Congressional Votes

During consideration of a budget resolution for fiscal 2025 (Senate Concurrent Resolution 7), Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) offered an amendment to protect access to "reproductive healthcare," including "fertility treatment services" such as in vitro fertilization (IVF).

The Senate rejected Duckworth's amendment on February 21, 2025 by a vote of 49 to 51 (Roll Call 82). We have assigned pluses to the nays because healthcare is not the role of government, and neither abortion nor IVF is healthcare. Despite healthcare not being one of the powers enumerated to Congress in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, the term "reproductive health services" has been codified into federal law. It encompasses the life-destroying practices of IVF and other assisted reproductive technologies, through which most embryos conceived outside the womb are aborted or indefinitely frozen. If Congress, as affirmed in the Declaration of Independence, holds that all people are "created equal" and "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights," then it should secure the first of those rights — the right to life — by rejecting any federal protections or support for abortion and cryo-orphaning entirely.

H.R. 21, the "Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act," would establish criminal penalties for healthcare practitioners who intentionally kill or harm an infant born alive following an abortion or attempted abortion.

The House passed H.R. 21 on January 23, 2025 by a vote of 217 to 204 (Roll Call 27). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the U.S. Constitution does not grant a right to abortion. Abortion is not healthcare, it is the ending of innocent human life, and the Declaration of Independence affirms the right to life as a fundamental, God-given, and inherent right.

S. 6, the "Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act," would establish criminal penalties for healthcare practitioners who intentionally kill or harm an infant born alive following an abortion or attempted abortion.

The Senate did not vote directly on S. 6, but on a motion to invoke cloture (and thus limit debate) so the bill could be voted on. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on January 22, 2025 by a vote of 52 to 47 (Roll Call 11; a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate is required to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the U.S. Constitution does not grant a right to abortion. Abortion is not healthcare, it is the ending of innocent human life, and the Declaration of Independence affirms the right to life as a fundamental, God-given, and inherent right.

S. 4445, also known as the "Right to IVF Act," would, in the words of the bill, "protect and expand nationwide access to fertility treatment, including in vitro fertilization."

The Senate did not vote directly on S. 4445, but on a motion by Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to invoke cloture (and thus limit debate) so the bill could be voted on. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on September 17, 2024 by a vote of 51 to 44 (Roll Call 242; a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate is required to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the nays because IVF is not included in the powers delegated to the federal government by the Constitution. Moreover, in February 2024, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos should be considered children, just as should be the case with embryos in the mother's womb. The destruction of frozen embryos — which is common in the IVF process — is the destruction of innocent human life.

During consideration of the fiscal 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 8070), Representative Beth Van Duyne (R-Texas) offered an amendment to prohibit the secretary of defense from paying for or reimbursing expenses relating to abortion services.

The House adopted Van Duyne's amendment on June 13, 2024 by a vote of 214 to 207 (Roll Call 263). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because abortion is not healthcare but the killing of innocent human life. The U.S. government should not fund baby-killing and has no constitutional authority to do so.

During consideration of the fiscal 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2670), Representative Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) offered an amendment to prohibit the Department of Defense from paying or reimbursing expenses for abortion services. It would also repeal an October 2022 Defense Department memo titled “Ensuring Access to Reproductive Health Care.” Under the policy established by this memo, the Defense Department reimburses travel expenses for service members who travel to get an abortion in another state where abortion is legal.

The House adopted Jackson’s amendment on July 13, 2023 by a vote of 221 to 213 (Roll Call 300). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the right to life is the most fundamental, God-given, and unalienable right asserted in the Declaration of Independence and guaranteed by the Fifth and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

S. J. Res. 10 would reverse the September 2022 Department of Veterans Affairs rule allowing medical benefit coverage for abortion counseling and procedures. This rule overturned longstanding VA regulations excluding abortion from its coverage.

