[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 6 (Tuesday, February 1, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S213-S216]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself, Mr. Abraham, and Ms. Snowe):
  S. 2018. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
revise the update factor used in making payments to PPS hospitals under 
the Medicare program; to the Committee on Finance.


                 the American Hospital Preservation Act

  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with 
my distinguished colleague from Michigan, Mr. Abraham, the American 
Hospital Preservation Act.
  This legislation builds upon legislation we introduced last year to 
preserve the ability of American hospitals to continue to provide the 
highest level of health care to be found anywhere in the world. The 
bill will fully restore scheduled cuts in annual inflation adjustments 
for in-patient services given to hospitals under the Medicare program.
  Mr. President, last year Congress passed legislation restoring almost 
$17 billion over five years in scheduled cuts and reductions in 
increases in provider reimbursement payments for various Medicare 
services. While some of these cuts were mandated by the 1997 Balanced 
Budget Act, or ``BBA,'' which laid the historic foundation for the 
balanced federal budget we enjoy today, many more of the cuts and the 
dramatic impact of some of the cuts came as a direct result of policies 
and practices of the Health Care Financing Administration. All told, 
Medicare providers faced an estimated $200 billion in reduced payments 
over the next five years, far in excess of the 1997 estimate of $116 
billion in savings. On top of this, in 1999 the Clinton Administration 
proposed an additional $9 billion in cuts from the Medicare program, on 
top of the BBA savings.
  All of this began to spell disaster for American hospitals, the 
backbone of our nation's health care delivery system and those health 
care providers most heavily dependent on, and sensitive to, the 
Medicare system. Last year, I and many of my colleagues in Congress 
began to hear from hospital administrators, trustees, and health 
professionals that they were struggling to maintain their quality and 
variety of health services in the face of mounting budgetary pressures. 
With the HCFA-imposed cuts they were seeing, many well-reputed and 
efficiently run hospitals even began for the first time to run deficits 
and to project closure in the next few years.
  For many of these hospitals, particularly those in the rural areas of 
our nation, to close would mean not only the loss of life-saving 
medical services to the residents of the area, but also the loss of one 
of the core components of the local community. Jobs would be lost, 
businesses would wither, and the sense of community and stability that 
a local hospital brings would suffer.
  The Balanced Budget Refinement Act Congress passed last year made the 
situation a little brighter for a number of these struggling hospitals. 
It eases the transition from cost-based reimbursement to prospective 
payment for hospital outpatient services, it restores some of the cuts 
to disproportionate share (``DiSh'') payments, and it provides targeted 
relief for teaching hospitals and cancer and rehabilitation hospitals.
  I was particularly pleased that the bill contained a portion of the 
legislation I introduced last year, an expanded version of which I am 
introducing today. While my bill proposed restoring in-patient 
inflation adjustments for all hospitals, the final legislative package 
included such relief only for fiscal year 2000 and only for

[[Page S214]]

designated ``sole community provider'' hospitals. While this was a step 
in the right direction, more must be done not only to ensure survival 
among our nation's hospitals, but also to ensure that they continue to 
be able to provide the highest level and quality of care that they can 
to their patients.
  Hospitals continue to struggle to meet the continued rise in 
personnel costs, prescription drugs, and blood supplies, just to name a 
few areas. And this is coming at a time when hospitals are being doubly 
squeezed by the pressures of flat or reduced government health care 
reimbursement rates and the rapid growth of cost-conscious managed care 
private insurance.
  The bill we are introducing today will make sure that hospitals are 
able to adjust to these changes by ensuring that their Medicare 
payments for their in-patient services actually keep up with the rate 
of hospital inflation. It will restore the full 1.1 percent in 
scheduled reductions from the annual inflation updates for in-patient 
services called for by the BBA. Moreover, rather than just applying to 
a small group of hospitals, this legislation would benefit every 
hospital in America, providing an estimated $6.9 billion in additional 
Medicare payments over the next five years.
  Mr. President, I realize that this bill will require some budgetary 
offset, and that the overall goal of maintaining a solvent and strong 
Medicare system for our nation's seniors is and will remain the 
overriding goal. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle to ensure that this bill meets that objective and 
fits within our overall budget constraints.
  But I believe that, as we enter a new millennium and a new era of 
medical breakthroughs the likes of which we can only now dream about, 
we simply must continue to invest in the core infrastructure of our 
nation's health delivery system--our hospitals. Doing so will ensure 
the future health and longevity of all Americans. This bill will take a 
significant step in that direction, and I urge my colleagues to 
cosponsor and support it.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BROWNBACK (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Cochran, Mr. 
        Jeffords, Mr. Helms, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Edwards, Mr. 
        Voinovich, Mr. McCain, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 2021. A bill to prohibit high school and college sports gambling 
in all States including States where such gambling was permitted prior 
to 1991; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


