U.S. Rep. Susan Wild's IVF bill stalls again in Congress

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A sister version of U.S. Rep. Susan Wild's bill to protect access to in vitro fertilization and similar fertility treatments failed to pass the U.S. Senate on Thursday.

To little fanfare earlier this year, Wild, D-Lehigh Valley, introduced the Access to Family Building Act, which would guarantee Americans' access to assisted reproductive technology.

While dozens of states have limited reproductive rights in recent years, none had specifically denied couples access to procedures that could help them conceive.

But that changed in February when the Alabama Supreme Court determined a state law that stated life begins at conception extended to frozen embryos. As a result, fertility clinics across the state shut down operations for a week as health care providers feared they would be liable to child endangerment laws.

State lawmakers scrambled to pass legal exceptions to fertility treatments, and IVF treatments are currently taking place across the country without interference.

But Democrats have seized on the episode as well as reduced access to abortions to attack Republicans as extremists who are out of touch with the American public on reproductive rights.

U.S. Senate vote fails

Wild's bill has been stuck in committee in the Republican-controlled House. But Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., attempted to move its companion bill to a vote in the Senate on Thursday.

The effort to end debate on the matter failed by a 48-47 vote, with most Republicans opposed. The bill was also blocked in February when Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., objected to its passage on a unanimous consent vote.

Hours before the Senate vote Thursday, Wild and other House Democrats held a news conference urging House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to bring the matter up to a vote in the lower chamber. They said that infertility doesn't respect political divides and that families on both sides of the aisle have relied on assisted reproductive technology to conceive.

"It's time, I believe, for Americans to see where all members of the House of Representatives stand on this critically important issue," Wild said. "We've heard a lot of noise from people who say they don't agree with the Alabama decision, but yet they've not rushed to sign on to this bill."

After Roe v. Wade

Wild said she was moved to introduce her bill following the Dobbs v. Jackson Supreme Court decision in 2022, which revoked guaranteed access to abortions at the federal level. Wild said she took note of Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion that said the court should review other matters such as gay marriage and access to contraceptives as they relied on similar logic.

Wild said she considers the right to control one's own body a fundamental right but said that hasn't stopped conservative politicians from passing strict abortion laws in dozens of states. While four Republicans have signed on to her IVF bill, she's concerned that more members of the House haven't embraced it.

"I think what we have learned is to never underestimate the GOP in terms of their willingness to infringe on people's rights and liberties," Wild said.

The IVF debate

The IVF debate has placed Republicans in a difficult spot. The expensive treatment is popular among the American public; about 1 in 5 married American women struggles with infertility, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

But many conservatives, including Johnson, have pushed for legislation that would recognize life as beginning at conception. While those debates have largely focused on abortion, the same logic would apply to IVF. The procedure has doctors harvest eggs, which are then fertilized outside the womb and inserted back into the patient's body.

Often times, multiple embryos are made at once, and extras are preserved in case the couple opts to have more children later. However, clinics wouldn't be able to dispose of unwanted embryos if the law states life begins at conception. Doctors could also theoretically face criminal charges for child endangerment if the IVF process fails.

Senate Republicans have instead expressed support to an alternative bill sponsored by Britt and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. Their bill would deny Medicaid funding to any state that would ban IVF treatments.

Senate Democrats blocked a vote on that bill Wednesday, saying it doesn't do enough to guarantee IVF access.

"Everyone should understand that the only reason we do not currently have a strong protection of IVF in federal law is because Senate Democrats blocked it," Cruz said in a prepared statement Thursday. "Democrats cynically decided they would rather have a political issue to scare the voters with instead of actually passing legislation to make certain that IVF is fully protected."