By
After the Alabama Supreme Court’s recent ruling, Republicans went out of their way to assure Americans that the party supports in vitro fertilization, and there was no great mystery as to why: The party was, and is, terrified of the kind of backlash it faced after the demise of Roe v. Wade, so GOP officials scrambled to say all the right things.
But as a friend of mine likes to say, watch what they do, not what they say.
Two weeks ago, Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois sought unanimous consent — a procedural move designed to help quickly advance uncontroversial measures — on the “Access to Family Building Act,” which would create legal protections for IVF at the national level. It failed in response to Republican opposition.
Last week, House Speaker Mike Johnson hedged on whether he believes destroying or disposing of embryos constitutes “murder.”
And this week, as AL.com reported, another Democratic bill was blocked by the GOP.
Washington state Democratic Sen. Patty Murray tried to pass a bill Tuesday that would expand access to in vitro fertilization for military service members and veterans, but Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford raised an objection and prevented the legislation from moving forward.
Like Duckworth’s bill two weeks ago, Murray tried to advance her measure through unanimous consent, making it possible for any one senator to derail the effort. Lankford played that role.
It might be tempting to think it’s unfair to blame all Senate Republicans for the objection raised by one member, but it’s worth noting for context that no other GOP senators denounced Lankford for blocking unanimous consent on Murray’s bill.
As for the substance of the Washington Democrat’s legislation, The New Republic noted that Murray’s bill “would allow all veterans to access IVF and other fertility treatments at Veterans Affairs facilities. Currently, in order to qualify for VA treatment, veterans must prove their infertility is due to a health issue caused by their military service.”
Lankford balked, raising procedural objections and claiming that the bill’s definition of “infertility” was overly “broad.”
Murray soon after spoke on the Senate floor saying she was “deeply disappointed but not surprised,” adding, “I really hoped after the outpouring of public statements in support of IVF from my colleagues across the aisle, they might finally change their tune. But the American people understand that actions speak louder than words.”
Just hours before Lankford objected to the Democratic measure, Politico reported that prominent far-right opponents of reproductive rights are pushing Republicans to oppose protections for in vitro fertilization.
There’s apparently reason to believe the lobbying efforts are having the intended effect.
This post updates our related earlier coverage.