S. 1630 (119th)Bill Overview

MOMS Act

Health|Health
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
May 6, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This bill creates a federal pregnancy.gov website to aggregate resources for pregnant and postpartum women, excludes entities that provide or support abortions from listings and grants, and compiles a national list of licensed child placement agencies. It funds grants for nonprofits offering pregnancy support services and telehealth equipment for prenatal and postnatal care, with eligibility exclusions for abortion providers.

Why people may split

Exclusion of abortion providers from website and grants.

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is principally a substantive policy package that and also contains administrative and reporting components.

This bill creates a federal pregnancy.gov website to aggregate resources for pregnant and postpartum women, excludes entities that provide or support abortions from listings and grants, and compiles a national list of licensed child placement agencies.

It funds grants for nonprofits offering pregnancy support services and telehealth equipment for prenatal and postnatal care, with eligibility exclusions for abortion providers.

It amends child support law to allow states to establish and enforce child support obligations on behalf of an "unborn child," including retroactive support beginning at conception if requested by the mother.

Passage30/100

Contains some low‑salience administrative elements but prominent ideological provisions (exclusions of abortion providers; unborn child support) increase resistance and litigation risk.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is principally a substantive policy package that and also contains administrative and reporting components. It is drafted with clear statutory integrations and several concrete mechanisms (website features, grant eligibility and prohibitions, reporting deadlines, and precise code amendments).

Contention75/100

Exclusion of abortion providers from website and grants.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Local governments · CommunitiesFederal agencies

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Local governmentsCentralized website increases pregnant and postpartum women’s access to localized resources and referrals.
  • Potential benefitGrants and telehealth funding expand prenatal and postnatal care access in rural, tribal, and underserved areas.
  • CommunitiesFunding and support for pregnancy centers may increase community-level services and nonprofit employment opportunities.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenExcluding entities that perform or counsel for abortions narrows the scope of resources listed and referrals.
  • Federal agenciesProhibitions on certain providers may reduce availability of comprehensive reproductive health information on the feder…
  • Potential burdenUnborn child support enforcement raises legal, paternity, and reproductive autonomy concerns that could prompt litigati…
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Exclusion of abortion providers from website and grants.
Progressive20%

Likely to view the bill skeptically because it explicitly excludes abortion providers and directs federal support toward pregnancy support centers and messaging that may promote anti‑abortion viewpoints.

Support for telehealth and maternal services is positive, but concerns center on accuracy, reproductive rights, and potential misinformation.

The unborn-child child support provision raises constitutional and practical concerns about fetal personhood and paternal enforcement before birth (speculative).

Likely resistant
Centrist60%

Generally supportive of improving maternal supports, telehealth access, and clearer adoption-agency transparency, while concerned about exclusions and legal complexity.

Sees value in resource aggregation and maternal services, but wants guardrails on accuracy, costs, and legal conflicts from unborn-child enforcement.

Would look for bipartisan assurances and fiscal clarity.

Split reaction
Conservative90%

Likely to view the bill favorably as it channels federal support to pregnancy support centers, excludes entities that perform or promote abortions, and strengthens financial responsibility by allowing unborn-child support enforcement.

Sees telehealth and resource aggregation as pragmatic investments to help mothers carry pregnancies to term.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood30/100

Contains some low‑salience administrative elements but prominent ideological provisions (exclusions of abortion providers; unborn child support) increase resistance and litigation risk.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • No official cost estimates or CBO score included
  • Potential constitutional or statutory challenges to "unborn child" enforcement
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Exclusion of abortion providers from website and grants.

Contains some low‑salience administrative elements but prominent ideological provisions (exclusions of abortion providers; unborn child sup…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is principally a substantive policy package that and also contains administrative and reporting components. It is drafted with clear statutory integrations and severa…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis