Revised Defense Bill Does Not Include Military Abortion Provision

Main Category: Abortion
Also Included In: Sexual Health / STDs;  Public Health
Article Date: 17 Dec 2010 - 5:00 PDT


Leaders of the House and Senate armed services committees have agreed to a revised fiscal year 2011 Department of Defense authorization bill (HR 6523) that has been stripped of its most controversial provisions, including a policy that would have permitted abortion services at military hospitals, CQ Today reports (Donnelly, CQ Today, 12/15).

The abortion provision, written by Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.), was included in a previous version of the Senate's bill (S 3454). The provision would have repealed a policy that bans provision of nearly all abortion services at military hospitals, even if paid for with private funds. If enacted, the measure would have allowed military servicewomen and their dependents to obtain abortion care at military hospitals if they paid for the procedure with their own money (Women's Health Policy Report, 12/10).

Although the House passed its version of the authorization bill (HR 5136) in May, the Senate twice voted against bringing its bill to the floor, largely because of GOP opposition several provisions, including a provision that would have repealed the 1993 "don't ask, don't tell" law banning openly gay people from serving in the military. The don't ask, don't tell provision has also been removed from the new authorization bill.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said that about 80% to 90% of the original bill remains intact, including about 400 policy provisions to provide guidance on matters such as war policies and military personnel levels.

In a statement, Levin and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), ranking member of the committee, said the "unique circumstances in which the bill is being considered" have led the committee and its House counterpart "to drop many controversial provisions" included in the original bills (CQ Today, 12/15).

To pass the bill before the end of the current session, the House would have to bring the bill up on the suspension calendar, which would bypass the usual rules and debate process (Tiron, The Hill, 12/15). The suspension process requires a two-thirds vote in the House. Then the bill would be sent to the Senate and they would need to adopt the bill by unanimous consent (CQ Today, 12/15).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families.

© 2010 National Partnership for Women & Families. All rights reserved.

• Additional
• References
• Citations