A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, called "Marcus's Law," requires local educational agencies that receive certain Federal funds to ensure students in grades 9 through 12 receive an electrocardiogram and an echocardiogram. This medical screening must happen before a student participates in an athletic contest for the first time. Starting in the 2026-2027 school year, agencies must partner with entities to provide these screenings for $20 or less per student. There are provisions for waivers if partnerships cannot be formed. Additionally, students may be exempt based on religious tenets or physician documentation.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +7
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Ensures affordable medical screenings capped at $20 for students.
- Scored +7
Would students be better off under this?
Provides high school athletes with affordable and mandatory health screenings for safety.
- Scored +6
Would children be better off under this?
Provides potentially life-saving cardiac screenings for high school students.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
Imposes a federal requirement on local agency operations regarding student health screenings.
- Scored -2
Does this protect people from being watched or searched?
Requires mandatory medical screening as a condition for participation in school athletics.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Affordable Screenings: Section 2(a)(3)(A) requires agencies to partner with entities to offer the required medical screenings at a cost of $20 or less per student.
-
Health Screenings for Athletes: Section 2(a)(1) requires students in grades 9 through 12 to receive an electrocardiogram and echocardiogram before their first athletic contest.
-
Flexibility and Exemptions: Section 2(b) allows students to avoid the screening if it conflicts with religious tenets and practices or if a physician provides documentation explaining why the student should not participate.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Mandatory Requirements for Participation: Section 2(a)(1) requires students to undergo medical screening as a condition of participating in an athletic contest for the first time.
-
Administrative Burden on Agencies: Section 2(a)(3)(A) mandates that local educational agencies must enter into partnerships to provide these screenings by the first day of the first sports season following enactment.
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.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Ensures affordable medical screenings capped at $20 for students. Would students be better off under this? — Provides high school athletes with affordable and mandatory health screenings for safety. Would children be better off under this? — Provides potentially life-saving cardiac screenings for high school students. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Protects high school students (grades 9-12) from undetected cardiac issues. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Provides an affordable option for necessary cardiac screenings. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Offers a standardized health screening, though less impactful for those already paying for private care.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Increases access to critical cardiac screenings for high school athletes through affordable partnerships.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases federal mandates on local educational agencies that receive federal funding. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Imposes a federal requirement on local agency operations regarding student health screenings. Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — Requires mandatory medical screening as a condition for participation in school athletics.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this protect the freedom to practise a religion? — Provides specific exemptions for students whose religious tenets conflict with the required medical screenings.
- 6/9/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
Don BaconRepublican · Nebraska