Highlights:
Portman, 2015: “I Am Proud Of My 100 Percent Pro-Life Record In The Senate And Am Fully Committed To Protecting The Sanctity Of Life.” According to a press release from the office of Senator Rob Pormtan, obtained via States News Service, “It is always an honor to attend the National Prayer Breakfast, and I was especially blessed to have President Smith and Darla St. Martin join me this year,’ said Portman. ‘I am proud of my 100 percent pro-life record in the Senate and am fully committed to protecting the sanctity of life. The breakfast also served as a reminder that even before the founding of our country, religious liberty has been sacred to the American people. And when religious liberty is threatened around the world, we must lead the fight against those who would deny it. Today in the Middle East, we are witnessing the systematic purging of Christians, and I am proud to sponsor a resolution that is a call for action to stand shoulder to shoulder with them.’” [States News Service, 2/5/15]
Portman, 2013: “I Am Proud Of My Pro-Life Record Throughout My Time In Public Service.” According to a press release from the Office of Senator Rob Portman, obtained via States News Service, Portman said, “I am proud of my pro-life record throughout my time in public service. I have co-sponsored pro-life measures, including the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act to permanently prohibit federal funding of abortion, and the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act, which would allow a health plan to decline coverage of things like abortion that go against the religious or moral beliefs of the person or organization offering or purchasing the plan. I am also a co-sponsor of the Protect Life Act, which prohibits federal funding of abortion in the President’s health care spending law.” [States News Service, 1/22/13]
Portman, 2012: “The Sanctity Of Life Is Fundamental And Universal, And I Am Committed To Protecting It While Serving In The Senate.” According to a press release from the Office of Senator Rob Portman, obtained via States News Service, “U.S. Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) released the following statement on the March for Life today in the nation’s capital: ‘I commend those who have traveled from Ohio and throughout the country to stand and march together as a voice for the voiceless. Thank you for committing time, energy and money to stand up for the unborn. Americans from all walks of life are stepping forward to say that life is precious and must be preserved. And it’s not just at today’s March, but every day that people across the country are creating greater awareness of the issue. The sanctity of life is fundamental and universal, and I am committed to protecting it while serving in the Senate.’” [States News Service, 1/23/12]
Portman, 2013: “We Must All Work Together To Reduce The Number Of Abortions.” According to a press release from the Office of Senator Rob Portman, obtained via States News Service, Portman said, “While our nation is divided on whether or not abortion should be legal, on one point there is a growing consensus: we must all work together to reduce the number of abortions. Recent data indicates that more and more Americans agree. This is not surprising. Cutting-edge medical technology can detect a baby’s heartbeat even earlier in a pregnancy and ultrasounds are providing an increasingly advanced look into a baby’s development.” [States News Service, 1/22/13]
2022: Portman Effectively Voted Against The Women's Health Protection Act Of 2021, Which Would Codify The Right For Health Care Providers To Provide Abortion Services And The Right For Patients To Receive Abortion Services. In May 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Portman voted against the “motion to invoke cloture on the Schumer motion to proceed to the bill that would statutorily establish that health care providers have a right to provide and patients have a right to receive abortion services.” The vote was on a motion to invoke cloture. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 49-51. [Senate Vote 170, 5/11/22; Congressional Quarterly, 5/11/22; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3755]
2022: Portman Effectively Voted Against The Women's Health Protection Act Of 2021, Which Would Protect The Right To Abortion Access And Prohibit Restrictions On Abortion. In February 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Portman voted against the “motion to invoke cloture (thus limiting debate) on the Schumer, D-N.Y., motion to proceed to the bill.” The vote was on a motion to invoke cloture. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 46-48. [Senate Vote 65, 2/28/22; Congressional Quarterly, 2/28/22; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3755]
2018: Portman Effectively Voted For The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, Which Banned Abortion After 20-Weeks. In January 2018, Portman voted for legislation banning abortion after the fetus is 20-weeks old. According to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill that would prohibit abortions in cases where the probable age of the fetus is 20 weeks or later and would impose criminal penalties on doctors who violate the ban, with certain exceptions. The bill would require a second doctor trained in neonatal resuscitation to be present for abortions where the fetus has the ‘potential’ to survive outside the womb.” The vote was on a motion to invoke cloture on a motion to proceed, which required 60 affirmative votes. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 51 to 46. [Senate Vote 25, 1/29/18; Congressional Quarterly, 1/29/18; Congressional Actions, S. 2311]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted For A Bill That Would Prohibit Abortions After 20-Weeks Gestation Except In Cases Of Rape Or Incest, But Would Erect New Barriers Such As Requiring Rape Victims To Document That They Received Prior Medical Treatment Or Counseling. In September 2015, Portman effectively voted for a bill that would prohibit abortions after 20 weeks of gestation and would impose criminal penalties on doctors that violated the ban. According to Congressional Quarterly, the bill would, “prohibit abortions in cases where the probable age of the fetus is 20 weeks or later, except in cases of rape, incest against a minor or when the life of the pregnant woman is in danger. Specifically, it would provide an exemption for pregnancies that are the result of rape against adult women if the woman obtained counseling or medical treatment for the rape at least 48 hours before the abortion. Pregnancies resulting from rape or incest against a minor would also be exempt from the ban if the rape or incest had been reported before the abortion to law enforcement or another government agency authorized to act on reports of child abuse. The measure would impose criminal penalties on doctors who violate the ban. The measure also would require health care practitioners to give the same level of care to an infant born alive during a failed abortion as they would give to an infant born at the same gestational age through natural birth.” The vote was on cloture and the Senate rejected the bill 54 to 42; 60 Senators voting yes would have been required to invoke cloture. The House had earlier passed the bill. [Senate Vote 268, 9/22/15; Congressional Quarterly, 9/22/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 36]
Portman Co-Sponsored A Bill Banning Abortions After 20 Weeks Of Pregnancy. According to the Washington Post, “A Republican senator seeking his party’s 2016 presidential nomination introduced a bill Thursday banning most late-term abortions and is predicting the Senate will vote on the highly polarizing issue this year. […] Like the House legislation, Graham’s bill would make it illegal to perform most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. There would be exceptions to save the mother’s life or if the mother was a rape victim who receives counseling or medical treatment at least 48 hours before the procedure. Also exempted would be minors who were victims of rape or incest and reported the incident to law enforcement or social service officials. […] By Thursday afternoon, Graham’s office said his measure was co-sponsored so far by 45 of the Senate’s 54 Republicans. Of Republicans facing potentially tight re-election races next year, Sens. Rob Portman of Ohio, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania were listed as co-sponsors.” [Washington Post, 6/11/15]
Portman Called Upon His Facebook Fans To Sign A Petition In Support Of His 20-Week Abortion Ban. According to a Facebook post by Rob Portman, “I am a proud co-sponsor of the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, an important bill that will protect our nation’s unborn babies. More and more Americans are recognizing that we must protect our most innocent and I am pleased that so many support this bill. Please stand with me to protect our country’s unborn by signing my petition to support the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. – Rob” [Rob Portman for U.S. Senate Facebook, 6/11/15]
Portman Said A Ban On Abortions After 20 Weeks Was Consistent With Research On Fetal Viability. According to the Wall Street Journal, “The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act would outlaw abortions beginning at 20 weeks of pregnancy, with exceptions when the life of the mother is at risk and in cases of rape and of incest involving a minor. […] Mr. Portman said 20 weeks seems like a reasonable cutoff based on research he has seen on fetal viability.” [Wall Street Journal, 6/18/15]
Portman Falsely Claimed Medical Advances Now Allow Fetuses To Survive Outside The Womb At Earlier Stages Of Pregnancy. According to Marina Bolotnikova in the Toledo Blade, “In a recent conversation with The Blade’s editorial board, U.S. Sen. Rob Portman (R., Ohio), who supports banning abortion at 20 weeks, noted that babies today can survive earlier thanks to medical advances. That’s true, but such judgments can only be made by doctors on a case-by-case basis, not by a rigid state law. In any case, 20-week-old fetuses are not viable outside the womb.” [Toledo Blade – Marina Bolotnikova, 7/5/15]
Portman Claimed His Support For The 20-Week Abortion Ban Was “Not A Political Calculation.” According to The Wall Street Journal, “He acknowledged that views on abortion are mixed in Ohio, but said, ‘it’s not a political calculation.’” [Wall Street Journal, 6/18/15]
2003: Portman Voted To Ban A Medical Procedure Opponents Refer To As “Partial-Birth” Abortion. In June 2003, Portman voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “ban[ned] a medical procedure opponents refer to as ‘partial-birth’ abortion. The procedure would only be allowed when it is necessary to save a woman’s life. Those who unlawfully performed the procedure would face fines and up to two years in prison.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 282 to 139, and a conference committee was then convened to work out a compromise with the Senate’s version of the bill. The resulting conference report on the bill, which omitted Senate language affirming the Roe v. Wade decision, was later adopted by both the House and the Senate, and then signed into law by the president. [House Vote 242, 6/4/03; Congressional Quarterly, 6/4/03; Congressional Actions, H.R. 760; Congressional Actions, S. 3; Congressional Quarterly, 10/1/03]
