College betting-ban debate begins

Benjamin Grove

Thursday, April 26, 2001 | 11:14 a.m.

WASHINGTON -- Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., on a mission to outlaw college sports betting in Nevada, today faced a panel of opponents to the plan, including venerable coach Pete Newell, a national sports analyst and a Harvard University addictions researcher.

McCain said he had a duty to college presidents and coaches who say his legislation closing a "Las Vegas loophole" is an important first step in attacking illegal gambling by students and athletes.

"Although the Amateur Sports Integrity Act bans legal gambling on college athletics, I expect it also will reduce a substantial amount of illegal gambling as well," McCain said.

Experts testified in today's hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee of which McCain is chairman.

Among the high-profile witnesses was University of Maryland basketball coach Gary Williams, who said students rarely distinguish between illegal gambling that thrives on college campuses, and the legal gambling in Nevada. Banning bets in Nevada will send a "national" message to students that gambling on college sports hurts the game and is illegal everywhere, he said.

"We really believe this would be a great message to these players across the country," Williams said. "Let the game alone. Let us have our game."

Penn State basketball player Titus Ivory agreed that athletes need to hear a clear statement that gambling is illegal nationwide. He said gamblers constantly harass athletes for information and criticize players for losing them money.

"My reaction to them is always the same: I'm playing the game I love, not to win money for you or anyone else,' " said.

Football coach Lou Holtz, who supports the bill, was unable to attend as expected, because of an injury.

But former Nebraska football coach and newly elected Republican Rep. Tom Osborne said gambling in Nevada hurts the game because it feeds point-spread setting that puts added pressure on players and coaches and gives fans unrealistic expectations. Osborne said the bill alone would not get rid of illegal sports gambling in America, but added, "I see no socially redeeming value to gambling on intercollegiate sports."

Nevada's four-member delegation testified against the bill. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., sits on the Commerce Committee and was allowed to pepper the witnesses with questions. He challenged Osborne's notion that banning Nevada bets would curb the proliferation of point spreads, which are available in a variety of forms outside Nevada, including online.

Ensign also challenged a Cleveland Plain Dealer sports editor who said many newspaper sports editors would likely discontinue publishing point spreads if McCain's bill passed.

"I just don't see sports editors saying, 'Yeah, let's give people information about an illegal act,' " the sports editor, Tracy Dodds Hurd, said.

Hurd said editors know some people are using the point spreads to gamble illegally. "We don't feel real good about that. On the other hand, we're giving readers information they want."

USA Today sports analyst and point-spread setter Danny Sheridan testified that McCain's bill would not stop him, however. Sheridan said that in his career he has developed a vast network of coaches and illegal and legal bookmakers and that he was sure McCain's bill would drive legal gamblers underground.

Sheridan predicted that if the bill passed, "two or three dozen" games would be fixed within 90 days because bookies would have no fear of being caught in a world of illegal gambling circles, absent the regulated, watchful eyes of the legal gambling industry in Nevada.

"It's a guarantee," Sheridan said.

Notable witnesses invited by Nevada lawmakers included former college coach Newell, 85, who said Nevada sports books are the National Collegiate Athletic Association's best watchdog for fixed games.

"The NCAA has never single-handedly uncovered a point-shaving or game-fixing scandal," Newell said. "The NCAA even credits Nevada's sports books with helping to uncover recent point-shaving schemes."

Howard Shaffer, director of the Harvard Medical School division on addictions, backed the arguments of Nevada lawmakers. He said McCain's bill would have little effect on gambling by college students and would drive some legal bettors to illegal bookies.

The hearing produced several moments of testy exchanges, including one between Sheridan and McCain over why so many respected coaches support McCain's bill.

Another occurred when Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., who along with McCain is a champion of the legislation, pleaded with witness Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., to take Kansas colleges off the boards in Nevada. He repeated his question and Reid said, "Sam, I think your question is silly, and I'm not going to answer it."

Nevada lawmakers have introduced their own bill, initially introduced last year by Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., and Reid, that would increase penalties for illegal gambling, launch a study of gambling by college students and require universities to implement anti-gambling programs. Nevada lawmakers and the gaming industry say that $380 billion is bet each year on sports, and less than 1 percent of that is bet legally in Nevada.

Ensign got one other committee member to agree the Nevada bill is a better way to attack the problem of illegal gambling, Sen. John Breaux, D-La.

"I would suggest that the (McCain) legislation misses the target," Breaux said.

Today's hearing was the first congressional hearing for the betting-ban legislation that targets Nevada, the only state that allows betting on college sports. A similar bill introduced by McCain died last year, although it is said to have majority support in Congress.

McCain plans to call for a committee vote on the bill next week and will then look for a way to push for a full Senate vote. A House hearing on the bill has not yet been scheduled.