of that, how might
    the importance of academics change if student-athletes are
    deemed to be employees?
        Ms. Wynne. My academic experience was certainly a high
    point of my career. I studied strategic communications in
    undergrad, and during that time my coach also was very
    supportive of joining extracurricular clubs as well, so I had
    the ability to join an advertising club in my college.
        My coaches took academics very seriously. When we were
    playing on the road we had study halls on the road with each
    other, and even our academic advisers would travel with us to
    ensure that we had the most adequate resources at all times.
    They demonstrated a very healthy balance between my athletic
    experience and my academic experience.
        Mrs. Foxx. Well, that is wonderful to hear that there was
    that emphasis on your academics. Ms. McWilliams Parker,
    academic achievement and professional development have been the
    primary purpose of post-secondary education in the student-
    athlete experience.
        What educational and other benefits do student-athletes
    gain from their athletic experience, and how does this
    experience help them in their future careers?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. I would say that the whole team
    concept of being on a team, that experience by itself, is
    pretty powerful. You learn leadership. You learn perseverance.
    I mean even in these discussions of injury and being hungry,
    and all those other things. I mean there is something about
    athletics that defines who we are as a country, and as we are
    as a community, and to provide access and opportunity for our
    student-athletes, whether it is careers.
        I mean part of my institution helped me get a post-graduate
    scholarship to go get my degree at Temple. I have never had to
    pay for college, except that 1 year that I talked about as a
    walk on. Careers, as we have partners and sponsors, I mean we
    have pathways to help them get internships, and those types of
    opportunities.
        There are just so many benefits of being a student-athlete,
    not just on the court, but also off the court, and as leaders
    and administrators we have that responsibility to support that
    effort.
        Mrs. Foxx. Well, thank you very much. My grandson was on
    the track team. He was a thrower in high school and in college.
    I think he learned a lot about teamwork, and he also told--said
    the coach told him if you show up on time, you are late, show
    up 10 minutes early, that is a wonderful characteristic to have
    in our country. Thank you very much, and I appreciate it.
        Mr. Walberg. I thank the gentlelady, and I recognize the
    Ranking Member, Representative DeSaulnier from California.
        Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you. I want to thank all the
    witnesses again. Terrific testimony. Mr. Huma, a lot has
    changed other than you have gone from a linebacker's build and
    five meals a day to three and a DB, but could you talk a little
    bit about--I mean, in our--in sports there has been lots of
    arguments for decades about what is an amateur, whether it is
    the Olympics or college athletics, and what is a professional.
        What has changed, from your perspective, to make this a
    more acute need to define the boundaries of professionalism and
    amateurism?
        Mr. Huma. Thanks for that question. I think, you know,
    today the high revenue college sports are almost
    indistinguishable from the pros. Obviously, college is
    involved, but besides that, again, it was mentioned just
    yesterday, there was a hearing. Because there was legal
    pressure again, one of the avenues to fight against this
    injustice, the NCAA Power Five Conferences are being pushed to
    finally share revenue with athletes.
        As we speak right now there are recruits, 16, 17 years old
    being signed by schools right now to professional agreements,
    so--and that is a good thing. That is a great development, and
    that is now something even the schools are celebrating, they
    kind of have to because they have no choice, but hey, we are
    there. That was because athlete's rights were not taken away by
    Congress.
        I will point out as an athlete, all the athletes we work
    with, there are very special things about college sports, you
    know, but amateurism has nothing to do with it. It has nothing
    to do with it. You can learn leadership if you are an employee.
    You know, you can learn all the different things we have talked
    about today: teamwork, camaraderie. That does not go away
    because someone has rights, because someone is an employee. You
    know, the ability to play at a high level and pursue a degree,
    that is really what makes college sports special, and I think
    if you dissect what everyone is talking about here, that is
    what is there.
        The employee status issue does not negate that. It does not
    take away from being a student. You have students in bookstores
    at all the schools we are talking about. They are employees.
    You have some students on these campuses, they actually have
    the right to form a union, but we are not here talking about
    that. This is about taking away rights from athletes, so that
    they are not empowered to make the changes this industry has
    never wanted to make.
        You know, the first year that we actually announced what we
    were doing, within months, three football players died in off-
    season workouts. Since then, there has been death after death
    after death. You can set your watch to it. The very next year I
    testified in Congress, 2002, begging Congress, ``Please do
    something'', and nothing has been done.
        There have been individuals that have talked about it. I
    was really in agreement with much of what Congressman
    Baumgartner said today. Congress, you have the votes, you can
    solve these issues, and this is what I am here pleading for on
    behalf of all the families that have suffered, and the families
    that will suffer if Congress does not act.