2002: Portman Voted To Ban So-Called “Partial Birth” Abortions, Except To Save The Life Of The Mother. In July 2002, Portman voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “ban[ned] a procedure opponents refer to as ‘partial birth’ abortion. It [have] would allow[ed] the procedure only when it is necessary to save a woman’s life. Those who performed the procedure for other reasons would [have] face[d] fines and up to two years in prison, although the woman would not [have] be[en] criminally liable. The bill also includes congressional findings that establish the constitutionality of the measure.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 274 to 151; however, the Senate took no substantive action on the measure. [House Vote 343, 7/24/02; Congressional Quarterly, 7/24/02; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4965]
Portman Was An Original Cosponsor Of The So-Called Partial-Birth Abortion Ban. According to a letter to the editor by Michael Gonidakis in the Cincinnati Enquirer, “As the president of Ohio Right to Life as well as a member of the board of directors for National Right to Life, I believe it is my responsibility to correct the record regarding Portman’s pro-life credentials. Specifically, he voted 77-0 in favor of the pro-life position on the National Right to Life Committee scored key votes dating back to the 1990s. He has consistently opposed the use of taxpayer funds for abortion. He voted to reinstate the Mexico City Policy in 2001. He was an original cosponsor of the partial-birth abortion ban that passed Congress in 2003. He supported the Unborn Victims of Violence Act in 2004. […] Michael Gonidakis, president, Ohio Right to Life” [Letter – Cincinnati Enquirer, 9/6/14]
PORTMAN VOTED REPEATEDLY TO DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD
2018: Portman Voted To Defund Planned Parenthood. In August 2018, Portman voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “prohibit[ed] federal funds from going to Planned Parenthood.” The underlying legislation was an FY 2019 Labor, HHS, Education and Defense appropriations bill. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 45 to 48. [Senate Vote 191, 8/23/18; Congressional Quarterly, 8/23/18; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 3967; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 3695; Congressional Actions, H.R. 6157]
2015: Portman Voted For A Bill That Defunded Planned Parenthood Less Than One Week After The Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood Shooting. In December 2015, Portman voted for a bill that according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “scrap[ed] in 2018 the law's Medicaid expansion, as well as subsidies to help individuals buy coverage through the insurance exchanges.” Additionally, according to Congressional Quarterly the bill would have “repeal[ed] portions of the 2010 health care law and block[ed] federal funding for Planned Parenthood for one year. As amended, the bill would zero-out the law’s penalties for noncompliance with the law’s requirements for most individuals to obtain health coverage and employers to offer health insurance.” The vote was on passage of a reconciliation bill. The Senate approved the bill by a vote of 52 to 47. The bill was later passed by the full Congress, which the president then vetoed. The House was not able to override the veto. [Senate Vote 329, 12/3/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/3/15; Real Clear Politics, 12/4/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3762]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted For Defunding Planned Parenthood. In December 2015, Portman effectively voted for defunding Planned Parenthood. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would have “remove[d] the section of the measure that would block for one year federal funding that is considered direct spending to Planned Parenthood.” The underlying legislation was a substitute amendment repealing key provisions of the Affordable Care Act while also defunding Planned Parenthood. The vote was on a motion to waive all applicable budgetary discipline required a 3/5’s majority. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 48 to 52. [Senate Vote 314, 12/3/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/3/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/3/15; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2885; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2874; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3762]
2015: Portman Voted For Defunding Planned Parenthood. In May 2015, Portman voted for barring all federal funding to Planned Parenthood. According to CNN, “The fight over funding for Planned Parenthood shifts to a must-pass government funding measure this fall after a procedural vote in the Senate on legislation that would have barred all federal funds for the group failed on Monday.” The vote was on cloture the Motion to Proceed; the motion was rejected by a vote of 53 to 46; 60 Senators voting yes would have been required to proceed. [Senate Vote 262, 8/3/15; CNN, 8/4/15; Congressional Actions, S. 1881]
2011: Portman Voted For A Bill To Defund Planned Parenthood. In April 2011, Portman voted for prohibiting any funds appropriated in the recently-passed bill funding the government through the end of fiscal year 2011 from being made available to Planned Parenthood or any of its affiliates. The vote was on a continuing resolution that, according to the Congressional Research Service, “[d]irect[ed] the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make a correction in the enrollment of H.R. 1473 (Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011) to prohibit any funds under such Act from being made available to Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. or any affiliate of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc.” That change would have been made prior to sending H.R. 1473 – which had already passed both the House and Senate – to the president. The Senate rejected the concurrent resolution by vote of 42 to 58. [Senate Vote 60, 4/14/11; CRS Summary, H Con Res 36, 4/14/11]
2011: Portman Voted For Eliminating FY2011 Federal Funding For Planned Parenthood. In March 2011, Portman voted for prohibiting any funds in the remainder of FY2011 from being used to fund Planned Parenthood. The provision was part of a continuing resolution to fund the federal government until the end of FY 2011 that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would prohibit any funds in the bill from being made available to Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc. or its affiliates.” The bill was rejected by the Senate by a vote of 44 to 56. The bill number was later used as the vehicle for another piece of legislation. [Senate Vote 36, 3/9/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1; Congressional Quarterly, 3/1/11]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted To Shut Down The Federal Government Via A 10-Week Continuing Resolution That Defunded Planned Parenthood. In September 2015, Portman effectively voted for a 10-week continuing resolution that defunded Planned Parenthood. According to Congressional Quarterly, the vote was on a “Motion to invoke cloture (thus limiting debate) on the Cochran, R-Miss., substitute amendment no. 2669 that would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Dec. 11, 2015, at an annual rate of about $1.017 trillion. It also would prohibit for one year federal funding for Planned Parenthood or its affiliates unless they certify that they will not perform, or fund other entities that perform, abortions during that period. The substitute amendment would redirect $235 million to community health centers.” The vote was on a motion to concur. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 47 to 52. [Senate Vote 270, 9/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, 9/24/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 719; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2669; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 61]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted Against Stripping A Bill Of A Provision Defunding Planned Parenthood While Also Establishing A Fund To Provide Payments To Women’s Health Clinics For Security. In December 2015, Portman effectively voted against stripping a bill of a provision defunding Planned Parenthood while also establishing a fund to provide payments to women’s health clinics for security. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would have “remove[d] the section that would block for one year federal funding to Planned Parenthood. It also would [have] establish[ed] a fund to make payments to women's health clinics to provide services and to ensure safety of such clinics.” The underlying legislation was a substitute amendment repealing key provisions of the Affordable Care Act while also defunding Planned Parenthood. The vote was on a motion to table. The Senate agreed to the motion by a vote of 54 to 46. [Senate Vote 311, 12/3/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/3/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/3/15; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2876; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2874; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3762]
2017: Portman Voted For The So Called “Skinny Repeal” Version Of Trumpcare, Which Defunded Planned Parenthood For One Year. In July 2017, Portman voted for the Health Care Freedom Act, also known as “skinny repeal.” According to Vox, “The Health Care Freedom Act is the Senate Republicans’ last-ditch attempt to repeal Obamacare. Released around 10 o’clock Thursday night, it is expected to come to a vote early Friday morning. […] This HCFA would repeal the Affordable Care Act’s mandate that all Americans carry coverage. It would nix the requirement that large employers provide coverage to all workers, too. The bill includes a three-year repeal of the medical device tax and a one-year defunding of Planned Parenthood.” The vote was on the amendment. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 49 to 51. [Senate Vote 179, 7/28/17; Vox, 7/27/17; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 667; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 267; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1628]
Portman Co-Sponsored Legislation Defunding Planned Parenthood And Funding Organizations Which He Claimed “Provide Health Services For Women.” According to a Facebook post by Rob Portman for U.S. Senate, “Following this month’s shocking videos, Rob is co-sponsoring legislation to defund Planned Parenthood and protect women’s health by offering federal funds to organizations that provide health services for women, including diagnostic laboratory and radiology services, prenatal and postnatal care, immunizations, cervical and breast cancer screenings and more.” [Rob Portman for U.S. Senate Facebook, 8/1/15]
Portman Pledged To “Continue To Push To Fully Defund Planned Parenthood.” According to a press release from the Office of Senator Rob Portman, Portman said, “I will also continue to fight to stop taxpayer money from going to Planned Parenthood. Senate Democrats continue to protect Planned Parenthood, even after the release of deeply disturbing videos exposing their practice of selling the fetal tissue of babies who are aborted. I support redirecting the tax dollars from Planned Parenthood to community health centers that can provide the women's health services needed. In my home state of Ohio, we have nearly eight times the number of local community health centers compared to Planned Parenthood clinics. Although Senate Democrats blocked us from doing so last week, I will continue to push to fully defund Planned Parenthood in the coming days and weeks.” [Official Website of Senator Rob Portman, 9/28/15]