The Senate rejected S. J. Res. 10 on April 19, 2023 by a vote of 48 to 51 (Roll Call 90). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because taxpayers should not be required to subsidize abortion services. The Declaration of Independence affirms the right to life as the most fundamental, God-given, and inherent right, which is further protected by the Fifth and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

H.R. 8296, also known as the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022, would establish that healthcare providers have a statutory right to provide abortion services, and that women have a corresponding right to obtain abortions.

The House passed H.R. 8296 on July 15, 2022 by a vote of 219 to 210 (Roll Call 360). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the right to life is the most fundamental, God-given, and unalienable right asserted in the Declaration of Independence and guaranteed by the Fifth and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

S. 4132 would statutorily require that healthcare providers would have a right to provide abortion services and that patients would have a right to receive abortions.

The Senate did not vote directly on S. 4132, but on a motion to invoke cloture (and thus limit debate) so the bill could be voted on. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on May 11, 2022 by a vote of 49 to 51 (Roll Call 170; a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate is required to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the nays because Roe v. Wade was deemed unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24, 2022, giving states the power to determine how they handle abortions. There is no constitutional provision granting a right to abortion. Many of our healthcare providers are subsidized by taxpayers, and government should not subsidize the killing of innocent human life.

H.R. 3755, the pro-abortion legislation known as the “Women’s Health Protection Act of 2021,” would “protect a person’s ability to determine whether to continue or end a pregnancy” and “protect a health care provider’s ability to provide abortion services.” Representative Judy Chu (D-Calif.), the bill’s sponsor, said her bill was needed because “we have seen an unprecedented number of state-based attacks on a woman’s right to choose.”

The House passed H.R. 3755 on September 24, 2021 by a vote of 218 to 211 (Roll Call 295). We have assigned pluses to the nays because abortion has nothing to do with the protection of women’s health, despite the name of the bill; and there is no right to an abortion in the Constitution, the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision notwithstanding.

During consideration of the Budget Resolution for fiscal 2022 (Senate Concurrent Resolution 14), Senator James Lankford (R-Okla.) offered an amendment to prevent funding from being included in the budget for abortion or abortion-related discrimination. According to a press release from Lankford’s office, “The amendment ensures that the budget will comply with the long-standing Hyde Amendment, which bars the use of federal dollars to pay for abortion, and the Weldon amendment, which protects health care providers who refuse to participate in abortion from discrimination.”

The Senate adopted Lankford’s amendment on August 10, 2021 by a vote of 50 to 49 (Roll Call 336). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because there is no constitutional provision granting a right to abortion, Roe v. Wade notwithstanding; and pro-life taxpayers should not be forced to fund a lethal practice that violates their deeply held religious convictions.

During consideration of the Endless Frontier Act (S. 1260), Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) offered an amendment to, as he described it from the Senate floor, “simply prohibit any research funded, for the Endless Frontier Act, from using any fetal tissue obtained from an abortion and from creating, destroying, discarding, or putting human embryos at risk.” Lee’s amendment would have essentially codified the National Science Foundation’s agency policy banning research that destroys or creates human embryos.

The Senate rejected Lee’s amendment on May 25, 2021 by a vote of 48 to 51 (Roll Call 206). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because not only does the Constitution not authorize the federal government to fund any type of research that incentivizes abortion, but all human life, at every stage of development from fertilization onward, is sacred and taxpayers should not be forced to pay for the destruction and unethical manipulation of such life.

During consideration of the appropriations bill for Health and Human Services and other federal departments including Defense (H.R. 6157), Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), introduced an amendment to prohibit federal funding of Planned Parenthood.

The Senate rejected Senator Paul’s amendment on August 23, 2018 by a vote of 45 to 48 (Roll Call 191). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because Planned Parenthood is the nation’s largest abortion provider, and government should not subsidize the killing of innocent human life. Moreover, under the Constitution, the federal government should not be subsidizing any private entity in the marketplace.

