A Republican bill with 2 Republican cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors
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, known as the "STRONG Act," directs the Office of Management and Budget to consider creating a specific code for strength and conditioning coaches in the Standard Occupational Classification system. Currently, these professionals are not listed as a separate occupation. The bill suggests these coaches perform specialized work that differs from athletic trainers or physical therapists. If the Director decides not to create this new code, they must submit a report to specific House and Senate committees explaining why. This legislative action does not authorize any new funding.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +1
Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?
The bill recognizes the work of coaches who assist members of the United States military in injury prevention and recovery.
- Scored +1
Is this likely to create jobs?
The bill provides formal occupational recognition which can aid in the professionalization and visibility of the strength and conditioning field.
- Scored +1
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill requires a report to Congress if the Director decides not to establish the new occupational code.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Recognition of Specialized Work: The bill seeks to establish a discrete occupational category to recognize the specialized work these professionals do with athletes, law enforcement, first responders, and military members (Section 2, Subsection 6).
-
Improved Data Accuracy: Establishing a separate code would correct what is described as an inaccurate representation within the current Standard Occupational Classification system (Section 2, Subsection 6).
-
Alignment of Systems: A new code would better align the Standard Occupational Classification system with other related classification systems (Section 2, Subsection 6).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No Negative Impacts Identified: The provided text does not list any specific provisions that would result in negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups of people.
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 veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — The bill recognizes the work of coaches who assist members of the United States military in injury prevention and recovery.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill provides formal occupational recognition which can aid in the professionalization and visibility of the strength and conditioning field.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires a report to Congress if the Director decides not to establish the new occupational code.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — By recognizing strength and conditioning coaches as a detailed occupation within healthcare practitioner groups, the bill supports the professional infrastructure of injury prevention and recovery.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive? — The bill notes that strength and conditioning coaches work with members of the United States military to minimize the risk of injury.
- 9/2/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/13/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/29/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- Introduced in House
Gregory MurphyRepublican · North Carolina
Mariannette Miller-MeeksRepublican · Iowa