Portman Suggested Planned Parenthood Did Not Provide “Legitimate” Women’s Healthcare Services. According to Talking Point Memo, “Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) said on Wednesday that even though the Senate passed a temporary funding bill that includes funds for Planned Parenthood, lawmakers should still work to defund the organization. He said that the government should instead help clinics that provide ‘legitimate care.’ ‘I think it’s worth continuing to fight to defund. Taxpayer dollars should not be going to Planned Parenthood,’ he told Fox host Neil Cavuto. ‘I think our legislation makes a lot of sense. It says, not only do you not send taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood, but those tax dollars instead go to community health centers — there are a lot more of them than Planned Parenthood clinics; eight times more in the state of Ohio for instance — and they can provide the women’s health needs that are legitimate, that are needed.’” [Talking Points Memo, 9/30/15]
2013: Portman Effectively Voted To Support Passing Sen. Rubio’s Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA). In March 2013, Portman effectively voted for a “sense of the Senate” amendment regarding the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA) and calling for that bill’s passage. According to The Hill, “The Senate on Friday evening rejected a Republican amendment to the 2014 budget that calls for new criminal penalties for abortions performed on minors outside their home state. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) proposed an amendment to the budget that encourages passage of his Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act.” The vote was on a motion to waive a point of order raised against the amendment. According to The Hill, “Boxer raised a point of order against Rubio’s amendment, saying it was non-germane. Rubio asked for a waiver from Senate budget rules.” The Senate rejected the motion to waive the point of order by a vote of 48 to 51, killing the amendment. [Senate Vote 64, 3/22/13; The Hill, 3/22/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 292; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 8]
2005: Portman Voted To Criminalize The Transportation Of A Minors Across State Lines To Obtain An Abortion Without The Consent Of A Parent, Guardian Or Judge. In April 2005, Portman voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] bar[red] the transportation of a minor girl across state lines to obtain an abortion without the consent of a parent, guardian or judge. The bill would [have] authorize[d] fines and/or up to a year in prison for individuals who transport[ed] a minor to a state without a parental consent law in an attempt to circumvent parents’ involvement. Doctors who performed such abortions also would [have] be[en] subject to the penalties. Abortion providers in states without parental consent laws would [have] be[en] required to try to notify a parent or legal guardian, either personally or by certified mail, before performing an abortion on a minor who was a resident of another state.” The vote was on passage of the bill; the House adopted it by a vote of 270 to 157. The Senate took no substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 144, 4/27/05; Congressional Quarterly, 4/27/05; Congressional Actions, H.R. 748]
2002: Portman Voted In Favor Of Prohibiting The Transport Of “Minors Across State Lines For The Purposes Of Performing An Abortion Without Parental Consent.” According to the New York Times, “Child Custody Protection Act (H.R. 476): The House on April 17 approved a bill, sponsored by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., to prohibit transporting minors across state lines for the purposes of performing an abortion without parental consent. Proponents said it would uphold state laws requiring parental consent for abortion. Opponents argued the bill would restrict abortion rights. The vote was 260 yeas to 161 nays. YEAS: […] Rep. Rob J. Portman” [New York Times, 4/19/02]
2002: Portman Voted To Criminalize Evading Parental Consent Laws By Transporting A Minor Across State Lines To Have An Abortion. In April 2002, Portman voted for legislation that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “ma[de] it a federal crime to transport a minor across state lines with the intent to obtain an abortion and circumvent state parental-consent laws unless it’s to protect the life of the girl. The girl would [have] be[en] protected from prosecution under the bill, which carries a punishment of up to one year in jail and a $100,000 fine.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 260 to 161; however, the Senate took no substantive action on the measure. [House Vote 97, 4/17/02; Congressional Quarterly, 4/17/02; Congressional Actions, H.R. 476]
2005: Portman Voted To Criminalize The Transportation Of A Minor Girl Across State Lines To Obtain An Abortion Without The Consent Of A Parent, Guardian Or Judge. In April 2005, Portman voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] bar[red] the transportation of a minor girl across state lines to obtain an abortion without the consent of a parent, guardian or judge. The bill would [have] authorize[d] fines and/or up to a year in prison for individuals who transport[ed] a minor to a state without a parental consent law in an attempt to circumvent parents’ involvement. Doctors who performed such abortions also would [have] be[en] subject to the penalties. Abortion providers in states without parental consent laws would [have] be[en] required to try to notify a parent or legal guardian, either personally or by certified mail, before performing an abortion on a minor who was a resident of another state.” The vote was on passage of the bill; the House adopted it by a vote of 270 to 157. The Senate took no substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 144, 4/27/05; Congressional Quarterly, 4/27/05; Congressional Actions, H.R. 748]
Doctors Who Performed Abortions On The Illegally Transported Minor Would Also Be Subject To Criminal Penalties. According to Congressional Quarterly, “The House is expected to pass legislation this week that would bar the transportation of minor girls across state lines to obtain abortions without the consent of a parent, guardian or judge. The bill (HR 748) […] would authorize fines or prison time -- up to a year -- for individuals who transported a minor to a state that did not require parental consent for abortions in order to circumvent a parent’s involvement. Doctors who performed the abortions also would be subject to the penalties.” [Congressional Quarterly, 4/22/05]
Doctors In States Without Parental Consent Laws Would Have To Attempt To Notify A Non-Resident Minor’s Parents Before Performing An Abortion. According to Congressional Quarterly, “The bill would require abortion providers in states without parental consent laws to try to notify a parent or legal guardian before performing an abortion on a minor girl who was a resident of another state.” [Congressional Quarterly, 4/21/05]
PORTMAN EFFECTIVELY VOTED AGAINST PROVISION TO PREVENT A FATHER WHO RAPED HIS CHILD TO SUE ADULTS WHO TOOK THE CHILD ACROSS STATE LINES FOR AN ABORTION
2005: Portman Effectively Voted Against Preventing A Father Who Raped His Child From Suing Adults Who Took The Child Across State Lines To Get An Abortion, Or The Doctor Who Aborted The Resulting Pregnancy. In April 2005, Portman effectively voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] bar[red] fathers who have committed rape or incest against a minor that resulted in a pregnancy from being able to sue the doctor who performed the abortion.” The underlying bill, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] bar[red] the transportation of a minor girl across state lines to obtain an abortion without the consent of a parent, guardian or judge. The bill would [have] authorize[d] fines and/or up to a year in prison for individuals who transport[ed] a minor to a state without a parental consent law in an attempt to circumvent parents’ involvement. Doctors who performed such abortions also would [have] be[en] subject to the penalties.” The vote was on a motion to recommit the bill with instructions to report it back with the specified amendment; the House rejected the motion by a vote of 183 to 245. [House Vote 143, 4/27/05; Congressional Quarterly, 4/27/05; Congressional Actions, H.R. 748; Congressional Quarterly, 4/27/05]
PORTMAN VOTED TO DENY OVERSEAS ABORTIONS FOR SERVICEMEMBERS, EVEN IF THEY PAID FOR IT THEMSELVES
2002: Portman Voted Against Allowing Abortions At U.S. Military Medical Facilities Abroad If A Doctor Agreed To Perform The Procedure And The Patient Paid For It. In May 2002, Portman voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] allow[ed] abortions at U.S. military medical facilities abroad if a doctor [agreed] to perform the procedure and [it was] paid for by the patient.” Current policy at that time limited self-funded abortions to cases of rape, incest or where the mother’s life is endangered. The House rejected the proposed amendment to the fiscal year 2003 defense authorization act by a vote of 202 to 215. [House Vote 153, 5/10/02; Congressional Quarterly, 5/10/02; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4546; Congressional Record, 5/10/02]
2001: Portman Voted Against Allowing U.S. Military Medical Facilities At Bases Overseas To Perform Abortions On U.S. Servicewomen If She Paid For The Procedure Herself. In September 2001, Portman voted against an amendment that according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “allow[ed] female military personnel stationed at U.S. bases overseas to undergo an abortion at medical facilities there provided they pay for it themselves and a doctor consents to perform the operation.” The House rejected the proposed amendment to the fiscal year 2002 defense authorization act by a vote of 199 to 217. [House Vote 357, 9/25/01; Congressional Quarterly, 9/25/01; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2586]
1995: Portman Voted Against Allowing Military Personnel And Their Dependents To Obtain Abortions At Overseas Military Bases As Long As The Women Pays For The Procedure. In June 1995, Portman voted against allowing military personnel and their dependents to obtain abortions at overseas military bases as long as the women pays for the procedure. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would have “allow[ed] military personnel and their dependents to obtain abortions at overseas military bases as long as the woman pays for the procedure. The bill would prohibit the practice, and the amendment would strike the restriction and restore current law.” The underlying legislation was the FY 1996 Defense Authorization. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 196 to 230. [House Vote 382, 6/15/95; Congressional Quarterly, 6/15/95]
2002: Portman Voted Against Allowing Abortions At U.S. Military Medical Facilities Abroad If A Doctor Agreed To Perform The Procedure And The Patient Paid For It. In May 2002, Portman voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] allow[ed] abortions at U.S. military medical facilities abroad if a doctor [agreed] to perform the procedure and [it was] paid for by the patient.” Current policy at that time limited self-funded abortions to cases of rape, incest or where the mother’s life is endangered. The House rejected the proposed amendment to the fiscal year 2003 defense authorization act by a vote of 202 to 215. [House Vote 153, 5/10/02; Congressional Quarterly, 5/10/02; Congressional Record, 5/10/02; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 478; Congressional Record, H.R. 4546]
2001: Portman Voted Against Allowing U.S. Military Medical Facilities At Bases Overseas To Perform Abortions On U.S. Servicewomen If She Paid For The Procedure Herself. In September 2001, Portman voted against an amendment that according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “allow[ed] female military personnel stationed at U.S. bases overseas to undergo an abortion at medical facilities there provided they pay for it themselves and a doctor consents to perform the operation.” The House rejected the proposed amendment to the fiscal year 2002 defense authorization act by a vote of 199 to 217. [House Vote 357, 9/25/01; Congressional Quarterly, 9/25/01; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 317; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2586]