        Mr. DeSaulnier. My district is next to the mothership, the
    University of California. When I talk to the people in the
    football program at Berkeley, or my very dear friend who is the
    coach of the rugby team, sort of the rugby program in the
    United States, this challenge does not--to Mr. Baumgarten's
    comments, and Mr. Nash's too, there seems to be an ability to
    fix this. The idea of pooling the revenue, to make sure that
    these minor sports--and that is a misnomer from my perspective,
    having been a lacrosse player many years ago--to get all the
    benefits that you have talked about, so there does--and your
    comments about your agreement, I am in agreement too--but
    beyond that are these questions--and we always sort of
    mythologized the Rudy's of the world--but then underlying, and
    that is not just unique to college athletics; there are the
    issues you mentioned about sexual exploitation and harassment,
    just harassment of people who are in the program anyways.
    Defining that, as opposed to what Ms. McWilliams talked about,
    is dealing with adversity, that is legitimate adversity.
        There it strikes me as sort of the challenge we have here,
    is making this work, but also making sure that some of the
    cultures that we have unfortunately dealt with for too long do
    not get addressed, and the athletes have a chance to defend
    themselves, as an employee would.
        Mr. Huma. Absolutely. I think there is a big difference
    between the challenges that make us stronger as a college
    athlete, you know, dealing with adversity within a normal
    realm, but that adversity should not include sexual assault.
    You know, and UC Berkeley, that was one of--I could have listed
    names, but UC Berkeley, 2014, Ted Agu passed away. The
    university admitted negligence. Now, the trainer that oversaw
    that workout was the same trainer at Central Florida just a few
    years before that oversaw another workout death among similar
    circumstances: sickle cell, which is completely preventable.
    That trainer could be anywhere today, you know.
        That is not the type of adversity that people can walk off.
    That family is devastated. Ted is gone.
        Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you, I yield back.
        Mr. Walberg. I thank the gentleman. I recognize the
    gentlelady from Michigan, Ms. McClain.
        Mrs. McClain. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all
    for being here today. Really, what I want to talk about is the
    difference between employment status and non-employment status
    for the athletes. If you could start, and, Ms. Wynne, I will
    start with you, what is the advantage of making student-
    athletes employees versus non-employees, or disadvantaged from
    your perspective?
        Ms. Wynne. From my perspective, I think that employment
    status yields more disadvantages than they do advantages
    because the majority of a student-athlete, and I am here
    representing the female student-athletes, and Olympic sports as
    well. I think that employment status will shift the freedom for
    student-athletes to explore academic interests, transfer
    capabilities, or just playing for the love of the game, and
    replace that with legal contracts, performance pressures,
    financial decisions.
        I know myself I signed by NLI at 16 years old, and so I was
    very young, and I started my freshman year as a 17-year-old
    student, so opening those conversations, even to minors, I feel
    like that is a dangerous future in my opinion.
        Mrs. McClain. OK. I mean yesterday in your order to protect
    the balance right, I introduced the Protecting Student Athletes
    Economic Freedom Act, which clarifies that a student-athlete is
    not an employee of a college, conference, or other
    associations. Ms. McWilliams Parker, how would you, or excuse
    me, how would--this is kind of awkward, but un-unionization of
    studentathletes impact the school's ability to support their
    students and academic programs?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Yes. Thank you for that question. I
    think about the opportunity to continue to give them
    scholarships, you know, even the cost of the academic support,
    the regular mental health services that we have, the training
    support that is needed, the media support, career development
    success. I mean all of those things are going to be possibly
    compromised because of the costs associated with it from that
    department, athletics department.
        I mean I shared earlier, our departments are already
    operating in a deficit, so the more strain that we put on
    financially to provide those resources on top of additional
    resources, there would be some concern.
        Mrs. McClain. What do you say to the folks that say but we
    have to protect these athletes?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. I do not know why we do not think we
    are not protecting them already. I work in college athletics.
    My job every day is to protect student-athletes, give them the
    best opportunity to participate in championships, and make sure
    that we have the staffing and the support they need.
        We are talking about different subsets of institutions. We
    have got private, we have got public, we have got larger, we
    have got smaller, we have got bigger resources. We have got
    limited resources. I am in limited resources, and so we need to
    protect those limited resources institutions, by making sure we
    can sustain opportunities for studies like Ms. Wynne, who come
    to some of our schools.
        Mrs. McClain. If I am understanding it correctly, you think
    as a student-athlete, or a former student-athlete, being an
    employee is not a good thing. As an administrator, do you also
    agree with that?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Absolutely. I mean we are protecting
    the Olympic sports. We are protecting Title IX, and Title IX is
    not just about women, it is also about our men. We are trying
    to protect the disparity of the playing field. I mean there are
    a lot of implications here on paying student-athletes.
