WASHINGTON — Earlier this year, U.S. Rep. Michelle Steele, a two-term Republican from the battleground district of Orange County, California, co-sponsored the Republican Life Support Act with 124 other Republicans, reinforcing the party's influence. Showing solidarity with certain anti-abortion protesters. Rights base.
But last month, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that embryos created as part of in vitro fertilization are children, creating a political dilemma for Steel. There is broad support for IVF, and her critics say the bill she supported could effectively nationalize the Alabama ruling and threaten IVF, where unused embryos are often discarded. I immediately pointed out that there was. In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court's conservative majority overturned Roe v. Wade, giving Congress the power to restrict reproductive rights.
Steele responded by co-sponsoring a non-binding resolution expressing support for IVF.
“As someone who has struggled with infertility and witnessed first-hand the miracle of IVF, I strongly believe that IVF should continue to be protected and accessible.” sheassistance In a statement.
However, the Steel-backed Life at Conception Act states that legal protections for humans take effect “at the moment of conception.” She also did not sign the Family Formation Access Act, which is sponsored only by Democrats and establishes specific legal protections for assisted reproductive technologies like in vitro fertilization.
Ms. Steele's office did not respond to messages seeking comment on how she reconciles her pro-IVF position with her support for the Life at Conception Act.
Democrat Derek Tran, a veteran consumer rights attorney who is running for Steele's seat, called Steele a “fraud” for claiming to support in vitro fertilization. Unlike her, he said he supports the Family Formation Access Act.
“She continues to tell lies,” Tran said in an interview. “Just three weeks ago, she signed the Life at Conception bill. This is the second time she's done that. And now she signed the Life at Conception bill even though the 'Life at Conception' bill is exactly the opposite. , says he is in favor of IVF. So she's still just spewing lies to attract voters. ”
A similar dilemma faces Republicans across the country.
An Axios/Ipsos poll found that 66% of U.S. adults oppose designating IVF embryos as children, while 31% support it.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana), who built a reputation as a staunch social conservative even before his victory with the gavel, will decide Thursday whether he will support legislation that would give legal protection to IVF. did not state clearly. Asked whether he thought the disposal of embryos was murder, he did not directly answer.
“Look, I believe in the sanctity of every human life. I always have,” he said. “That's why I support IVF and its availability.” He said the technology has resulted in an estimated 8 million births, and “I have many close friends” who have used IVF. he added.
“It has to be readily available. It has to be something that all Americans support. And this issue needs to be handled in an ethical way,” he said, adding that the Republican He lamented that there were “many misunderstandings” about his position on the issue.
In the wake of the IVF controversy, many Republican lawmakers in battleground states have stepped up to support the symbolic resolution.
The Steele resolution was co-signed by Rep. Lori Chavez Delemer (R-Ore.) and Rep. Juan Siscomani (R-Ariz.), who also represent battleground states.Another group of Republicans signed on. Another solution Representatives Don Bacon of Nebraska, David Schweikert of Arizona, Jen Quiggans of Virginia, and Anthony D'Esposito and Nick Larota of New York also voiced their support for IVF. It has been stated. All eight districts represent districts won by President Joe Biden in 2020, making them top targets for Democrats in the fall election.
Unlike Steele, no other Republican in the Biden district has sponsored the current Life at Conception Act. But Mr. Bacon and Mr. Schweikert sponsored the 2021 version of the bill in the last Congress, before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. These Republican lawmakers also do not support legislation that would codify protections for IVF, as they walk the line between their conservative and partisan bases.
In the Senate, an IVF protection bill sponsored by Illinois Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth and Democrats stalled after Mississippi Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith opposed it as going too far.
Democrats argue that if Republicans in battleground states are elected to power, they will be instrumental in the party's agenda of banning abortion and in vitro fertilization.
“The Alabama Supreme Court has done what many House Republicans wanted,” Rep. Susan DelBene, D-Washington, who chairs the party's campaign arm, said on MSNBC on Monday. “They supported a bill called the Life at Conception Act, similar to what the Alabama court decided. And now all the Republicans are trying to say publicly that they support IVF, but they actually support IVF. No one is going to support a bill to do that.”
“They want a national abortion ban that would affect contraception, in vitro fertilization and many other things,” she said. “Our rights are at risk.”