1995: Portman Voted Against Allowing Military Personnel And Their Dependents To Obtain Abortions At Overseas Military Bases As Long As The Women Pays For The Procedure. In June 1995, Portman voted against allowing military personnel and their dependents to obtain abortions at overseas military bases as long as the women pays for the procedure. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would have “allow[ed] military personnel and their dependents to obtain abortions at overseas military bases as long as the woman pays for the procedure. The bill would prohibit the practice, and the amendment would strike the restriction and restore current law.” The underlying legislation was an FY 1996 Defense Authorization. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 196 to 230. [House Vote 382, 6/15/95; Congressional Quarterly, 6/15/95; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 436; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1530]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted Against Stripping A Bill Of A Provision Defunding Planned Parenthood While Also Establishing A Fund To Provide Payments To Women’s Health Clinics For Security. In December 2015, Portman effectively voted against stripping a bill of a provision defunding Planned Parenthood while also establishing a fund to provide payments to women’s health clinics for security. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would have “remove[d] the section that would block for one year federal funding to Planned Parenthood. It also would [have] establish[ed] a fund to make payments to women's health clinics to provide services and to ensure safety of such clinics.” The underlying legislation was a substitute amendment repealing key provisions of the Affordable Care Act while also defunding Planned Parenthood. The vote was on a motion to table. The Senate agreed to the motion by a vote of 54 to 46. [Senate Vote 311, 12/3/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/3/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/3/15; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2876; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2874; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3762]
PORTMAN VOTED AGAINST MAKING VIOLENCE OR THE THREAT OF VIOLENCE TO PEOPLE SEEKING ABORTIONS OR CLINIC STAFF A FEDERAL CRIME
1994: Portman Voted Against Protecting Both Women Seeking An Abortion And Abortion Clinic Staff From Intimidation Using Actual Or Threatened Violence By Making It A Federal Crime To Do So. In May 1994, Portman voted against the conference report on the Freedom of Access To Clinic Act, which, according to Congressional Quarterly, “ma[d]e[] it a federal crime to intimidate abortion clinic workers or women seeking abortions, by force or threat of force. Violators [will] face criminal penalties of jail time and fines. The law also allow[ed] affected individuals to sue for civil remedies, such as compensatory damages or court injunctions to restrain blockaders.” The House adopted the conference report by a vote of 241 to 174. The Senate later adopted the conference report as well, and the president signed the bill in to law. [House Vote 159, 5/5/94; Congressional Quarterly, 12/31/94; Congressional Actions, S. 636]
1994: Portman Voted Against Protecting Both Women Seeking An Abortion And Abortion Clinic Staff From Intimidation Using Actual Or Threatened Violence By Making It A Federal Crime To Do So. In March 1994, Portman voted for making it a federal crime to use force to block access to abortion clinics. According to Congressional Quarterly, the vote was on a “establish[ing] federal criminal and civil penalties for people who use force, the threat of force or physical obstruction to block access to abortion clinics.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the measure 237 to 169. A related bill later became law. [House Vote 70, 3/17/94; Congressional Quarterly, 3/17/94; Congressional Actions, H.R. 796; Congressional Actions, S. 636]
1994: Portman Effectively Voted Against Protecting Both Women Seeking An Abortion And Abortion Clinic Staff From Intimidation Using Actual Or Threatened Violence By Making It A Federal Crime To Do So. In March 1994, Portman effectively voted against making it a federal crime to use force to block access to abortion clinics. According to Congressional Quarterly, the vote was on a “motion to table (kill) the House amendment (the text of HR796) to the Senate bill to establish federal criminal and civil penalties for people who use force, the threat of force or physical obstruction to block access to abortion clinics.” The vote was on a motion to table an amendment. The House rejected the motion to table by a vote of 175 to 240. The House subsequently adopted the motion by voice vote. The bill later became law. [House Vote 68, 3/17/94; Congressional Quarterly, 3/17/94; Congressional Actions, H.R. 796; Congressional Actions, S. 636]
1995: Portman Voted Against Explicitly Allowing Block Grant Money For Abortion Clinic Protection. In February 1995, Portman voted against an amendment which explicitly allowed block grant money for abortion clinic protection. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would have “explicitly allow[ed] money from the block grants to be used for protection at abortion clinics.” The underlying measure was H.R. 728, the Local Government Law Enforcement Block Grants Act of 1995. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 164 to 266. [House Vote 125, 2/14/95; Congressional Quarterly, 2/14/95; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 159; Congressional Actions, H.R. 728]
2021: Portman Effectively Voted For An Amendment That Would Create Penalties For Health Care Providers Who Do Not Provide The Same Medical Treatment To An Infant Who Survived An Abortion As Babies Born At The Same Gestational Age. In February 2021, Portman voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “motion to waive all applicable sections of the Congressional Budget Act with respect to the Durbin, D-Ill., point of order that the Sasse amendment no. 192 amendment is not germane and thus violates section 305(b)(2) of the Budget Act. The amendment would create a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation related to improving health care, including legislation to establish criminal and civil penalties for health care providers who do not provide the same degree of medical care for an infant who survives an abortion procedure as would be provided to another infant born at the same gestational age.” The vote was on a motion to waive. The Senate rejected the motion, failing to acquire 3/5 of the vote, by a vote of 52-48. [Senate Vote 23, 2/4/21; Congressional Quarterly, 2/4/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt 192; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res. 5]
2021: Portman Voted For An Amendment That Would Create Penalties For Providers That Conduct Elective Abortions At Or After 20 Weeks Of Gestation. In August 2021, Portman voted for an amendment which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, “create a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation related to improving health programs, including to establish penalties for providers of elective abortions at or after 20 weeks of gestation.” The vote was on the adoption of an amendment. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 48-51. [Senate Vote 348, 8/11/21; Congressional Quarterly, 8/11/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 3758; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res.14]
2002: Portman Voted Against Requiring Hospitals To Provide Information About Abortions. According to the New York Times, “Abortion Non-Discrimination Act (H.R. 4691): The House on Sept. 25 rejected an amendment, sponsored by Rep. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, to the abortion bill to prohibit institutions from withholding medically appropriate information or services. Proponents said the amendment would save lives. Opponents argued it was coercive to require hospitals to provide information about abortions. The vote was 191 yeas to 230 nays. […] NAYS: […] Rep. Rob J. Portman” [New York Times, 9/27/02]
2002: Portman Voted In Favor Of Allowing “Hospitals And Insurance Companies To Refuse To Provide Or Pay For Abortion-Related Services.” According to The New York Times – Ohio, “Abortion Non-Discrimination Act (H.R. 4691): The House on Sept. 25 approved a bill, sponsored by Rep. Michael Bilirakis, R-Fla., to allow hospitals and insurance companies to refuse to provide or pay for abortion-related services. Proponents said forcing hospitals and insurance companies to support abortion was unfair and coercive. Opponents argued that the bill would restrict women’s rights to have an abortion. The vote was 229 yeas to 189 nays with 2 voting ‘present.’ YEAS: […] Rep. Rob J. Portman” [New York Times – Ohio, 9/27/02]
2019: Portman Effectively Voted For Legislation Prohibiting Federal Funds From Funding Abortions Or Health Benefits Covering Abortions. In January 2019, Portman effectively voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “prohibit[ed] federal funds from being used to fund abortions or to fund health benefits covering abortions.” The vote was on a motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to the bill. The Senate rejected the motion, thereby defeating the bill, by a vote of 48 to 47. [Senate Vote 7, 1/17/19; Congressional Quarterly, 1/17/19; Congressional Actions, S. 109]
2011: Portman Co-Sponsored The No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act To “Permanently Prohibit Federal Funding Of Abortion.” According to a press release by the Office of Senator Rob Portman, obtained via States News Service, “U.S. Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) has co-sponsored the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act (S. 906) to permanently prohibit federal funding of abortion. Currently, the policies that prohibit taxpayer funding of abortions are attached to appropriations bills that must be reauthorized annually. This is a piecemeal approach under which there’s a risk that the policies could be eliminated each year. This bill would make the policies permanent.” [States News Service, 6/16/11]
2011: Portman Co-Sponsored The Protect Life And The Respect For Rights Of Conscience Acts, Which Would Prevent Tax Dollars From Funding Abortions Under The Affordable Care Act And Allow Doctors To Deny Abortions. According to a press release from the Office of Senator Rob Portman, obtained via States News Service, “U.S. Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) has co-sponsored two bills, the Protect Life Act (S.877) and the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act (S.1467), which ensure that taxpayer dollars are not used to fund abortion under the President’s health care law and protect the right of conscience for doctors and health care professionals.” [States News Service, 11/29/11]
2021: Portman Voted For An Amendment That Would Be Consistent With Hyde And Weldon Amendments And Prohibit Federal Funding For Abortion Services Or Prohibit Federal Funds To States And Localities That Penalize Entities That Do Not Cover Abortions. In August 2021, Portman voted for an amendment which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, “create a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation related to improving health programs, including to prohibit federal funding for abortions or federal funding to state or local governments that discriminate against entities that do not provide, cover or refer for abortions, consistent with the Hyde and Weldon amendments.” The vote was on the adoption of an amendment. The Senate adopted the amendment by a vote of 50-49. [Senate Vote 336, 8/10/21; Congressional Quarterly, 8/10/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 3792; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res.14]
