A government shutdown might actually—some would say “probably”—happen this fall. And abortion is at the center of the risk.
But it’s not Democrats who are wielding power to hold up critical spending bills. At least not in the House.
Moderate House Republicans, many from battleground districts, are squabbling with members of their own party on whether to advance a controversial provision that would overturn federal guidance allowing mifepristone, a pill that can induce an abortion in the first two months of pregnancy, to be sent by mail.
ADVERTISEMENT
At the crux of the holdup is the political risk for moderates in taking votes on abortion-related issues.
Public opinion is against Republicans on reproductive rights. The Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade last year was a driving force for GOP underperformance in the midterms. And virtually every proposal made by House Republicans on restricting abortion access has become fodder for Democratic hopes of winning back the majority in 2024.
“Vulnerable Republicans are twisting themselves in knots because they know when these bills attacking reproductive freedoms receive a floor vote, they will cave to the MAGA extremists in their party,” Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson Viet Shelton told The Daily Beast in a statement.
“They will say anything to cover up the fact that, in the end, they will support a national abortion ban,” Shelton said.
(The National Republican Congressional Committee—a House Republicans campaign arm—did not respond to a request for comment on whether the group is concerned about vulnerable Republicans voting on such a hot-button issue.)
With just weeks left until the government funding deadline on Sept. 30—and Congress out until Sept. 5—there’s not an easy solution in sight.
The abortion pill provision was passed out of committee as part of an agriculture spending bill, which generally funds the Department of Agriculture and federal food assistance programs. But that umbrella also extends to the Food and Drug Administration, which currently oversees guidance that allows mifepristone to be sent by mail.
Republicans from battleground districts—namely those President Joe Biden won in 2020—have been voicing concern over the provision and seeking to have it removed from the final package. According to reports, roughly a dozen moderate GOP members have been pushing leadership on the issue.
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) in July said states and the FDA—not Congress—should be deciding whether mifepristone, which is typically used with misoprotol to induce an abortion, can be mailed. A spokesperson told The Daily Beast “his position hasn’t changed since late July.”
Reps. Marc Molinaro (R-NY) and Anthony D’Esposito (R-NY) have also publicly expressed opposition to the provision. Both previously criticized a ruling from a Texas federal judge that would have banned mifepristone nationwide.
Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-OR), who narrowly won her seat last year, also told Axios she would not be able to support the bill if the language remains included.
Rep. Nick LaLota (R-NY) has also indicated he believes the question on mailing mifepristone should be left to the states.
Other moderates haven’t completely dismissed concerns over the provision, but are ready to move on one way or another. Rep. David Valadeo (R-CA), one of the most vulnerable House Republicans in 2024, voted the bill out of committee, though he thinks it's imperfect.
A Valadeo spokesperson told The Daily Beast his main issue with the agriculture spending bill is with cuts to nutrition programs, and that the mifepristone amendment will not be a “make or break” issue for him.
As it's written, the agriculture bill does indeed include proposed cuts to nutrition programs, including for low-income mothers and children.
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) had hoped to pass the agriculture spending bill in the full House before members went home for August recess. But he was evidently unable to wrangle the necessary support. Of the 12 spending bills the House must pass annually as part of the government funding process, only one has passed in the full House so far.
If the House, Senate and White House can’t agree on new spending levels before the September deadline—which seems increasingly likely—Congress can pass a continuing resolution. As it’s called in congressional jargon, a “CR” would carry on last year’s spending levels for a set amount of time, buying lawmakers a few more days, weeks or months for negotiations.
The problem, however, is that some House conservatives have already said they’d oppose a continuing resolution, seeing as it’d carry on spending levels set last year when Democrats held the House, Senate and White House.
And of course, those same conservatives could hold up passage of the bills themselves for a slew of other reasons, like if they think spending levels are too high, or certain provisions don’t make it through. In fact, there’s a good chance they’ll find something to object to, because they can, and doing so has worked repeatedly for them this term.
Even if the mifepristone amendment passes the House, there’s sure to be opposition in the Senate. The White House has also said the president would veto the agriculture bill as is, specifically citing disapproval of the cuts to spending programs and the mifepristone amendment.
In the meantime, House Democrats are sharpening their knives.
“If the GOP wants to enact a nationwide ban on abortion care, then let’s have that debate and let’s hold that vote—but let’s do it in the open, so the American people can judge each member’s action for themselves,” Reps. Diana DeGette (D-CO) and Barbara Lee (D-CA), chairs of the pro-choice caucus, said in a statement.
“Hijacking these critical funding bills to try to sneak through an extreme anti-abortion agenda that a vast majority of Americans oppose is reprehensible. House Republicans should be ashamed of themselves,” they said.