This bill (H.R. 1625) would provide $1.3 trillion in discretionary appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2018 for federal government operations and services. This represents an overall increase in discretionary spending of 12 percent over the 2017 level. The big winner was the Department of Defense, with an increase of 10 percent over last year’s appropriations. Democrat negotiators on this bill successfully fought off many Republican riders, such as a rider that would have permitted the Trump administration to withdraw the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule. Pro-life Republicans were saddened to learn that the omnibus bill continues the more than $500 million in taxpayer dollars Planned Parenthood receives each year.

The House passed the omnibus spending bill on March 22, 2018 by a vote of 256 to 167 (Roll Call 127). We have assigned pluses to the nays because with this omnibus bill, members of Congress are failing to address their fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars, as well as minimizing their accountability to the voters by combining all discretionary federal spending for fiscal 2018 into one gigantic “take it or leave it” bill.

Known as the “Pain-Capable Unborn Protection Act,” this bill (H.R. 36) bans abortion when the age of the pre-born baby is 20 weeks or longer. “After 20 weeks,” the bill says, “the unborn child reacts to stimuli that would be recognized as painful if applied to an adult human, for example, by recoiling.”

The House passed H.R. 36 on October 3, 2017 by a vote of 237 to 189 (Roll Call 549). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because all forms of abortion constitute the murder of pre-born children, and the U.S. Supreme Court, in its Roe v. Wade decision, overstepped its proper authority by “legalizing” abortion in the first place.

During consideration of the healthcare bill (H.R. 1628), Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) introduced an amendment that would have expired the expansion of Medicaid and certain taxes created under ObamaCare, prohibited healthcare plans that provide abortion coverage from qualifying for certain tax credits, banned federal funding of abortion, and repealed the individual and employer mandates created under ObamaCare.

The Senate rejected Paul’s amendment on July 26, 2017 by a vote of 45 to 55 (Roll Call 169). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because government should not subsidize the killing of innocent human life, and also because Senator Paul’s amendment would have repealed extensive portions of the unconstitutional ObamaCare law.

This legislation (House Joint Resolution 43) would disapprove of and nullify a Health and Human Services Department rule that prevents states that distribute federal family funding from prohibiting participation and receipt of funds by healthcare providers, such as Planned Parenthood, for any reason other than their ability to provide family planning services.

The Senate passed H. J. Res. 43 on March 30, 2017 by a vote of 50 to 50 with Vice President Mike Pence casting a tie-breaking "yea" vote (Roll Call 101). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because this bill limits the power of an unconstitutional federal government agency. The U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to get involved in healthcare, much less establish a Department of Health and Human Services, so any attempt to limit the power of an unconstitutional federal agency is a step in the right direction.

This legislation (House Joint Resolution 43) would disapprove of and nullify a Health and Human Services Department (HHS) rule that prevents states from restricting federal family planning funding to a health provider, such as denying funds to a center that provides abortions, for any basis other than its ability to provide health services. Under the current rule, HHS can withhold family planning grants to any state that restricts the participation of a health provider in the family planning services grant program.

The House passed H. J. Res. 43 on February 16, 2017 by a vote of 230 to 188 (Roll Call 99). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because this bill limits the power of an unconstitutional federal government agency. The U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to get involved in healthcare, much less establish a Department of Health and Human Services, so any attempt to limit the power of an unconstitutional federal agency is a step in the right direction.

The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act (H.R. 7) would permanently prohibit federal funds from being used to pay for abortion services or health insurance plans that include abortion coverage, as well as prohibit the District of Columbia from using its own local funds to provide or pay for abortions. Additionally, the Office of Personnel Management would be required to ensure that qualified health plans under the state exchanges were not providing abortion coverage. There is a rape, incest, and life of the mother exemption.

The House passed H.R. 7 on January 24, 2017 by a vote of 238 to 183 (Roll Call 65). We have assigned pluses to the yeas for two reasons. First, the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to fund any healthcare-related programs. Such issues should be left up to the states, or, ideally, left to the free market. Second, abortion is the taking of an innocent human life, period. It is unconscionable that American taxpayers' money should be used to subsidize such a practice.

