PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Hazardous Materials.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 14, 1996
What-Really-Happened Act of 1996 - Requires the head referee or other designated referee in a professional sports league game played in the United States: (1) in the event of conflicting calls, to review instant replay to determine the correct call; and (2) to enforce such call. Requires a professional sports league to make instant replay available to the head referee or the designate. Vests power in the Federal Trade Commission: (1) to examine and investigate a professional sports league to determine whether such league has been or is engaged in any act or practice prohibited by this Act; and (2) if the league is found to be in violation, to take action against it by the issuance of a cease and desist order as if the league were in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
People & committees
Rep. Jacobs, Andrew, Jr. [D-IN-10] · D–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the House Committee on Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3096 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3096 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3096 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3096 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.