House Republican faction experiences division over handling IVF advertising, with certain members urging Speaker Johnson to initiate a vote before the upcoming election.
The intense pressure from Republican legislators within their conference has intensified recently, with those running in tight elections striving to prove their backing of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF). This support has been questioned by Democrats following the Alabama Supreme Court's ruling earlier this year, declaring frozen embryos as human beings, and any destruction of them being accountable for wrongful death.
Johnson's reluctance to introduce legislation on the topic, as described by involved lawmakers, is due to concerns that the Republicans might struggle to pass it in their precarious hold on the majority, and the apprehension of politically endangering their members. There's also a recognition of Johnson's efforts to cater to the needs of his vulnerable members who are pro-fertility treatments, small-government conservatives who oppose mandates, and religious conservatives who are against IVF.
One GOP lawmaker labeled Johnson as "treading carefully" in his approach to the IVF legislation situation.
"You're dealing with some individuals rooted in older beliefs and challenging districts," the lawmaker explained about Johnson and the House GOP leadership team.
Another GOP legislator stated that Johnson outright refused when asked for IVF legislation support. "He's been more direct with me," the lawmaker mentioned.
"Multiple GOP members have had discussions with leadership about IVF," the lawmaker continued. "Multiple GOP members have drafted bills regarding IVF. It's particularly beneficial for those in purple or swing districts, but they haven't acted on it yet. I'm not sure why."
A third GOP lawmaker, who advocated for Johnson and his conference to take a public stance on IVF, reported a gradual change in attitude among their party's leadership.
"My conference is hesitant to push through bills of this nature, but they're starting to grasp the necessity," the lawmaker commented.
With the House scheduled for a short session prior to the presidential election, Johnson's primary focus has been on keeping the government operational beyond the September 30 deadline, encountering significant obstacles.
However, when questioned about his conversations with members and his stance on bringing forward IVF legislation before the election, Johnson told CNN, "I think we've been consistent. Our party supports IVF in every aspect. If there's a legislative opportunity, I'm confident we'd take it. I'll review it. I've been occupied with various matters, but I'll look into that."
Six months prior, Johnson stated that he felt Congress had no role in IVF legislation.
Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade more than two years ago, Republicans have been on the defensive regarding their reproductive healthcare messaging. Many have tried to create a pro-IVF narrative following the Alabama Supreme Court ruling to reconnect with moderate women.
Former President Trump declared himself a "leader on IVF, which is fertilization," during this week's presidential debate and introduced a policy covering treatment expenses.
House GOP Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik told CNN following the debate, "President Trump has been clear, I've been clear. We support IVF. We are pro-babies, pro-families."
But despite this support, Republicans have yet to convert their stance into a legislative response. Senate Republicans rejected a bill in June that aimed to guarantee nationwide IVF access, arguing the legislation was unnecessary, and Senator Majority Leader Chuck Schumer plans to reintroduce it for a vote before the election to maintain pressure on Senate Republicans.
Although House Republicans proclaim universal support for IVF within their conference, some were less enthused about voting on legislation supporting the treatments before the election.
"I'm not interested in this topic," GOP Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky informed CNN.
GOP Rep. Chip Roy of Texas advocated for focusing narrowly on government financing, inflation, and the US-Mexico border, adding, "And then let's get the hell out of here."
GOP Rep. Brad Wenstrup of Ohio, a doctor, commented that while the treatments were lawful, "I don't prefer it in my family. In my family, we had a son and then adopted a daughter."
The current stage of the GOP's pro-IVF initiative
GOP Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks of Iowa became the latest Republican to propose a pro-IVF bill last week.
Miller-Meeks explained that the legislation, which would offer a fully refundable tax credit up to $30,000 for IVF expenses, stemmed from ongoing conversations with other Republican women over the summer.
"We've had back-and-forth discussions," Miller-Meeks shared with CNN. "We spoke about legislation. And so finally, for me, it was, 'I'm tired of hearing criticism from the other side of the aisle on something we support, and the majority of Americans support, so we're going to introduce legislation.'"
A flurry of additional bills and resolutions have been introduced, many in response to the Alabama Supreme Court ruling, covering a range of effectiveness and policy goals.
In January, Rep. Susan Wild from Pennsylvania took the lead on a bill aiming to secure an individual's right to undergo IVF treatments. Wild had been trying to find a Republican co-sponsor for the bill in 2023, but didn't manage until after the Alabama ruling, as confirmed by a source familiar with the process. Now, there are four GOP co-sponsors, with 202 in total, but none joined Wild in her July attempt to bypass GOP leadership and force a floor vote.
Majority of the initiatives in the House, including from Reps. Lori Chavez-DeRemer of Oregon and Nancy Mace of South Carolina, are mostly symbolic, non-binding resolutions expressing support for IVF. GOP Rep. Zach Nunn of Iowa joined forces with Wild to introduce a bipartisan bill defending fertility treatment access.
Nunn, who discussed his bill with House GOP leadership, told CNN, "I'm really passionate about this. This is the way forward. Regardless of party, coverage for IVF or starting a family should be an option for every American."
Reacting to other efforts supporting IVF in the House, Wild stated, "I invite all my colleagues, Democrat or Republican, who claim to back IVF to prove it by co-sponsoring my bill and signing the discharge petition to force a vote on the floor."
Many Republican legislators agreed that voting on pro-IVF bills, especially before the election, could be advantageous for the party.
GOP Rep. Ronny Jackson of Texas said, "I believe it'll greatly benefit the party to take a firm position."
GOP Rep. Cory Mills of Florida agreed, adding, "I think it's a significant vote. It shows our stance."
However, some, like those supporting IVF, see no need for Republicans to push for a vote on it and argue that forcing a vote before the election would just be politicking.
GOP Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida said, "I'm still confused as to why we're even asked if Republicans support IVF."
GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a supporter of IVF, expressed doubts about Republicans voting on any type of IVF legislation before the election due to their current government funding issues: "We can't even manage anything right now."
Johnson's decision to refrain from pushing IVF legislation is influenced by the delicate political situation within the Republican conference, as they strive to maintain their majority while catering to various factions within their party. The GOP's current initiative on IVF, involving proposals for tax credits and legislative support, has gained momentum with the introduction of pro-IVF bills by several Republican representatives.