        Mrs. McClain. You actually have some trust in people. You
    have some trust in the athletes. You have some trust in each
    other. You do not need big brothers in essence to come in and
    regulate everything?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Despite what everybody says, I am
    part of the NCAA. I am the NCAA. I am one of the administrators
    that sits around the table like you all do to make policies and
    processes and procedures, so that our institutions and student-
    athletes can have that experience. Our student-athletes around
    the table, we have leadership around the table, and should we
    be getting better? Absolutely.
        Are we getting better? Absolutely. Are these conversations
    helpful to help us guide to the path of getting better?
    Absolutely.
        Mrs. McClain. Just to be clear, and I am being a little
    sarcastic, which I do not mean to be, but you have the athletes
    who participate, you have the administrators, you mean you
    actually collaborate to find out what the best course of action
    is, and you guys can do that right now?
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Absolutely. We are doing it.
        Mrs. McClain. That is great. Good for you. I applaud you.
        Ms. McWilliams Parker. Thank you.
        Mrs. McClain. I mean I think we need to get back into
    having a little bit of faith into our people. Thank you. I know
    I am over time, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. Thank you all.
        Mr. Walberg. I thank the gentlelady. Now I recognize the
    gentlelady from Connecticut, Representative Hayes.
        Mrs. Hayes. Thank you and thank you to our witnesses for
    being here today to testify. I apologize for coming in late. I
    am juggling multiple hearings.
        College athletics has become a multi-billion-dollar
    industry with the National Collegiate Athletic Association, or
    the NCAA, bringing in nearly $1.4 billion in revenue in 2024. I
    can tell you that I have absolute faith in college sports,
    being from the basketball championship of the world where our
    UConn women just won a 12th national title. It is the only
    sport we have. Our college athletes is Connecticut--I mean we
    have Connecticut Sun now, but college athletics is Connecticut
    sports, and this is a conversation we have often at home.
    Immediately after that win, one of the things that Coach
    Auriemma spoke about was the disparities for college athletes.
        It is very fitting that we are having this hearing here
    today. For many young people, an athletic scholarship can be a
    pathway out of poverty, but a scholarship alone does not help
    an athlete trying to feed themselves or provide for their
    families back at home.
        These scholarships are typically contingent upon an athlete
    being enrolled as a full-time student and meeting specific
    academic requirements. Across various sports and divisions,
    college athletics report spending between 30--college athletes
    report spending between 30 to 50 hours a week on athletic
    activities despite NCAA caps on the number of hours athletes
    may engage in ``countable athletically related activities.''
        In fact, many athletes report feeling pressured to attend
    so-called voluntary athletic sessions for fear of retaliation,
    or they are worried they may lose their spot on their team or
    incur a broader punishment for their teammates.
        This is an incredible level of control over how a person
    spends their time and fulfills the basic requirements of being
    a member of team. While a large part of the conversation around
    college athletics and collective bargaining centers around
    monetary compensation, a union also provides security for its
    members when facing excessive demands.
        Mr. Huma, could you please explain how union representation
    could help athletes' pressure to invest excessive hours in
    outside activities?
        Mr. Huma. Absolutely. I mean if you look at the pros, they
    have unions, and I think that many people watching today would
    love if their sibling, child, if they were in the pros, and
    they have unions, and they can negotiate how long their time
    demands are on their athletics.
        I think first and foremost, anyone that has concern about
    the over-emphasis of athletics, overcoming academics and
    affecting graduation rates, has to recognize that the athletes,
    if they had a union, and could collectively bargain, could try
    to reduce hours that are required of them.
        Mrs. Hayes. Thank you. There are more than 500,000 NCAA
    college athletes, but fewer than 2 percent of them will go on
    to play sports professionally. The NCAA has pointed this out in
    social media campaigns in recent years. The demands of an
    athletic schedule can often stand in the way of a student
    pursuing internships, career workshops, and other types of
    training that will help them in their post-graduate years.
        Every college athlete should have the flexibility to ensure
    that they can pursue their dreams of playing collegiate sports
    and invest in their futures after college. Unions provide their
    members with a seat at the table and can do the same for
    college athletes. Mr. Huma, what benefits could union
    representation offer so that college athletes can prioritize
    their academics, and post-college goals, while meeting the
    vigor of an athletic schedule?
        Mr. Huma. That is a great question. You know, beyond just
    reducing the time demands, there could be ironclad agreements
    that ensure that their scholarship is not revocable at each
    year. That a coach can't, ``fire you or run you off,'' because
    despite the promises and the rhetoric, that if athletes become
    employees they could suddenly be fired--they are getting fired
    all the time, for years and years. The coach creates a hostile
    work environment, breaks the athlete mentally to the point
    where they want to transfer or quit their sport altogether.
    That could be negotiated; the terms of whether, you know, a
    person could be fired or not, and that is as we have mentioned,
    tied to your educational opportunity.
        Post-eligibility as well. If you need another semester or
    two to graduate because you have been dealing with such high
    athletic demands, that could be negotiated. You know, how about
    an extra couple of years to graduate? Again, not as a verbal
    promise that no one is enforcing, but under an agreement.
        Mrs. Hayes. Thank you. Like I said, from a State like
    Connecticut where college athletes is our sport, they are
    making big money right now in Connecticut off of this
    championship. I yield back, thank you.
        Mr. Onder. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair recognizes
    himself for 5 minutes. You know, I think the question at this
    hearing today is whether NCAA college sports are farm teams, or
    mere farm teams for the pros. In Missouri we have taken a
    position on this issue. In July 2023, Governor Mike Parson
    signed into law legislation clarifying that student-athletes at
    Missouri's colleges and universities are not employees.
        Mr. Nash, as you point out in your written testimony, there
    have been efforts in recent years to reclassify student-
    athletes as employees and allow for collective bargaining.
    Supporters of these efforts often cite professional sports
    teams as the model. We have heard that quite a bit today.
        Do you agree with claims that student-athletes are no
    different than professional athletes, and they should be
    treated as such in the eyes of the law, especially Division 1
    sports that generate a lot of revenue?
        Mr. Nash. Thank you. No. I do not. I do not think that
    student-athletes at the college level are remotely equivalent
    to professional athletes for the simple reason professional
    athletes are not required or not admitted as students under
    academic standards at a university.
        Their sole focus is to play their sport. A college athlete,
    and I would defer to Ms. Wynne on this. She is in a better
    position to speak than me, a college athlete has to be admitted
    as a student, has to continue to progress toward a degree, and
    there is a tremendous amount of focus on their education.
        Mr. Onder. Yes. Do you find it ironic that all this
    discussion of employment, and the unionization, it centers
    around Division 1 sports that are profitable, and as you point
    out in two sports, basketball and football. What about--where
    is the solicitousness of the worker's rights and all the other
    sports that are not profitable?
        Mr. Nash. Well, that is a good question, and that is I
    think probably the biggest problem that I see with the effort
    to turn student-athletes into professionals. It just simply
    ignores that the arguments that are being made really are
    focused on just the so-called high revenue sports, and really
    on just a few individual athletes in those, the sort of
    professional free agent kind of model, while ignoring all the
    other sports.
        Mr. Onder. That is something I wanted to address.
    Representative Hayes pointed out, and correct me if this is not
    correct, that the NCAA had revenues in 2024 of 1.4 billion
    dollars. Do you know what percentage of athletic programs are
    profitable? You can express that any way you wish.
        It is my understanding that not even all football or
    basketball programs are profitable to the schools, much less
    lacrosse, cross-country, wrestling and so forth.
        Mr. Nash. I defer to the NCAA and the colleges on that.
        Mr. Onder. Sure.
        Mr. Nash. I think the assumption of your question is
    actually quite correct. One example I can give you is in the
    NLRB case involving the University of Southern California, the
    focus there was on football and basketball.
        Mr. Onder. Right.
        Mr. Nash. The evidence in the case showed that the revenue
    from those sports, not only supported by the more than 20 other
    sports, the athletic department as a whole, according to the
    reports that were provided to the education department,
    operates at a loss.
        The revenue did not even support all of the sports and
    required further assistance--further financial support from the
    university.
        Mr. Onder. Yes. Yes, that is when you see a big number like
    1.4 billion OK, that is revenue, what is expense?
        Mr. Nash. Right.
        Mr. Onder. Then to the extent revenue exceeds expense in
    the nonprofit world we do not call that profit, but what is
    that revenue used for in other things, like supporting the
    sports that are not profitable. Mr. Huma, you cited deaths in
    college athletics in training and so on, cause of death
    generally cardiac issues, heat stroke? What is it generally?
        Mr. Huma. Cardiac, heat illness, sickle-cell related, even
    asthma, things that--the deaths we are concerned with are
    preventable.
        Mr. Onder. Yes.
        Mr. Huma. You know, and sometimes, you know, there is risk
    inherent in sports, but preventable deaths are still around
    unfortunately.