2015: Portman Voted Against Reiterating The “Hyde Amendment” Which Prevents Federal From Being Used To Pay For Most Abortion Services. In April 2015, Portman voted against an amendment that would have, according to NARAL, “strike a reiteration of the Hyde amendment, a current-law public coverage ban on abortion care.” The underlying legislation that permanently patched the SGR reimbursement rate for Medicare physicians and reauthorized the Children’s Health Insurance Program. The vote was on the amendment. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 43 to 57. [Senate Vote 140, 4/14/15; NARAL, 12/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/14/15; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 1117; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted For Expanding The “Hyde Amendment” To Prevent Federal Money In A Domestic Trafficking Victims’ Fund From Being Used To Pay For Most Abortion Services. In April 2015, Portman voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “remove[d] a provision in the bill that would state that amounts in the Domestic Trafficking Victims’ Fund would be subject to limitations in the fiscal 2014 consolidated appropriations law prohibiting money appropriated under the law from being spent on abortions, except for cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is in danger, to the same extent as if the money from the fund was appropriated under that law.” According to Planned Parenthood, the underlying bill, which established the Domestic Trafficking Victims’ Fund that provided additional resources to survivors of human trafficking “ma[d]e permanent a prohibition of federal tax dollars from being used to pay for access to abortion care - a restrictive and harmful policy commonly referred to as the Hyde amendment.” The vote was on the amendment. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 43 to 55. [Senate Vote 156, 4/22/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/22/15; Planned Parenthood, 2016 Congressional Scorecard; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 301; Congressional Actions, S. 178]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted For Anti-Human Trafficking Bill That Included Ban On Using Victim Restitution Funds To Pay For An Abortion, Except In Cases Of Rape, Incest Or To Save The Mother’s Life. In March 2015, Portman effectively voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would use fines and penalties against sex-trafficking perpetrators for more restitution and assistance funds for victims.” According to a separate Congressional Quarterly article, “At issue is a provision that would prohibit the money in a crime victim compensation fund — established by the bill and funded by fines from offenders — from being used towards abortion services. Bill sponsor and Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas said the measure would provide about $30 million to help victims of human trafficking crimes recover. […] The provision bars federal dollars from being used to fund abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother’s life is in danger.” The vote was on a motion to end debate on the bill, which required 60 votes to succeed. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 56 to 42. Afterwards, the Senate set the bill aside, and moved on to other business. A month later, the Senate passed a compromise version of the legislation that became law. [Senate Vote 76, 3/19/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/19/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/10/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/21/15; Congressional Actions, S. 178]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted For Anti-Human Trafficking Bill That Included Ban On Using Victim Restitution Funds To Pay For An Abortion, Except In Cases Of Rape, Incest Or To Save The Mother’s Life. In March 2015, Portman effectively voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would use fines and penalties against sex-trafficking perpetrators for more restitution and assistance funds for victims.” According to a separate Congressional Quarterly article, “At issue is a provision that would prohibit the money in a crime victim compensation fund — established by the bill and funded by fines from offenders — from being used towards abortion services. Bill sponsor and Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas said the measure would provide about $30 million to help victims of human trafficking crimes recover. […] The provision bars federal dollars from being used to fund abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother’s life is in danger.” The vote was on a motion to end debate on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s substitute version of the legislation, which required 60 votes to succeed. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 56 to 42. After another attempt to end debate on the bill with the controversial language failed, the Senate set the bill aside, and moved on to other business. A month later, the Senate passed a compromise version of the legislation that became law. [Senate Vote 75, 3/19/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/19/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/10/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/21/15; Congressional Actions, S. 178]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted For Anti-Human Trafficking Bill That Included Ban On Using Victim Restitution Funds To Pay For An Abortion, Except In Cases Of Rape, Incest Or To Save The Mother’s Life. In March 2015, Portman effectively voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would use fines and penalties against sex-trafficking perpetrators for more restitution and assistance funds for victims.” According to a separate Congressional Quarterly article, “At issue is a provision that would prohibit the money in a crime victim compensation fund — established by the bill and funded by fines from offenders — from being used towards abortion services. Bill sponsor and Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas said the measure would provide about $30 million to help victims of human trafficking crimes recover. […] The provision bars federal dollars from being used to fund abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother’s life is in danger.” The vote was on a motion to end debate on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s substitute version of the legislation, which required 60 votes to succeed. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 57 to 41. After two other attempts to end debate on the bill with the controversial language failed, the Senate set the bill aside, and moved on to other business. A month later, the Senate passed a compromise version of the legislation that became law. [Senate Vote 74, 3/18/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/18/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/10/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/21/15; Congressional Actions, S. 178]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted For Anti-Human Trafficking Bill That Included Ban On Using Victim Restitution Funds To Pay For An Abortion, Except In Cases Of Rape, Incest Or To Save The Mother’s Life. In March 2015, Portman effectively voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would use fines and penalties against sex-trafficking perpetrators for more restitution and assistance funds for victims.” According to a separate Congressional Quarterly article, “At issue is a provision that would prohibit the money in a crime victim compensation fund — established by the bill and funded by fines from offenders — from being used towards abortion services. Bill sponsor and Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas said the measure would provide about $30 million to help victims of human trafficking crimes recover. […] The provision bars federal dollars from being used to fund abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother’s life is in danger.” The vote was on a motion to end debate on the bill, which required 60 votes to succeed. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 55 to 43. After several further attempts to end debate on the bill with the controversial language failed, the Senate set the bill aside, and moved on to other business. A month later, the Senate passed a compromise version of the legislation that became law. [Senate Vote 73, 3/17/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/17/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/10/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/21/15; Congressional Actions, S. 178]
2015: Portman Effectively Voted For Anti-Human Trafficking Bill That Included Ban On Using Victim Restitution Funds To Pay For An Abortion, Except In Cases Of Rape, Incest Or To Save The Mother’s Life. In March 2015, Portman effectively voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would use fines and penalties against sex-trafficking perpetrators for more restitution and assistance funds for victims.” According to a separate Congressional Quarterly article, “At issue is a provision that would prohibit the money in a crime victim compensation fund — established by the bill and funded by fines from offenders — from being used towards abortion services. Bill sponsor and Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas said the measure would provide about $30 million to help victims of human trafficking crimes recover. […] The provision bars federal dollars from being used to fund abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother’s life is in danger.” The vote was on a motion to end debate on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s substitute version of the legislation, which required 60 votes to succeed. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 55 to 43. After several further attempts to end debate on the bill with the controversial language failed, the Senate set the bill aside, and moved on to other business. A month later, the Senate passed a compromise version of the legislation that became law. [Senate Vote 72, 3/17/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/17/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/10/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/21/15; Congressional Actions, S. 178]
2011: Portman Voted For Reinstating The Restriction On Funding Any Organization That Uses Its Own Funds To Provide Abortions In A Foreign Country. In March 2011, Portman voted for a bill that according to Congressional Quarterly, “would reinstate the so-called Mexico City restrictions on family-planning funds. The provision prohibits U.S. funding to any private, non-governmental or multilateral organization that uses its own funds to directly, or indirectly, perform abortions in a foreign country. The restrictions would not apply to funds used to perform abortions in instances of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman is in danger.” The provision was part of a continuing resolution to fund the federal government until the end of FY 2011. The bill was rejected by the Senate by a vote of 44 to 56. The bill number was later used as the vehicle for another piece of legislation. [Senate Vote 36, 3/9/11; Congressional Quarterly, 3/1/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
