H.R.7 - No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.7, the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2025," seeks to prohibit taxpayer funding for abortions and for health insurance plans that cover abortions. The bill amends Title 1 of the United States Code to explicitly prohibit the use of federal funds for abortions, including funds in trust funds authorized or appropriated by federal law. It also clarifies the application of these prohibitions under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), specifically addressing premium credits and cost-sharing reductions.
Expected Effects
If enacted, H.R.7 would restrict access to abortion services for individuals who rely on federal funding for healthcare. It would also require clearer disclosure of abortion coverage in health plans and any associated surcharges. The bill aims to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not used to fund abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother.
Potential Benefits
- Potentially reduces the financial burden on taxpayers who oppose abortion.
- Increases transparency regarding abortion coverage in health insurance plans.
- Reinforces existing federal policies against abortion funding (e.g., Hyde Amendment) by codifying them more explicitly.
- Provides exceptions for abortions in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother.
- May lead to increased funding for alternative healthcare services, such as prenatal care.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Restricts access to abortion services for low-income individuals who rely on federal healthcare programs.
- May disproportionately affect women of color and other marginalized communities.
- Could lead to increased unintended pregnancies and associated social costs.
- Creates administrative complexities in separating abortion coverage from other healthcare services.
- May face legal challenges based on constitutional rights to privacy and equal protection.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutionality is debatable. Proponents argue it aligns with the principle that taxpayers should not be forced to fund activities they morally oppose, potentially referencing the First Amendment's protection of religious freedom. Opponents may argue that it infringes upon the right to privacy, potentially referencing the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, as interpreted in Roe v. Wade and subsequent cases, although the bill attempts to navigate this by not directly criminalizing abortion but restricting funding.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).