Lawmakers bash leaders for cutting IVF coverage from Pentagon policy bill
After both the House and Senate passed a Pentagon policy bill that included an expansion of in vitro fertilization coverage for active duty service members and their families, congressional leaders stripped the provision from the final version — and lawmakers in both parties are livid.
As the House prepares for a final vote on the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, on Wednesday, frustration is boiling over across the aisle.
Democrats are directing their anger at Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., accusing him of blocking the provision in defiance of President Donald Trump’s stated support.
“Trump claimed on the campaign trail that he’d make IVF free for all Americans, creepily declaring himself the ‘father of IVF,’” said Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., a member of the Armed Services Committee and a key advocate of the IVF provision. “Well, he proved he’s a deadbeat dad by not only failing to make IVF free for anyone, but standing by as Speaker Johnson undermined one of his key campaign promises and stripped coverage from service members behind closed doors that both the House and Senate approved.”
“Shame on them,” Duckworth added.
As MS NOW first reported last week, Johnson was working to keep the IVF language — which would have expanded TRICARE, the insurance plan for service members and their families, to cover IVF services for all enrollees — out of the compromise bill. (Currently, TRICARE only covers fertility services for military members whose infertility was caused by “a serious or severe illness or injury while on active duty.”)
The co-chairs of the Congressional Reproductive Freedom Caucus — Reps. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., and Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass. — said in a statement that, “Nothing could be truer to our American values than giving those who fight for our freedom the freedom to build their families on their terms.”
“If IVF is truly a priority for this Republican President, he and the House Speaker must both answer for this glaring omission,” they said.
Rep. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., another member of the Armed Services Committee, placed the onus at the feet of congressional leaders who crafted the final version of the annual defense policy bill.
“It’s frustrating and angering that the will of both houses has essentially been negated on that point and a number of others by a conference committee that seems unresponsive to the will of the majority,” Blumenthal told MS NOW.
But it’s not just Democrats who are frustrated that the IVF language was cut from the final bill. A wide range of GOP lawmakers said leaders were wrong to cut that provision.
“I regret that. I wish they had put it in there,” Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said. “I support IVF. I think the American people support IVF. For the life of me, I don’t know why they didn’t include it in there. I think they made a mistake by not including it in there.”
When asked about leaders cutting the IVF provision, Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., said it was “not the way that I would do it.” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said it was “unfortunate” the language wasn’t included. And Rep. Mike Lawler of New York — one of three House Republicans representing districts Vice President Kamala Harris won in 2024 — told MS NOW that he was “disappointed” the IVF provision didn’t survive in the final bill.
“It’s something I campaigned on, and President Trump did as well, and I appreciate the work he’s already done to push this issue forward,” Lawler said. “We owe it to our service members and their families to follow through on that commitment.”
The bipartisan frustrations broke out on Sunday after congressional leaders unveiled the 3,086-page annual defense policy bill. The sprawling legislation authorizes $890 billion for the Pentagon, National Nuclear Security Administration and related agencies, and includes a 4% pay raise for enlisted service members.
But notably missing from the bill was the language that would mandate TRICARE, the insurance policy for service members and their families, to cover IVF.
Duckworth told MS NOW last week that Johnson was “single-handedly working behind closed doors — and against the President’s promise — to rip this provision away from our heroes and their families.” In the past, Johnson has expressed support for IVF, but has expressed concerns about the disposal of unused embryos.
A spokeswoman for the speaker told MS NOW last week that Trump and Republicans on Capitol Hill “have been working to lower costs and expand access to IVF.”
“The Speaker has clearly and repeatedly stated he is supportive of access to IVF when sufficient pro-life protections are in place, and he will continue to be supportive when it is done responsibly and ethically,” the spokeswoman said.
Asked about the exclusion of the provision on Monday, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said the IVF language “was one of the many issues at the end that were — there was a disagreement about, and ultimately didn’t land.”
“It’s not the only thing. There were other provisions that didn’t make it in either,” Thune said. “So those will all, I’m sure, fight another day and we’ll litigate it over again.”
Advocates for military families also said they were disappointed by the outcome.
“Failing to include this provision is failing our military,” Julie Eshelman, founder and president of the Building Military Families Network, told MS NOW.
“This was something that both houses of Congress passed, and we know was something that was very much wanted from military families, and for it to come out at the last minute is mystifying and frustrating and really does a disservice for military families who were counting on this coverage,” said Eileen Huck, director of government relations at the National Military Family Association.
Ellen Gustafson, founder of Military Family Building Coalition, who said she and her husband spend thousands of dollars on IVF since they didn’t have coverage under TRICARE, said she hoped Trump would take further action to expand access to IVF as promised.
In October, Trump announced both a cost-cutting deal for a critical IVF drug and a voluntary fertility benefit employers could offer. The proposals, however, fall short of a promise he made frequently on the campaign trail: to make IVF free by forcing the government or insurance companies to pay for it.
“The president put out an executive order, and quite frankly they didn’t follow his lead on that,” Gustafson said of congressional Republicans. “This is something where we’re going to need his further leadership in order to make this happen during his presidency.”
Spokespeople for the White House did not respond to MS NOW’s repeated requests for comment.
A spokesperson for the Pentagon declined to comment. “As a matter of policy, the Department does not comment on ongoing legislation,” the spokesperson said.
Despite the bipartisan frustrations, the NDAA is still expected to sail through Congress, as it’s done for more than six decades. A handful of lawmakers told MS NOW that despite their qualms with the IVF provision, they will vote in favor of the bill.
“I’m going to keep pressing to get IVF expansion done, and I’m also going to make sure our military has the resources it needs to keep Americans safe,” Lawler said.
Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said he would support the bill despite his disappointment that the IVF provision was left on the cutting room floor.
“I am disappointed these items were excluded from the final text,” Smith said in a statement, “and will keep working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to advocate for them going forward.”
Kevin Frey contributed to this report.