Senate Set to Vote on Bipartisan College Sports Bill Curbing Athlete Pay and Transfers

The Senate is expected to pass a sweeping bipartisan bill on Monday that would impose national regulations on college sports, aiming to bring order to a landscape transformed by soaring athlete payments and frequent transfers.

The legislation, negotiated by Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, and the panel's top Democrat, Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington, represents Congress's most significant attempt yet to govern how college athletes are compensated for their name, image and likeness and how often they can change schools. It would grant the NCAA new authority over those rules along with limited antitrust protections to enforce them.

The bill emerged from years of negotiations that accelerated after a 2025 lawsuit settlement allowed colleges to pay players directly. Backers, including more than 70 senators from both parties, argue it would reduce litigation and uncertainty while providing hundreds of thousands of student athletes with new health and labor protections.

Under the measure, the settlement would be codified into law, including a revenue cap permitting schools to share up to $21.5 million with players. For some schools, the bill would more than double that amount by allowing an additional $27.5 million through a retention fund. Schools and conferences could also pool television media rights to generate more revenue.

The bill seeks to stabilize the NCAA transfer portal by limiting players to one "free" move over five years without sitting out a season, with some exceptions, and capping total eligibility at five years. It would also bar coaches from leaving their schools during the season and prevent conferences from expanding beyond 19 programs, an effort to forestall so-called superleagues. Schools switching conferences would be required to spend three years as an independent, down from five in the original draft.

Additional athlete protections include caps on agent fees and guarantees for health insurance and certain scholarships. Schools would be required to maintain a minimum number of sports and roster spots to protect women's and Olympic sports from being cut in favor of revenue-generating football and basketball programs.

Critics contend the bill does not go far enough. Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat who has worked with labor and civil rights groups to oppose the measure, said it "ensconces a system of exploitation" and noted it caps students' share of revenues without limiting coaches' salaries or donations to athletic programs. Virginia Senator Tim Kaine argued that new antitrust protections would make it harder for athletes to sue universities. Groups including the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus and the AFL-CIO have also opposed the bill, partly because it leaves unresolved whether athletes should be considered employees with collective bargaining rights. All four Black Democrats in the Senate have come out against it.

Some Republicans, including Florida Senator Rick Scott, say the bill represents federal overreach into collegiate athletics.

President Donald Trump has expressed interest in the legislation, and the White House formally endorsed it last month. Still, the bill faces a difficult path in the House, which failed repeatedly over the past year to advance a different version and is in recess until after the November elections. Some House Republicans have insisted on language explicitly stating that athletes are not employees, a provision absent from the Senate bill. Lawmakers would have to start over in the next Congress if the measure does not pass both chambers by the end of the year.