2001: Portman Voted For An Amendment That Prohibited The Giving Of Funds To Foreign NGOs That “Perform Or Promote Abortions.” According to States News Service, “Foreign Relations Authorization Act (H.R. 1646): The House on May 15 approved an amendment by Rep. Henry J. Hyde, R-Ill., that strikes a provision that would have allowed funding for foreign nongovernmental organizations that perform or promote abortions. The vote was 218 yeas to 210 nays. YEAS: […] Rep. Rob J. Portman” [States News Service, 5/18/01]
1995: Portman Effectively Voted For Prohibiting Money From The United States From Being Used To Pay For Abortions Abroad. In May 1995, Portman effectively voted for prohibiting money from the United States from being used to pay for abortions abroad. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would have eliminated provisions of a separate amendment which would have “codif[ied] the Mexico City Policy, which prohibits U.S. funding of any public or private foreign entity that directly or indirectly performs abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the woman is endangered, and to eliminate the provisions that require foreign organizations receiving U.S aid to certify that they do not violate or lobby to change abortion laws.” The underlying bill was an FY 1996 Foreign Operations Appropriations. The vote was on the amendment. The amendment was rejected by the House by a vote of 201 to 229. [House Vote 432, 6/28/95; Congressional Quarterly, 6/28/95; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt.478; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 477; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1868]
1995: Portman Effectively Voted For Prohibiting Money From The United States From Being Used To Pay For Abortions Abroad. In May 1995, Portman effectively voted for prohibiting money from the United States from being used to pay for abortions abroad. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment put forward by Rep. Constance Morella (R-MD) would have “prohibit[ed] money from the United States from being used to pay for abortions abroad or to lobby for an easing of foreign abortion restrictions.” The amendment would have amended a different amendment put forward by Rep. Christopher Smith (R-NJ) that would have “codif[ied] the Mexico City Policy, which prohibits U.S. funding of any public or private foreign entity that directly or indirectly performs abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the woman is endangered.” According to The National Committee for a Human Life Amendment, “Rep. Constance Morella (R-MD) offered a substitute amendment to replace a pro-life amendment that had been put forward by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ). The Smith Amendment would restore the Mexico City Policy and deny funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) as long as it supports China’s coercive population control program. The Morella Amendment would have gutted the Smith Amendment.” The underlying legislation was the FY 1996 – 1997 Foreign Aid and State Department Authorization. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 198 to 227. [House Vote 349, 5/24/95; Congressional Quarterly, 5/24/95; National Committee for a Human Life Amendment, Accessed 11/16/2015; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 404; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 403; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1561]
2001: Portman Voted For The FY 2002 Foreign Operations Appropriations Conference Report, Which Included Blocking Federal Funds For Organizations Who Perform Abortions Abroad. In December 2001, Portman voted for legislation that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “appropriate[d] $15.4 billion in fiscal 2002 for foreign operations, $403 million more than fiscal 2001. The agreement would [have] include[d] $625 million for the Andean Initiative, a Latin American counter-narcotics program, and $475 million for international HIV/AIDS programs. The bill also would [have] continue[d] a Bush administration policy blocking federal funds to groups that use their own money to offer abortion services overseas.” The vote was on the conference report. The House adopted the legislation by a vote of 357 to 66. The Senate then passed the bill by unanimous consent, and the president then signed it into law. [House Vote 505, 12/19/01; Congressional Quarterly, 12/19/01; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2506]
2019: Portman Voted For The FY 2020 Minibus Appropriations Bill, Which Continued The Global Gag Rule On International Family-Planning Funding. In December 2019, Portman voted for the FY 2020 minibus spending bill, which represented 8 of the 12 appropriations bills. According to Congressional Quarterly, “Within the total for global health programs, the agreement provides the FY 2019 level of $575 million for family planning and reproductive health programs. The measure does not take any actions with regard to the Mexico City restrictions on international family-planning funding that were reinstated by President Trump in January 2017, and it is silent on the May 2017 expansion of the policy, effectively leaving in place current restrictions.” The vote was a motion to concur. The Senate agreed to the motion by a vote of 71-23, thereby sending the bill to the president, who signed it into law. [Senate Vote 415, 12/19/19; Congressional Quarterly, 12/19/19; Congressional Actions, H.R.1865]
2011: Portman Voted For Reinstating The Restriction On Funding Any Organization That Uses Its Own Funds To Provide Abortions In A Foreign Country. In March 2011, Portman voted for a bill that according to Congressional Quarterly, “would reinstate the so-called Mexico City restrictions on family-planning funds. The provision prohibits U.S. funding to any private, non-governmental or multilateral organization that uses its own funds to directly, or indirectly, perform abortions in a foreign country. The restrictions would not apply to funds used to perform abortions in instances of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman is in danger.” The provision was part of a continuing resolution to fund the federal government until the end of FY 2011. The bill was rejected by the Senate by a vote of 44 to 56. The bill number was later used as the vehicle for another piece of legislation. [Senate Vote 36, 3/9/11; Congressional Quarterly, 3/1/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
2000: Portman Voted Against Allowing People Covered By Federal Employee Health Insurance To Receive Abortion Services. Portman voted against an amendment to allow women covered by the federal employee health benefit program to receive abortion services. The amendment was defeated 184-230. [HR 4871, Vote 422, 7/20/00]
1999: Portman Voted For A Ban On Abortion For Those On Federal Health Insurance. Portman voted in favor of a spending bill that continued the ban on federal employee health insurance from covering abortions and allowed for religious health plans to be exempt from requiring prescription drug coverage to include contraceptives. The measure passed on a vote of 210-209. [HR 2490, Vote 305, 07/15/99]
1999: Portman Voted Against Allowing Federal Employees To Join Health Plans With Abortion Services. Portman voted against an amendment allowing federal employees to join health plans that provide coverage for abortions. The proposal to lift the ban was defeated 188-230. [HR2490, Vote 301, 07/15/99]
1998: Portman Voted For An Amendment Barring Federal Employees From Health Plans With Coverage For Abortion Related Drugs. Portman voted in favor of an amendment to prohibit federal employee health plans from providing insurance coverage for drugs that induce abortion. The amendment was defeated, 198-222. [HR 4104, Vote 292, 6/16/98]
1998: Portman Voted Against Allowing Federal Employees To Join Health Plans With Abortion Services. Portman voted against an amendment to allow federal employee health plans to cover abortion services. The amendment was defeated 183-239. [HR 4104, Vote 288, 6/16/98]
2021: Portman Voted For An Amendment That Would Prohibit Funding For Down Syndrome Abortions Or Other Chromosomal Conditions. In August 2021, Portman voted for an amendment which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, “create a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation related to improving health programs, including to prohibit funding for abortions of unborn children with Down syndrome or other chromosomal conditions.” The vote was on the adoption of an amendment. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 49-50. [Senate Vote 350, 8/11/21; Congressional Quarterly, 8/11/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 3331; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res.14]
2021: Portman Effectively Voted For An Amendment That Would Prohibit Using American Rescue Plan Act Funds For Abortion Services. In March 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Portman voted for the “motion to waive all applicable sections of the Congressional Budget Act with respect to the Murray, D-Wash., point of order that the Lankford amendment no. 1031 to the Schumer, D-N.Y., substitute amendment no. 891 to the bill is not germane and thus violates section 313(b)(1)(d) of the Congressional Budget Act. The amendment would make conforming changes to insert the bill's provisions related to public health programs and domestic violence prevention and support programs into the December 2020 omnibus appropriations and coronavirus relief law, which would prohibit the use of funds for abortion services.” The vote was on a motion to waive. The Senate failed to acquire a 3/5 majority and rejected the motion by a vote of 52-47. [Senate Vote 94, 3/6/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/6/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 1031; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 891; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1319]
2016: Portman Effectively Voted For An FY 2017 Military Construction And Veterans Affairs Appropriations Bill Which Also Provided $1.1 Billion In Zika Funding, $800 Million Less Than Requested While Also Stipulating That No Funding Could Be Used To Pay For Abortions. In September 2016, Portman effectively voted for an FY 2017 military construction and veterans affairs conference report which would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “provide[d] $82.5 billion in fiscal 2017 appropriations for the Veterans Affairs Department, military construction and military housing and would provide $1.1 billion in funding to combat the Zika virus with about $750 million in offsets.” The vote was on a motion to invoke cloture, which required 60 affirmative votes. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 52 to 46. [Senate Vote 135, 9/6/16; Congressional Quarterly, 6/28/16; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2577]
2016: Portman Effectively Voted For An FY 2017 Military Construction And Veterans Affairs Appropriations Bill Which Also Provided $1.1 Billion In Zika Funding, $800 Million Less Than Requested While Also Stipulating That No Funding Could Be Used To Pay For Abortions. In July 2016, Portman effectively voted for an FY 2017 military construction and veterans affairs conference report which would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “provide[d] $82.5 billion in fiscal 2017 appropriations for the Veterans Affairs Department, military construction and military housing and would provide $1.1 billion in funding to combat the Zika virus with about $750 million in offsets.” The vote was on a motion to invoke cloture, which required 60 affirmative votes. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 52 to 44. [Senate Vote 134, 7/14/16; Congressional Quarterly, 6/28/16; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2577]
