Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The bill bars federal funds (direct or indirect, including contracts and subcontracts) to any entity unless the entity certifies it will not perform abortions or fund entities that do. Exceptions allow abortions in cases of rape or incest and where a physician certifies the pregnancy poses a life‑threatening physical condition.
Liberals emphasize access harms and chilling effects on healthcare
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill enacts a broad prohibition and certification requirement linking the receipt of Federal funds to an entity-level promise not to perform or fund abortions (with limited exceptions).
The bill bars federal funds (direct or indirect, including contracts and subcontracts) to any entity unless the entity certifies it will not perform abortions or fund entities that do.
Exceptions allow abortions in cases of rape or incest and where a physician certifies the pregnancy poses a life‑threatening physical condition.
The bill defines "entity" to include the entire legal entity and related controlled affiliates and requires the certification for the period funds are provided.
Strong controversy, broad federal impact, implementation and legal risks, and high Senate hurdle together reduce odds substantially.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill enacts a broad prohibition and certification requirement linking the receipt of Federal funds to an entity-level promise not to perform or fund abortions (with limited exceptions). The statutory core is concise and unambiguous in its principal prohibition, but the bill provides limited implementation detail, minimal interaction with existing statutory frameworks, and no explicit enforcement, oversight, or fiscal provisions.
Liberals emphasize access harms and chilling effects on healthcare
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize access harms and chilling effects on healthcare
Likely to oppose the bill as a broad federal restriction that will reduce access to reproductive health services and chill federally funded healthcare and research.
Will emphasize that the exceptions are narrow and that the certification requirement can force providers or affiliated organizations to lose funding or fragment services.
Views the bill as a targeted effort to prevent federal funding for abortions but is cautious about administrative complexity and unintended consequences.
Sees the rape/incest and life‑threat exceptions as politically important but worries about impacts on integrated providers and litigation risk.
Likely to strongly support the bill as a measure to prevent taxpayer dollars from supporting abortion and to extend that prohibition to contractors and affiliates.
Will view the rape/incest and life‑threat exceptions as reasonable narrow carve‑outs.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Strong controversy, broad federal impact, implementation and legal risks, and high Senate hurdle together reduce odds substantially.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize access harms and chilling effects on healthcare
Strong controversy, broad federal impact, implementation and legal risks, and high Senate hurdle together reduce odds substantially.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill enacts a broad prohibition and certification requirement linking the receipt of Federal funds to an entity-level promise not to perform or fund abortions (with limite…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.