After a memorable Fourth of July weekend, I returned to the office last week facing a calendar full of meetings and a Congress back in session. On Monday, I accompanied Christina West, assistant vice chancellor for federal relations, to the Hill to meet with staff members from the Tennessee delegation. In individual meeting with staff members from Representatives Marsha Blackburn and Jim Cooper’s office, we discussed the Frontiers in Innovation, Research, Science, and Technology Act of 2014 (FIRST Act) and why some of the bill’s provisions are harmful to both Vanderbilt and to the scientific community as a whole. In our meeting with Senator Alexander’s HELP Committee staff we asked for additional information on the Financial Aid Simplification and Transparency (FAST) Act. These meetings allowed me to learn more about both bills, but more importantly, they allowed me to compare and contrast the tone and direction that each meeting took. Tuesday and Wednesday were spent at my second AAU Council on Federal Relations monthly meeting. After a month in the office, I felt more prepared going in, and I had substantially more background knowledge on many of the topics that were discussed. One of the highlights from the meeting were two Senate chiefs of staff who addressed us on the second day. They provided us with a firsthand outlook on future congressional action and gave a brief overview of their bosses’ views on certain policy issues. It was surprising how candid they were (in a mostly nonpartisan way) when they discussed the current state of Congress. Finally, on Thursday I attended a Senate Commerce Committee hearing titled “Promoting the Well-Being and Academic Success of College Athletes.” The hearing featured testimony from a star studded panel including Mark Emmert, the President of the NCAA, and Myron Rolle, the former FSU football player who won a Rhodes scholarship. While the hearing lasted for almost three hours, and committee members barraged Dr. Emmert with questions for approximately two hours, I was shocked by the lack of aggression in the tone of questioning. It will be interesting to see what happens from here, as it appeared that the NCAA is more concerned with the pending decision in the Ed O’Bannon trial, which will determine whether the NCAA is illegally restricting athletes from being paid for their names, images, and likenesses than any potential Congressional action. -Nate Martis, VU OFR Summer Intern
Posted on: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 14:38:24 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015