            high school and college gambling prohibition act

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, today I introduce a bill along with 
Senators Leahy, Cochran, Jeffords, Helms, Durbin, Lugar, Edwards, 
Voinovich, McCain, and Feinstein, which seeks to protect the integrity 
of high school and college sports and reduce the unseemly influences 
that gambling has on our student athletes.
  I think you can tell by the coalition of people putting in this bill 
we are introducing today that this is a bipartisan issue that crosses 
virtually all ideological lines but is deeply concerned about the 
integrity of intercollegiate athletics and amateur sports. What we are 
seeking to do by this bill is to make it clear that it is illegal to 
wager on intercollegiate athletics, to wager on the Olympics.
  The High School and College Gambling Prohibition Act is in direct 
response to recommendations made by the National Gambling Impact Study 
Commission (NGISC), which last year concluded a 2-year study on the 
impact of legalized gambling on our country.
  The recommendation called for a ban on all legalized gambling on 
amateur sports and is supported by the National Collegiate Athletic 
Association (NCAA), which represents more than 1,000 colleges and 
universities nationwide. This bipartisan bill will prohibit all 
legalized gambling on high school and college sports, as well as the 
Summer and Winter Olympic Games.
  Gambling on college games and student athletes is not only 
inappropriate, it can be disastrous. There have been more point-shaving 
scandals on our colleges and universities in the 1990's than in every 
other decade before it combined.
  There have been 10 such cases in the 1990s. Those are the ones who 
were caught. How many went on that we don't know about? These scandals 
are a result of an increasing amount of gambling that is taking place 
on amateur sports. We now have annually around $1 billion a year bet 
legally on amateur athletic games. That may sound like a lot, and it 
is. It is a lot to influence those games, but for the overall gambling 
industry it is a small percentage. It is less than a half of 1 percent. 
So to the industry that is small. To amateur athletics it is big, and 
it is leading to a burgeoning problem that we are having of point 
shaving cases amongst college athletics.
  The scandal also points to another problem, and this gambling 
increase actually points to another problem.
  A recent Gallup poll found that betting on college sports was twice 
as prevalent among teenagers (18%) as adults (9%). The American Academy 
of Pediatrics estimates that there are more than a million compulsive 
teenage gamblers, whose first experience with gambling is on sports. 
The National Gambling Impact Study Commission warned that sports 
gambling ``can serve as gateway behavior for adolescent gamblers, and 
can devastate individuals and careers.''
  Critics have claimed this is a State issue, not a Federal one. 
Certainly, I am listening to that debate and am a person who is a 
strong supporter of States rights and believe strongly in devolution of 
authority from the Federal Government to the State government. But this 
argument just doesn't hold water.
  Congress already determined that it is a federal issue with the 
passage of Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) in 
1992. In addition, while Nevada is the only state where legal gambling 
on collegiate and Olympic sporting events occurs, Nevada's gaming 
regulations prohibit gambling on any of Nevada's own teams because of 
the potential to jeopardize the integrity of those sporting events.
  Let me give you the truth of the situation. You can go to Nevada and 
you cannot bet on UNLV in the basketball game. But you can bet on the 
University of Kansas basketball team and game. The reason the Nevada 
Legislature, I understand, took issue with betting on Nevada teams is 
by saying, well, it creates an unseemly situation and the potential for 
abuse. If the potential is there in Nevada, it is there across the rest 
of the country. That is what the NCAA is citing, and that is why this 
is their top legislative issue. They are saying this is important 
because it is starting to influence more and more sporting events and 
that we are afraid that may happen in the future.
  The NCAA used to be headquartered in Kansas. Until recently, it was 
headquartered in my State.
  We all consider ourselves to be advocates of state's rights, but in 
our eyes that means a state's authority to determine how best to govern 
within that state's own boundaries--not the authority to set laws that 
allow a state to impose its policies on every other state while 
exempting itself. Gambling on college sports, both legal and illegal, 
threatens the integrity of the game--and that threat extends beyond any 
one state's border.
  This legislation will have minimal economic impact on the Nevada 
casino industry. The NCAA has reported that sports betting makes up 
less than 1% of the total revenue by casinos in Las Vegas. The National 
Gambling Impact Study Commission Report recognized that sports wagering 
does not ``contribute to local economies or produce many jobs or create 
other economic sectors.''
  This is not an economic issue. It is not even a gambling issue. This 
is about the integrity of amateur athletics. It is about the integrity 
of the Olympics and whether or not there are going to continue to be 
more and more of these point-shaving cases involved because of the 
amount of money involved in the gambling and the ability to impact some 
of the athletes who are involved.
  I want to make one other point too; that is, we are not talking about 
office pools or ``March Madness'' and people having an office pool that 
looks at the NCAA Final Four. Those activities we are not talking about 
at all. They go on. But we are not addressing that issue in this bill. 
What we are talking about is the legalized sports betting that takes 
place in casinos in Nevada