During consideration of the State Department authorization bill (S. 600), Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) offered an amendment to repeal the rule prohibiting U.S. foreign aid from going to organizations that provide or promote abortions. Known as the "Mexico City" policy, this rule was imposed by President Reagan, lifted by President Clinton, and then reinstated by the second President Bush.

The Senate adopted Boxer's amendment on April 5, 2005 by a vote of 52-46 (Roll Call 83). We have assigned pluses to the nays because any federal aid to provide or promote abortions violates the right to life.

The final version (conference report) of S. 3 would ban partial-birth abortions. Although on March 12 the Senate had amended their version of S. 3 to include a reaffirmation of Roe v. Wade, on September 30 a 10-member House-Senate conference committee agreed to report out a final version of the bill identical to one (H.R. 760) that passed the House earlier this year without any reaffirmation of Roe v. Wade. Of course, all abortion procedures should be banned. But this bill is still a step in the right direction in that it is better to ban one abortion procedure than to ban none at all.

The House adopted the conference report on S. 3 on October 2, 2003 by a vote of 281 to 142 (Roll Call 530). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because all forms of abortion constitute the murder of preborn children, and the Supreme Court, in its Roe v. Wade decision, overstepped its proper authority by "legalizing" abortion in the first place.

This proposed amendment to the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban (S. 3) states: "It is the sense of the Senate that -- (1) the decision of the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade was appropriate and secures an important constitutional right; and (2) such a decision should not be overturned." Since this amendment supporting Roe v. Wade was adopted, we have opted to score the vote on this amendment rather than the vote on the resulting, severely compromised, Senate bill to ban partial-birth abortion.

The Senate adopted this amendment on March 12, 2003 by a vote of 52 to 46 (Roll Call 48). We have assigned pluses to the nays because Roe v. Wade should be overturned on the basis that all forms of abortion constitute the murder of unborn children -- and that the Supreme Court was overstepping its proper authority by "legalizing" abortion in the first place.

This bill (H.R. 4965) would ban one type of abortion, known as partial-birth abortion. Of course this measure, while commendable, would only slightly reduce the rate of routine killing of pre-born babies in this nation. This is the fourth consecutive session of Congress where the House has passed a bill banning partial-birth abortions. However, the Senate has only passed similar legislation once (106th Congress, 1999-2000). But the conference committee charged with reconciling the House-and Senate-passed versions never began work.

The House passed H.R. 4965 on July 24, 2002 by a vote of 274 to 151 (Roll Call 343). We have assigned pluses to the yeas.

"What this amendment would do," explained Representative Tom Coburn (R-OK), the amendment's author, "is it would limit the expenditure of Federal funds by the Food and Drug Administration in their efforts to approve drugs whose sole purpose is to terminate life, to take the life of an unborn child." More specifically, the amendment would prohibit the U.S. Food and Drug Administration from using funds in the underlying fiscal 2001 agricultural appropriations bill to test or approve for use the abortion pill RU-486, also known as mifepristone.

The House rejected the Coburn amendment to H.R. 4461 on July 10, 2000 by a vote of 182-187 (Roll Call 373). We have assigned pluses to the yeas.

This non-binding, "sense of Congress" measure would put Congress on record as stating that "Roe v. Wade was an appropriate decision," that giving mothers the ability to kill their babies in utero "secures an important constitutional right," and that Roe "should not be overturned." The 1973 Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision was a landmark in judicial activism; it single-handedly nullified the long-standing abortion laws in 50 states without citing a single precedent for High Court jurisdiction over abortion laws. Since the Roe decision, more than 38 million unborn children have been slaughtered with legalized abortion.

This measure, a second-degree amendment to the partial birth abortion ban bill (S. 1692), was adopted by the Senate on October 21, 1999 by a vote of 51-47 (Roll Call 337). We have assigned pluses to the nays. After the second-degree Roe amendment was added to the underlying amendment, the Roe amendment was added to the bill by voice vote.