Ted Cruz (R-TX)· Sep 24, 2026
S.Amdt. 6833: In the nature of a substitute.
Offered, and not voted on yet.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Brian Jack (R-GA)
Muhammad Ali American Boxing Revival Act of 2026
H.R. 4624 · House bill Sports and Recreation
A Republican bill with 8 Democratic cosponsors · See all 13 cosponsors
Last activity — Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
In the other chamber's committee
Passed one chamber and has been handed to a committee in the other.
The committee decides whether it goes any further, and most bills that reach a committee never leave it. A committee that simply does nothing kills a bill without anyone ever voting against it, so no news from here is usually the news.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House voice vote
- In Senate committee
The House by voice vote (members called out yes or no together): no member's position on it was recorded.
What this bill would do
The Muhammad Ali American Boxing Revival Act of 2026 amends the Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 to establish requirements for unified boxing organizations and further enhance boxer well-being. It sets specific standards for medical examinations, training facilities, and insurance policies for professional boxers. The bill requires anti-doping programs, minimum payment structures, and rules to prevent conflicts of interest and betting corruption. It also standardizes medical certifications for ringside physicians and limits championship titles to one per weight class. Finally, it outlines penalties for violations and details filing requirements with the Federal Trade Commission.
Yes· 3 of 8
- Scored +7
Does this make health care easier to get in general?
The act mandates enhanced medical presence, including an additional ambulance and ringside physician at matches.
- Scored +6
Does this raise the lowest wage an employer may pay?
The bill mandates a minimum payment of $200 per round for professional boxers.
- Scored +6
Would union members be better off under this?
The act implements stronger contract protections and safety standards for professional athletes.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
Boxers aged 40 or older face more frequent and intensive supplemental medical examination requirements.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 3, adding New Section 24(c): This provision requires at least one additional ambulance and one additional licensed physician to be continuously present at ringside during a covered match. This is positive because it increases immediate medical support and safety for boxers during fights.
-
Section 3, adding New Section 24(d): This section ensures that boxers under contract have access to training and rehabilitation facilities, medical insurance for training injuries, and a medical coordinator. This is positive because it provides vital health protections and support services to safeguard the physical well-being of the athletes.
-
Section 3, adding New Section 24(f): This guarantees that a boxer receives a minimum payment of at least $200 per round and fights at least once every six months, or receives equivalent pay. This is positive because it establishes financial floors and regular work opportunities for the fighters.
-
Section 4, amending Section 5(a)(4): This mandates that promoters or unified boxing organizations provide health insurance covering a minimum of $50,000 for match injuries and $15,000 for accidental death, without premium costs to the boxer. This is positive because it protects fighters and their families from devastating medical and funeral expenses.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Section 3, adding New Section 24(j): This provision states that the cost of any health insurance deductible for required boxer health insurance is the financial responsibility of the boxer. This could be considered a negative burden because it forces injured fighters to pay out-of-pocket costs for medical treatment resulting from their matches.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this raise the lowest wage an employer may pay? — The bill mandates a minimum payment of $200 per round for professional boxers. Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The act establishes stricter industry standards for unified boxing organizations to prevent exploitation.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would union members be better off under this? — The act implements stronger contract protections and safety standards for professional athletes. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill increases the guaranteed minimum payment per round for professional boxers. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Boxers aged 40 or older face more frequent and intensive supplemental medical examination requirements.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — The act mandates enhanced medical presence, including an additional ambulance and ringside physician at matches. Does this put more money into Medicaid, the health coverage for people on low incomes? — The bill requires UBOs to provide insurance coverage for injuries sustained during training.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires UBOs to submit information to the Federal Trade Commission and make it available to the public.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — The bill establishes minimum wage standards for professional boxers to increase their earning potential.
- 3/25/2026
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
- 3/24/2026
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2641-2643)
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2641-2643)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4624.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2641-2647)
- Mr. Walberg moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
- 2/25/2026
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-524, Part I.
- Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 449.
- 1/21/2026
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 30 - 4.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/3/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 11/17/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/4/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/3/2025
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 9/17/2025
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 7/25/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/23/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
Mark AmodeiRepublican · Nevada
Sharice DavidsDemocrat · Kansas
Shomari FiguresDemocrat · Alabama
Steven HorsfordDemocrat · Nevada
Jonathan JacksonDemocrat · Illinois
Morgan McGarveyDemocrat · Kentucky
LaMonica McIverDemocrat · New Jersey
Addison McDowellRepublican · North Carolina
Christopher SmithRepublican · New Jersey
Haley StevensDemocrat · Michigan
Derek SchmidtRepublican · Kansas
Dina TitusDemocrat · Nevada
Jefferson Van DrewRepublican · New Jersey