[[Page S215]]

and how those large-scale bets impact on intercollegiate athletics 
across this country.
  Senator Leahy was on the floor earlier. And I, along with Senator 
Durbin and Tim Roemer from the House of Representatives had a press 
conference earlier today with the NCAA. At that press conference, we 
had the gentleman who orchestrated the northwest football point-shaving 
scheme problem that they had during the decade of the 1990s. He said if 
it wasn't for the ability to place the $20,000 legal bet in Nevada, he 
wouldn't have had the system in place to be able to organize and put 
the money out there to organize this scheme. He had a powerful 
statement of his personal contrition and how he feels about having been 
a part of that. He blames only himself. But he said the system was 
there--and the temptation clearly is. We are trying to move collegiate 
athletics into a legal area.
  This nation's college and university system is one of our greatest 
assets. We offer the world the model for post-secondary education. 
Gambling on the outcome of college sporting events tarnishes the 
integrity of sports and diminishes respect and regard for our colleges 
and universities. This bill removes the ambiguity that surrounds 
gambling on college sports. It sends the clear and unmistakable message 
that it is illegal. We should not gamble with the integrity of our 
colleges, or the future of our college athletes. Our young athletes 
deserve legal protection from the seedy influences of the gambling 
industry, and fans deserve to know that athletic competitions are 
honest and fair. This legislation ensures that it will be so. I welcome 
your support.
  I welcome anybody in this body and the House of Representatives to 
support us in this effort. It is important. I fear if we don't pass 
something like this, you are going to see more and more of these point-
shaving scandals come about, as you see more and more athletes having 
the pressure they are facing with the potential for dollars occurring.
  In the decade of the 1990s--I want to repeat this one fact because I 
think it is so important--there were 10 illegal point-shaving cases the 
NCAA caught and prosecuted. Those were the ones caught. During the 
decade of the 1980s, there were two; in the 1970s, one; and in the 
prior fifties and forties, one each. So we had won, one, two in the 
1980s, and then 10 in the 1990s that we know about. How many more were 
there? Or worse still, how many more will there be in this decade of 
2000 to 2010? Let's stop that. Let's send that clear message, that 
signal. Let's help our student athletes. Let's protect the integrity of 
the sport.
  I introduce this bill, and I welcome any cosponsors.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join the senior senator 
from Kansas today to introduce legislation to ban all betting on 
college and high school sporting events, the High School and College 
Sports Gambling Prohibition Act. The recent report of the National 
Gambling Impact Study Commission recommended this ban and the National 
Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) strongly supports it to protect 
the integrity of college sports across the nation. I look forward to 
working with the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee to pass our 
bipartisan legislation this year.
  Our bipartisan bill would close a loophole in the Professional and 
Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992. That law prohibits most sports 
betting on amateur events but continued to grandfather some sports 
gambling activity that our bill would now prohibit in light of the 
recent recommendations of the National Gambling Impact Study 
Commission.
  I believe our legislation is needed to ensure the integrity of 
college sports across the country. Sports betting puts student athletes 
in vulnerable positions and threatens their integrity and the integrity 
of college and Olympic sports. It can devastate individuals and 
careers. In the past decade, college sports has suffered too many 
gambling scandals involving student athletes. For example, four 
football players at Northwestern University pled guilty to perjury 
charges related to gambling on their own games and, one player admitted 
to intentionally fumbling near the goal line in a 1994 game against 
Iowa. Just last year, a California State University at Fullerton 
student was charged with point shaving after allegedly offering $1,000 
to a player on the school's basketball team to shave points in a game 
against the University of the Pacific. Other sports gambling scandals 
have rocked the football programs at Boston College and the University 
of Maryland, and the basketball programs at Arizona State University 
and Bryant College, in the 1990s.
  Legal college sports betting undermines college sports across the 
country and encourages gamblers to tempt college students into gambling 
problems and point-shaving schemes. A national ban on college and high 
school sports betting will send a strong message to students that 
sports gambling and point shaving schemes will not be tolerated in this 
country, and it will help prevent these ravages.
  In addition, the National Gambling Impact Study Commission found in 
its June 1999 report that sports wagering has serious social costs. 
Indeed, the Commission reported: ``Sports wagering threatens the 
integrity of sports, it puts student athletes in a vulnerable position, 
it can serve as gateway behavior for adolescent gamblers, and it can 
devastate individuals and careers.'' A national ban on amateur and 
college sports betting may help prevent these ravages of sports 
wagering.
  The Commission concluded that legal sports betting spurs illegal 
gambling, finding ``legal sports wagering--especially the publication 
in the media of Las Vegas and offshore-generated point spreads--fuels a 
much larger amount of illegal sports wagering.'' Many newspapers 
publish point spreads on college games because wagers can be legally 
placed on college sporting events given the loophole in current law. 
Point spreads do not contribute to the popularity of sport; they only 
contribute to the popularity of sports gambling.
  As a result of all of these findings, the Commission recommended that 
``the betting on collegiate and amateur athletic events that is 
currently legal be banned altogether.'' I wholeheartedly agree. Closing 
this loophole is one of the Commission's clearest recommendations, and 
it is also a step that can find a clear consensus in Congress.
  In addition, our legislation outlaws betting on competitive games at 
the Summer or Winter Olympics. The Olympic tradition honors sport at 
its purest level. We, in turn, should honor that proud tradition by 
cherishing the integrity of the Olympics and prohibiting gambling 
schemes on the Summer or Winter Games. There have been enough stories 
about corruption in connection with bidding on venues for Olympic 
Games. We do not need a scandal having to do with gamblers seeking to 
influence the outcome of Olympic events. If we act soon, we have the 
opportunity to put this into place before the next Olympic games.
  During my time in the Senate, I have always tried to protect the 
rights of Vermont state and local legislators to craft their laws free 
from interference from Washington. As a defender of states' rights, I 
carefully considered the imposition of a total Federal ban on high 
school and college sports. After careful thought I have come to the 
conclusion that this ban is appropriate. Congress has already 
established a national policy against high school and college sports 
betting with passage of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection 
Act of 1992. Our bill closes a loophole in that law.
  I want to make it clear that gambling on professional sports is also 
a serious matter, worthy of national attention. Congress recognized 
this fact explicitly when it passed the Professional and Amateur Sports 
Protection Act of 1992 to arrest the growth of state sponsored sports 
gambling. By focusing our legislation today on amateur sports gambling, 
we take a first step toward resolving a fundamental problem. In 
hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, I am confident that the 
companion subject of gambling on professional sports will be addressed.
  Mr. President, our bipartisan bill is supported by a broad coalition 
of organizations dedicated to excellence in education and athletics.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support the High School and 
College Sports Gambling Prohibition Act and I urge its swift passage 
into law.
  I ask unanimous consent that a letter endorsing our legislation from 
more

