MOMS Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL]
- Committees
- Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (primary)
- Last action
- May 6, 2025
Bottom line
This bill aims to expand access to pregnancy and parenting support services, adoption resources, and child support for unborn children, while explicitly excluding abortion-related services and providers from all new programs and resources.
What it actually does
The "More Opportunities for Moms to Succeed Act" (MOMS Act) establishes a federal website, "pregnancy.gov," to serve as a clearinghouse of resources for pregnant and postpartum women and those parenting young children, explicitly excluding entities that perform or refer for abortions. It also creates grant programs for states to aggregate resources and for eligible non-profit organizations to provide "positive alternatives for women" services, again excluding abortion providers. Furthermore, it mandates the Secretary of HHS to compile a national list of licensed child placement agencies and makes states' eligibility for adoption incentive payments contingent on submitting these lists. Finally, it amends the Social Security Act to allow for the establishment and enforcement of child support obligations on behalf of unborn children, with payments potentially retroactive to conception, contingent on the mother's consent and without risk of harm to the unborn child.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the bill provides crucial support for women and families, offering comprehensive resources to help women carry pregnancies to term and care for their children, thereby promoting positive alternatives to abortion. They emphasize the importance of accessible information, financial assistance, and medical care, asserting that the bill empowers women by connecting them with a wide array of services without promoting abortion. The child support provisions are seen as a way to ensure financial responsibility from conception, further supporting mothers and children.
Opponents contend
Critics contend that the bill is a thinly veiled attempt to restrict access to abortion and reproductive healthcare by defunding and excluding providers that offer comprehensive services, including abortion. They argue that by creating a "pregnancy.gov" website that excludes abortion providers and funding "positive alternatives" grants with similar restrictions, the bill limits women's options and access to full reproductive health information. Concerns are also raised about the child support provisions for unborn children, particularly regarding privacy, potential for harassment, and the practical challenges of enforcement, as well as the implications for bodily autonomy.
The bill is moderately complex but readable within the estimated time, allowing for a substantive understanding of its provisions.
Title I, Sec. 101, adding Title XXXIV, Sec. 3401 to the Public Health Service Act
Establishment of Pregnancy.gov Website
This section mandates the Secretary of HHS to create a public website, "pregnancy.gov," within one year. The website will act as a clearinghouse for resources for pregnant and postpartum women and those parenting young children. Users can search for resources by ZIP Code and distance, and the site will offer an assessment with follow-up outreach. Crucially, the website is prohibited from listing resources from "prohibited entities," defined as those that perform, induce, refer for, or counsel in favor of abortions, or provide financial support to such organizations.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this creates a vital, easily accessible hub for women seeking support during and after pregnancy, ensuring they have comprehensive information on alternatives to abortion and resources for parenting. They emphasize the value of a dedicated, non-abortion-promoting platform.
Critics contend
Critics contend that by excluding abortion providers, the website presents an incomplete and biased view of available healthcare options, potentially steering women away from comprehensive reproductive health services. They argue it limits informed decision-making.
Tradeoffs
The bill balances the goal of providing resources for pregnant and parenting women with the explicit exclusion of abortion-related services, leading to a tension between comprehensive resource provision and ideological selectivity.
Title I, Sec. 102, amending Section 474 of the Social Security Act
National List of Licensed Child Placement Agencies
This provision requires states to annually submit a list of licensed, tax-exempt private child placement agencies to the Secretary of HHS. The Secretary, through the U.S. Children's Bureau, must then compile and maintain a publicly available national list on the "pregnancy.gov" website. States that fail to comply with this reporting requirement will lose eligibility for federal adoption and legal guardianship incentive payments.
Title I, Sec. 103, adding Sec. 3402 to Title XXXIV of the Public Health Service Act
List of Funding Opportunities Available to Pregnancy Support Centers
This section directs the Secretary of HHS to compile and maintain a publicly available list of federal funding opportunities for nonprofit and healthcare entities that provide pregnancy support services (as defined in Sec. 3401(g) of the Public Health Service Act) on the "pregnancy.gov" website.
Title II, Sec. 201
Grants for Positive Alternatives for Women
This section establishes a grant program for eligible nonprofit organizations to support, encourage, and assist women in carrying pregnancies to term and caring for themselves and their babies after birth. Grantees must provide information and referrals to various services (medical, nutritional, housing, adoption, education, childcare, substance abuse, parenting education) and may directly provide these services. Crucially, entities that perform, induce, refer for, or counsel in favor of abortions, or financially support such activities, are ineligible for these grants. Grantees must also adhere to strict privacy policies.
Title II, Sec. 202
Grants for Improving Access to Prenatal and Postnatal Telehealth Care
This section authorizes grants and cooperative agreements for eligible entities to purchase equipment for at-home telehealth visits. The goal is to improve maternal and infant health outcomes and reduce maternal mortality by enhancing access to prenatal and postnatal care, particularly in rural, frontier, medically underserved areas, or tribal jurisdictions. Similar to other provisions, entities involved in abortion-related activities are ineligible.
Title III, Sec. 301, amending Section 454 of the Social Security Act
Child Support Enforcement on Behalf of Unborn Children
This section amends the Social Security Act to require state child support plans to establish and enforce child support obligations for the biological father of an unborn child. Payments can begin from the first month of conception (if requested by the mother) and can be retroactively collected. The payment amount is determined by a court in consultation with the mother, considering the best interests of mother and child. Crucially, paternity establishment requires the mother's consent and cannot pose any risk of harm to the unborn child. States cannot waive these provisions.
The bill defines "prohibited entity" (for pregnancy.gov) and "ineligible entity" (for positive alternatives grants) as any entity, including affiliates, subsidiaries, successors, and clinics, that performs, induces, refers for, or counsels in favor of abortions, or provides financial support to any other organization that conducts such activities.
Sec. 101(g)(3) and Sec. 201(b)(2)
Why it matters:This level of detail is standard for definitions and eligibility, but its comprehensive nature ensures a broad exclusion of any entity connected to abortion services, reflecting a clear policy intent.
Case for: Proponents argue this ensures federal funds and resources are exclusively directed towards organizations that align with the bill's stated purpose of supporting alternatives to abortion and carrying pregnancies to term, preventing indirect funding of abortion-related activities.
Case against: Critics argue this broad definition effectively defunds and excludes a significant portion of comprehensive healthcare providers, even those offering extensive prenatal and postnatal care, thereby limiting options for women and potentially creating a chilling effect on organizations that might otherwise offer a wider range of services.
Estimated impact: Significant, as it shapes the entire landscape of eligible providers for the new website and grant programs, potentially redirecting millions in federal support.
Defines "unborn child" for child support purposes as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb." It also sets an effective date of 2 years after enactment for the child support amendments.
Sec. 301(a)(5) and (c)
Why it matters:Definitions are typically placed at the end of sections, and effective dates are standard. However, this specific definition of "unborn child" is highly consequential for the child support provisions and broader legal implications.
Case for: Proponents argue this definition provides clarity and consistency for the application of child support obligations, affirming the legal status of the unborn child from conception. The delayed effective date allows states time to implement complex changes.
Case against: Critics argue this definition has significant implications for reproductive rights, potentially establishing legal personhood for a fetus from conception, which could be used to challenge abortion access. They might also argue that a 2-year implementation window is insufficient for states to overhaul their child support systems for such a novel concept.
Estimated impact: Potentially profound, as it could set a precedent for legal personhood and significantly alter the legal landscape for child support and reproductive rights.