Senate IVF Bill Drops Again After Mostly Party-Line Vote

The Senate faced another setback on Tuesday as it failed to advance a bill aimed at protecting in vitro fertilization (IVF) with a vote of 51-44. The legislation required 60 votes to move forward but fell short despite support from two Republican senators.

Republican Senators Susan Collins from Maine and Lisa Murkowski from Alaska joined all Democrats in backing the bill. However, many Republicans dismissed the legislation as a mere political maneuver intended to rally support for Democrats who are vulnerable in the upcoming elections.

Senate Republican Whip John Thune emphasized this sentiment during a press conference prior to the vote, stating, “Republicans support IVF. Full stop. No question about that. This is not an attempt to make law. This is simply an attempt by Democrats to try to create a political issue where there isn’t one.”

Collins and Murkowski had previously supported the Right to IVF Act, proposed by Illinois Democrat Tammy Duckworth, which also failed to progress in June. As reproductive rights remain a contentious topic leading up to the elections, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer challenged Republicans to reject the bill once more.

“If the Senate votes no today and strikes IVF protections down yet again, it will be further proof that Project 2025 is alive and well,” Schumer asserted on the Senate floor earlier this week. He drew connections between Project 2025 and the Heritage Foundation, portraying the latter as a key conservative think tank that opposes the current IVF protection efforts.

Adding to the debate, former President Donald Trump reiterated his support for IVF on the campaign trail. During an August town hall meeting, he discussed ideas to assist those seeking IVF, indicating a commitment to either have the government cover costs or mandate insurance companies to do so.

At a debate with Vice President Kamala Harris on September 10, Trump declared he has been a “leader on IVF.” Following these statements, Schumer indicated he would bring the bill back to the Senate, giving Republicans another chance to support it, emphasizing that it would still need the requisite 60 votes to advance.

Schumer remarked, “We have seen the Republican Party’s nominee for president claim to be ‘a leader in fertilization’ and come out in support of expanding access to IVF by requiring insurance companies to cover IVF treatment,” highlighting the need for Republicans to clarify their position on the matter.

Schumer stated, “To my Republican colleagues today, you get a second chance to either stand with families struggling with infertility or stand with Project 2025, which aims to make reproductive freedoms extinct.” The Right to IVF Act consolidates several Democratic proposals, aiming to solidify access to IVF, enhance fertility treatments for veterans, and promote affordability in fertility care.

Momentum for this legislation gained traction over the summer following an Alabama Supreme Court ruling classifying embryos as children, an action that temporarily impacted IVF access in that state. Nonetheless, Republicans, while claiming to support IVF, criticized the proposed bill during the June vote. They denounced it as a political stunt and raised concerns about perceived overreach with the legislation.

Before the vote on Tuesday, Republicans sought to fast-track a different piece of IVF legislation. Sponsored by Senators Katie Britt and Ted Cruz, the bill sought to prevent states from receiving Medicare funding if they restricted access to IVF. However, this legislation faced opposition from Senator Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington, who deemed the Republican proposal insufficient.

Murray made a definitive statement on the Senate floor: “I have been perfectly clear about the glaring issue with this Republican bill. The cold hard reality is that this Republican bill does nothing to meaningfully protect IVF from the biggest threats from lawmakers and anti-abortion extremists all over this country. It would still allow states to regulate IVF out of existence.”