[[Page S216]]

than 25 of these organizations be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                                 February 1, 2000.
     Hon. Sam Brownback,
     Hon. Patrick Leahy,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators Brownback and Leahy: The undersigned wish to 
     express their full endorsement for the legislation you have 
     introduced to eliminate all exceptions for legalized betting 
     on high-school, college and Olympic sports. We urge the U.S. 
     Senate to pass this bill that will send a clear, no-nonsense 
     message that it is wrong to gamble on college students.
       The proposed legislation is especially important to our 
     community because it will:
       Eliminate the use of Nevada sports books for gain in point 
     shaving scandals.
       Eliminate the legitimacy of publishing point spreads and 
     advertising for sports tout services.
       ``Re-sensitize'' young people and the general public to the 
     illegal nature of gambling on collegiate sports.
       Reduce the numbers of people who are introduced to sports 
     gambling.
       Eliminate conflicting messages as we combat illegal sports 
     wagering that say it is okay to wager on college some places 
     but not in others.
       We stand ready to provide support as this bill progresses 
     through the legislative process.
         The National Collegiate Athletic Association; The 
           American Council on Education; National Association of 
           Independent Colleges and Universities; American 
           Association of State Colleges and Universities; 
           Conference Commissioners Association; National 
           Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics; 
           National Association of Collegiate Women Athletics 
           Administrators; American Football Coaches Association; 
           National Association of Basketball Coaches; American 
           Federation of Teachers; U.S. Olympic Committee; 
           National Federal of State High School Associations; 
           American Association of Universities; Divisions I, II 
           and III Student Athlete Advisory Councils; The National 
           Football Foundation and College Hall of Fame.
         The Atlanta Tipoff Club Naismith Awards; The American 
           Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions 
           Officers; College Golf Foundation; College Gymnastics 
           Association; USA Volleyball; National Field Hockey 
           Coaches Association; USA Track and Field; Team 
           Handball; National Soccer Coaches Association of 
           America; American Volleyball Coaches Association; 
           American Association of Community Colleges; Golf 
           Coaches Association of America.

                          ____________________