        Mr. Onder. Yes. I am a medical doctor, and I actually have
    a son with congenital heart disease, and his congenital heart
    disease was very obvious at birth, but there are congenital
    heart diseases, some of which can be tested by--discovered by
    pre-screening and precautions taken, and probably in most cases
    not participating in athletics at that level among other
    things.
        Are you aware, is there screening right now at the NCAA
    level for these undiagnosed congenital heart problems?
        Mr. Huma. No, but what is interesting is that now they are
    screening for sickle cells for instance, right?
        Mr. Onder. Right.
        Mr. Huma. That has given the athletic programs the ability
    to say ``Hey, this athlete has sickle cell, let's make sure we
    follow the protocols in workouts.'' With Bucknell University,
    Calvin Dickey Jr. had that, their athletics program knew, but
    they did not follow the protocols, and he passed away.
        Mr. Onder. Yes, thank you. My time has expired. I yield
    back. The Chair next recognizes the Ranking Member for a
    closing statement.
        Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank
    you, and all of us, for being here. I really want to thank the
    witnesses again. One, just, observation in the last
    conversation is one of the threats to minor league sports is
    these subsidies that come from those big sports. There are some
    instances where there is more pressure to get rid of minor
    sports, so that that money stays in those big programs. If we
    want to keep those minor sports going, we have to have an
    honest conversation about all of this. I am encouraged by some
    of the conversation today, that there is an acknowledgement to
    keep your experiences, my experiences, healthy by making sure
    that this revenue continues to be generated in such a way that
    it continues to support this larger, really beneficial culture
    in college sports for all the college athletes.
        As I said earlier, our priority in this Committee must
    always be the health and well-being of the college athletes.
    That benefits everyone, but particularly they should be the
    focus of our attention. It is our responsibility to stand with
    these students as they stand for themselves.
        College sports have changed since the days of amateurism
    and leather helmets, as many athletes suffer exploitation and
    abuse. It should come as no shock that many are attempting to
    exercise their right to defend themselves and organize for
    their own protection.
        College athletes are not a monolith, as we have talked
    about today, and should not be treated as such. It would be
    inappropriate to ban all athletes from being classified as
    employees, just as it would be inappropriate to call every
    single college athlete an employee.
        College athletics exist on spectrum, and employment issues
    should be addressed according to existing labor laws. As we
    speak, the current administration is attacking higher
    education, and that also creates a vulnerability for the
    college student. While I am grateful for the productive
    discussion on college athletics, and I see a potential for us
    on this Committee, and in the other Committees of jurisdiction,
    to come up with a meaningful solution, Mr. Chairman, let us not
    forget that one of the biggest problems and threats facing
    public education today is not college athletes unionizing, it
    is the policies and priorities of the current administration.
    Thank you and I yield back.
        Chairman Allen. I thank the Ranking Member, and now I would
    like to make my closing statement. First, you know, if there is
    any polling available from NCAA from student-athletes on their
    interest in joining or not joining a union, I would like for
    the Committee to do the research on that, and let us get that
    polling, so we can kind of, you know, hear from the athletes
    themselves on what they are thinking about this.
        Then certainly, on your comment about the Department of
    Education, we are spending more money than any other nation and
    we are losing ground rapidly in education, so we have got a lot
    of work to do on this Committee, and I agree with you, the
    Ranking Member, that we have got to correct that process.
        We learned a lot today, and in House about student-
    athletes, and how they would be negatively affected if they
    were classified as employees. Obviously, we do not want our
    athletes in danger, and we need to speak to that as well.
    Employee status would harm these athletes by restricting their
    freedoms, altering their significant benefits they currently
    enjoy.
        Undermining non-revenue generating sports, triggering
    unintended consequences like taxing, scholarships, and taking
    the focus off education, which I said earlier, should be our
    No. 1 priority, which is central, and really, the whole reason
    for the student-athlete experience.
        I mean it was college first, then athletics I believe, is
    the way it all got started. In response, our Committee
    colleague from Michigan, Representative Lisa McClain introduced
    the Protecting Students Athletes Economic Freedom Act, which
    would shield student-athletes from misguided efforts to deem
    them to be employees.
        It is my hope that my Committee colleagues will join this
    effort and continue to work together with our colleagues on the
    other Committees, to find solutions that ensure the viability
    of college sports for future generations. I would like to thank
    our witnesses again for taking the time to testify before the
    Subcommittee today, and without objection, there being no
    further business, the Subcommittee stands adjourned. Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 11:44 a.m., the Subcommittee on Health,
    Employment, Labor and Pensions was adjourned.]

        [Additional submissions from Chairman Walberg follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]