2016: Portman Effectively Voted For An FY 2017 Military Construction And Veterans Affairs Appropriations Bill Which Also Provided $1.1 Billion In Zika Funding, $800 Million Less Than Requested While Also Stipulating That No Funding Could Be Used To Pay For Abortions. In June 2016, Portman effectively voted for an FY 2017 military construction and veterans affairs conference report which would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “provide[d] $82.5 billion in fiscal 2017 appropriations for the Veterans Affairs Department, military construction and military housing and would provide $1.1 billion in funding to combat the Zika virus with about $750 million in offsets.” The vote was on a motion to invoke cloture, which required 60 affirmative votes. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 52 to 48. [Senate Vote 112, 6/28/16; Congressional Quarterly, 6/28/16; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2577]
2012: Portman Effectively Voted For The Blunt Amendment, Which Would Have Allowed Employers And Insurance Companies To Avoid ACA Requirements They Found Morally Objectionable. In March 2012, Portman effectively voted for the Blunt Amendment that, according to CNN, “would establish that an entity refusing coverage on religious or moral grounds is not in violation of the law.” The vote was on a motion to table the amendment, with 48 senators voting against the motion – keeping the amendment alive – and 51 senators voting for the motion. [Senate Vote 24, 3/1/12; CNN, 3/1/12; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 1520; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 1730; Congressional Actions, S. 1813]
2013: Portman Voted To Support Allowing Employers To Claim Exemptions To ACA’s Provisions On Health Care And Contraception Coverage On The Basis Of Religious And Moral Objections. In March 2013, Portman voted for an amendment that, according to the National Law Review, “would allow employers to opt out of contraception coverage on moral grounds.” According to the Congressional Record, the purpose of the amendment was to “establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to protect women's access to health care, including primary and preventive care, in a manner consistent with protecting rights of conscience.” The vote was on an amendment to the Senate version of the fiscal year 2014 budget resolution. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 44 to 55. [Senate Vote 55, 3/22/13; Congressional Record, 3/22/13; National Law Review, 3/25/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 630; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res. 8]
2013: Portman Voted To Oppose Protecting ACA’s Health Care And Contraception Coverage Provisions For Women. In March 2013, Portman voted against an amendment that, according to The Hill’s Floor Action Blog, would “protect women’s healthcare coverage and employer-provided contraceptive coverage authorized under the Affordable Care Act.” According to the Congressional Record, the purpose of the amendment was to “establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to protect women’s access to health care, including primary and preventative health care, family planning and birth control, and employer-provided contraceptive coverage, such as was provided under the Affordable Care Act.” The vote was on an amendment to the Senate version of the fiscal year 2014 budget resolution. The Senate adopted the amendment by a vote of 56 to 43. The underlying budget resolution later passed the Senate, but Congress had taken no further action on it as of September, 2013. [Senate Vote 54, 3/22/13; The Hill’s Floor Action Blog, 3/22/13; Congressional Record, 3/21/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt 438; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res. 8]
2017: Portman Effectively Voted Against Requiring 60 Votes To Consider Legislation That Would Reduce Reproductive Health Care Coverage And Birth Control Coverage From The Affordable Care Act. In January 2017, Portman voted against waiving a point of order against an amendment that said, according to the text of the amendment, “(a) Point of Order.--It shall not be in order in the Senate to consider any bill, joint resolution, motion, amendment, amendment between the Houses, or conference report that makes women sick again by eliminating or reducing access to women’s health care, including decreases in access to, or coverage of, reproductive health care services including contraceptive counseling, birth control, and maternity care, and primary and preventive health care as afforded to them under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148). (b) Legislation That Makes Women Sick Again.--For the purposes of subsection (a), the term ‘makes women sick again’ with respect to legislation refers to any provision of a bill, joint resolution, motion, amendment, amendment between the Houses, or conference report, that would— […] (C) permitting discrimination against providers who provide reproductive health care benefits or services to women; or […] (3) eliminate, or reduce the scope or scale of, the benefits women would have received pursuant to the requirements under title I of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148) and the amendments made to that title. (c) Waiver and Appeal.--Subsection (a) may be waived or suspended in the Senate only by an affirmative vote of three- fifths of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be required to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order raised under subsection (a).” The underlying legislation was an FY 2017 budget resolution designed to being the process of repealing the Affordable Care Act, which could be passed by a majority vote. The vote was on a motion to waive the budget act in relation to the amendment. The vote required a three-fifths vote for approval. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 49 to 49. [Senate Vote 23, 1/11/17; Congressional Record, 1/11/17; Vox, 1/3/07; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 82; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 3]
April 2013: Portman Said A District Court Ruling Allowing The “Morning-After Pill” To Be Sold Over-The-Counter Was “Misguided” And An “Overreach By The Judiciary.” According to a press release from the Office of Senator Rob Portman, obtained via States News Service, “The following information was released by Ohio Senator Rob Portman: U.S. Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) today released the following statement on U.S. District Judge Edward Korman’s ruling to make the morning-after pill available over the counter and without a prescription for girls of all ages: ‘This misguided decision by an unelected judge attempts to reverse a reasonable and well-supported policy designed to ensure that girls 16 and younger get the advice of a doctor before buying morning-after pills. I call on the Administration to join me in opposing this overreach by the judiciary and to immediately appeal the decision.” [States News Service, 4/5/13]
PORTMAN PUSHED FOR RELIGIOUS EXEMPTIONS FROM THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT’S CONTRACEPTIVE MANDATE
February 2012: Portman Wrote To Attorney General Eric Holder, Requesting Exemptions For Religious Organizations From The Affordable Care Act’s Contraceptive Mandate. According to a press release from the Office of Senator Rob Portman, obtained via States News Service, “U.S. Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) today sent a 4-page letter to Attorney General Eric Holder calling on the Department of Justice to halt a new mandate under President Obama’s health care law that will force religious organizations including Catholic hospitals, schools, and charities to participate in coverage of medical services that violate their religious beliefs, or pay massive fines. Portman contends in the letter that the mandate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, a bipartisan law signed by President Clinton. The letter calls on Attorney General Holder to enforce that law and order HHS to withdraw its regulation.” [States News Service, 2/6/12]
Portman Called The Mandate An “Affront To The Right Of Conscience”
Portman: “This Affront To The Right Of Conscience Runs Counter To Our Nation’s Tradition Of Religious Liberty And Pluralism.” In a letter to Holder, Portman wrote, “Last year, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) adopted a regulation that forces thousands of religious schools, hospitals, and charities in America to make a painful choice: pay for medical services that violate their religious beliefs, or incur a massive government fine. Two weeks ago, HHS responded to concerns voiced by the affected religious organizations by granting a one-year reprieve from the mandate as though their faith-based objections will fade away in 12 months. This affront to the right of conscience runs counter to our nation’s tradition of religious liberty and pluralism. I believe it is also unlawful. I write today to urge the Department of Justice to advise HHS to withdraw and revise this rule to comply with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.” [States News Service, 2/6/12]
Portman: HHS Admitted “That The Mandate Will Have An Effect On The Religious Beliefs Of Certain Religious Employers.” In a letter to Holder, Portman wrote, “First, the law is clear that individuals engage in protected exercise of religion under RFRA when, for bona fide religious reasons, they choose not to engage in certain conduct. The decision of a Catholic hospital, a Christian school, or a similar religious enterprise to decline to participate in insurance coverage of certain medical services that violate their sincere religious beliefs is an exercise of religion. Indeed, HHS conceded this point, admitting that the mandate will have an effect on the religious beliefs of certain religious employers.” [States News Service, 2/6/12]
Portman: “I Respectfully Urge You To Take Swift Action And Advise The Department Of Health And Human Services That It Cannot Violate The Conscience Rights Of Millions Of Americans.” In a letter to Holder, Portman wrote, “The Justice Department has had a disappointing record on religious liberty over the past three years including the Department’s attempt to undermine the long-standing ministerial exception, which the Supreme Court unanimously rejected last month. This latest regulatory overreach presents an opportunity to improve that record and protect the legal rights of Americans of all faiths. I respectfully urge you to take swift action and advise the Department of Health and Human Services that it cannot violate the conscience rights of millions of Americans.” [States News Service, 2/6/12]
Portman Believed The Mandate Violated The Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Portman: “HHS Did Not Even Mention” The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, “Much Less Attempt To Justify Its Actions Under The Strict Scrutiny Test That RFRA Requires.” In a letter to Holder, Portman wrote, “A bipartisan law signed by President Bill Clinton, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) requires the government to reasonably accommodate religious beliefs and practices that conflict with general regulation. As President Clinton explained at the signing ceremony for RFRA, the Government should be held to a very high level of proof before it interferes with someone’s free exercise of religion. This letter explains why the HHS mandate falls far short of that high level of proof. Remarkably, in announcing this sweeping mandate under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, HHS did not even mention RFRA, much less attempt to justify its actions under the strict scrutiny test that RFRA requires.” [States News Service, 2/6/12]
Portman: “The HHS Mandate Violates RFRA Because It Punishes Religious Employers Who Decline To Participate In Coverage Of Certain Medical Services.” In a letter to Holder, Portman wrote, “The HHS mandate violates RFRA because it punishes religious employers who decline to participate in coverage of certain medical services in particular, sterilization and contraception that contradict their faith-based commitments. And crucially, the mandate is not the least restrictive means to achieve the agency’s regulatory goals, as HHSs own actions attest.” [States News Service, 2/6/12]
2001: Portman Voted In Favor Of Making Penalties For Injuring Or Killing A Fetus The Same As Those For Injuring Or Killing A Person, Whether Or Not The Pregnancy Was Known By The Perpetrator. According to Congressional Quarterly, in April 2001 Portman voted in favor of “Passage of the bill that would make it a criminal offense to injure or kill a fetus during the commission of a violent crime. The measure would establish criminal penalties, equal to those that would apply if the injury or death occurred to the pregnant woman, for those who harm a fetus, regardless of the perpetrator's knowledge of the pregnancy or intent to harm the fetus. The bill states that its provisions should not be interpreted to apply to consensual abortion or to a woman's actions with respect to her pregnancy. The death penalty could not be imposed under this bill.” [Congressional Quarterly, 4/26/01]
PORTMAN VOTED TO MAKE IT A CRIMINAL OFFENSE TO HARM A FETUS
2004: Portman Voted To Make It A Criminal Offense To Harm A Fetus In A Violent Crime. In February 2004, Portman voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would make it a criminal offense to injure or kill a fetus during the commission of a violent crime. The measure would establish criminal penalties, equal to those that would apply if the injury or death occurred to the pregnant woman, for those who harm a fetus, regardless of the perpetrator's knowledge of the pregnancy or intent to harm the fetus. The bill states that its provisions should not be interpreted to apply to consensual abortion or to a woman's actions with respect to her pregnancy. The death penalty could not be imposed under this bill.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 254 to 163, and, following the Senate’s adoption of the bill, it was signed into law by the president. [House Vote 31, 2/26/04; Congressional Quarterly, 2/26/04; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1997]
2004: Portman Voted Against Making Assaulting A Pregnant Person A Federal Crime Without Recognizing A Separate Legal Status For Fetuses. In February 2004, Portman voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have made] assault on a pregnant woman a federal crime. […] The issue of whether a fetus -- at any stage of development -- should be recognized as a separate legal entity is expected to be the focus of Thursday’s debate in the House on a bill that would establish a separate offense for federal crimes against pregnant women that result in harm to a fetus.” The vote was on a substitute amendment to the House’s version of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 186 to 229. [House Vote 30, 2/26/04; Congressional Quarterly, 2/26/04; Congressional Quarterly, 2/25/04; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 465; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1997]
Portman Was Supported By Anti-Abortion Groups
Portman Tweeted That He Had A 100% Rating From National Right To Life. According to a Tweet by Rob Portman for U.S. Senate, “Rob Portman has a 100% rating from National Right to Life. Join him in standing for life!” [Rob Portman for U.S. Senate Twitter, 4/22/15]
Portman Received An “A” Rating From Anti-Abortion Group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. According to SBA Pro-Life’s website, “Sen. Rob Portman(former) Ohio (Republican) SBA List Rating: A” [SBA Pro-Life, Accessed 10/11/23]
Portman Voted Against Allowing Use Local Funds For Abortions In D.C. On August 06, 1998, Portman voted against a Norton, D-D.C., amendment that would allow use of local funds for abortions. The underlying legislation would appropriate $491 million in federal funds and $6.8 billion from the D.C. treasury for government operations and related activities in the District of Columbia in fiscal 1999. [Roll Call 408, H 4380, 08/06/1998]
Portman Voted Against Amendment 1 to HR 3845, Would Have Allowed Washington, D.C., To Use Local Funds For Abortion-Related Services. Robert Portman voted against Amendment 1 to HR 3845, the FY 1997 appropriations bill for the District of Columbia. The existing situation prohibited Washington D.C. from the use of both federal and local funds for abortion-related services. The amendment, offered by Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C), would have permitted Washington D.C. to use local funding in order to provide abortion-related services, while maintaining the ban on the use of federal funding for such ends. On July 22, 1996 the amendment was rejected by a vote of 176 to 223. [Roll Call 332, H 3845, 07/22/1996; [Washington Post, 7/23/96]
2019: Portman Effectively Voted For The So-Called “Born-Alive” Abortion Survivors Protection Act. In February 2019, Portman effectively voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “require health care practitioners to provide medical care to any infant that survives an abortion procedure, to the extent legally required for any infant born at the same gestational age.” The vote was on a motion to invoke cloture, which required 60 affirmative votes. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 53 to 44. [Senate Vote 27, 2/25/19; Congressional Quarterly, 2/25/19; Congressional Actions, S. 311]
2017: Portman Effectively Voted To Restrict Access To Private Insurance Plans That Provide Abortion Coverage. In July 2017, Portman effectively voted for legislation that would have, according to Planned Parenthood, “restructured the tax credits in the underlying legislation in order to restrict coverage of abortion. This Strange Amendment was not about segregating federal funds from abortion – it was really about restricting access to safe and legal abortion. This proposal needlessly restricted women’s access to private plans that offer abortion coverage. Health plans participating in the Marketplace may already choose whether or not to offer coverage of abortion – unless state law prohibits or requires abortion coverage.” The underlying legislation was the legislative vehicle for Trumpcare. The vote was on a motion to waive all applicable budgetary discipline for the amendment, which required a three-fifths majority. The Senate rejected the motion, thereby defeating the amendment, by a vote of 50 to 50. [Senate Vote 174, 7/27/17; Planned Parenthood Action Congressional Scorecard, Accessed 5/1/18; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 389; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 267; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1628]
2002: Portman Voted To Prohibit State And Local Governments From Requiring That Health Plans Cover Abortion Services. In September 2002, Portman voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “prohibit[ed] the federal government and state and local governments that receive[d] federal funding from discriminating against health care providers, health maintenance organizations, health insurers, and ‘any other kind of health care facility, organization or plan,’ that refuse[d] to perform, pay for or provide referrals for abortion services. The bill would [have] expand[ed] a current law ‘conscience clause’ that [provided] protection for physician training programs that refuse to provide abortion training.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 229 to 189; however, the Senate took no substantive action on the measure. [House Vote 412, 9/25/02; Congressional Quarterly, 9/25/02; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4691]
2002: Portman Effectively Voted Against Requiring Individuals With Debt To Repay Their Debts Using A Specific Payment System As Well As Limiting The Ability Of Anti-Abortion Protestors To Discharge Fines Through Bankruptcy. In November 2002, Portman effectively voted against a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “require[d] debtors able to repay $10,000 or 25 percent of their debts over five years to file under Chapter 13, which requires a reorganization of debts under a repayment plan, instead of seeking to discharge their debts under Chapter 7.” The bill included provisions that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would have limited the rights of abortion protesters in bankruptcy proceedings. […] The provision that caught their attention was aimed at preventing abortion protesters from filing for bankruptcy in order to avoid paying court-ordered judgments. It resulted from painstaking negotiations between Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., who wanted a strict crackdown on such a practice, and Rep. Henry J. Hyde, R-Ill., who has become something of a patron saint of abortion foes.” The vote was on adoption of the rule that would have governed debate on the conference report on the underlying bill. The House rejected the proposed rule by a vote of 172 to 243. [House Vote 478, 11/14/02; Congressional Quarterly, 11/14/02; Congressional Quarterly, 11/30/02; Congressional Actions, H.R. 333; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 606]
2001: Portman Voted Against Allowing Federal Prisons To Provide Abortion Services. In July 2001, Portman voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have struck] language prohibiting the use of funds for abortion services in federal prisons.” The House rejected the proposed amendment to the underlying fiscal year 2002 appropriations bill – which funded the Justice Department along with several other federal departments and agencies – by a vote of 169 to 253. [House Vote 235, 7/17/01; Congressional Quarterly, 7/17/01; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 171; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2500]
1993: Portman Voted Against Authorizing $6.2 Billion In Funding For The NIH Through FY 96 While Also Codifying President Clinton’s Executive Order Lifting The Ban On Fetal Tissue From Abortion And Allowing The Government To Ban HIV Positive Immigrants. In May 1993, Portman voted against a conference report which, according to Congressional Quarterly, “authorize[d] $6.2 billion for the National Institutes of Health in fiscal 1994 and such sums as necessary in fiscal 1995-96. The conference report codifie[d] the Clinton executive order lifting the ban on fetal tissue research from induced abortions and include[d] language allowing the government to prohibit immigration by those with the HIV virus.” The vote was on the conference report. The House agreed to the legislation by a vote of 290 to 130. The Senate later agreed to the legislation by voice vote and then was signed into law by the president. [House Vote 178, 5/25/93; Congressional Quarterly, 5/25/93; Congressional Actions, S. 1]
December 2013: Portman Publicized His Co-Sponsorship Of The Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act, Which Required Disclosure From Insurance Plans Offering Abortion Coverage Through The Affordable Coverage. According to a press release from the Office of Senator Rob Portman, obtained via States News Service, “U.S. Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) today cosponsored a bill to require the Obamacare exchanges to fully disclose which participating insurance plans offer abortion coverage. […] The bill requires Obamacare exchanges to prominently disclose if an insurance plan offered through the exchange covers abortions. The bill also requires disclosure of the amount of the abortion fee, a surcharge required by Obamacare. This abortion surcharge is one dollar or more a month and is used to develop a fund to pay for abortion on demand.” [States News Service, 12/20/13]