Anti-abortion groups are sounding the alarm over an ObamaCare funding bill, urging lawmakers to vote against it because they say it doesn't contain "pro-life" protections.

A bill sponsored by Sens. Lamar Alexander Andrew (Lamar) Lamar AlexanderGraham: GOP has votes to confirm Trump's Supreme Court nominee before the election The Hill's Morning Report - Sponsored by Facebook - Washington on edge amid SCOTUS vacancy This week: Supreme Court fight over Ginsburg's seat upends Congress's agenda MORE (R-Tenn.) and Patty Murray Patricia (Patty) Lynn MurraySenate Democrats introduce legislation to probe politicization of pandemic response Trump health officials grilled over reports of politics in COVID-19 response CDC director pushes back on Caputo claim of 'resistance unit' at agency MORE (D-Wash.) would fund the key ObamaCare insurer payments called cost-sharing reductions (CSRs), which reimburse insurers for giving discounted deductibles and copays to low-income patients.

But influential anti-abortion groups like the Susan B. Anthony List and National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) say the bill shouldn't be passed unless it is amended to stipulate that the funding can't go toward plans that cover abortion.

ADVERTISEMENT

Such restrictions already exist in Medicaid and other programs under the Department of Health and Human Services through the Hyde Amendment, which bars the use of federal funds to pay for abortion, with some exceptions.

"Any member voting for the Alexander-Murray proposal, or other ObamaCare stabilization legislation not covered by the Hyde amendment, would not only be voting to sustain what many have called the largest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade, but would also be voting to directly appropriate taxpayer dollars for insurance that includes abortion," Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, wrote in a letter to members of Congress this week.

The Affordable Care Act says that CSRs can't be used for plans that cover abortions, but pro-life groups have long argued that the language isn't sufficient.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell Addison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellFEC flags McConnell campaign over suspected accounting errors Poll: 59 percent think president elected in November should name next Supreme Court justice Mark Kelly: Arizona Senate race winner should be sworn in 'promptly' MORE has said he supports passing the Alexander-Murray bill before the end of the year. He made the promise to Sen. Susan Collins Susan Margaret CollinsClub for Growth to spend million in ads for Trump Supreme Court nominee Maryland's GOP governor says Republicans shouldn't rush SCOTUS vote before election The Hill's Morning Report - Sponsored by Facebook - GOP closes ranks to fill SCOTUS vacancy by November MORE (R-Maine), who asked for its passage in exchange for her vote on the GOP's tax bill.

Collins has said she expects Alexander-Murray to be attached to the year-end spending deal.

ADVERTISEMENT

But there's concern that the Senate will try to jam the House with the spending bill, and with it, the Alexander-Murray bill with no "pro-life" protections.

That could pose a problem because Republicans are facing increased pressure from anti-abortion groups.

"Simply put, it is a stone-cold non-starter without the Hyde language as all conservatives will feel pressure to oppose," said a House GOP Appropriations aide.

"Leadership might be able to peel off some opposition by adding the language."

NRLC went a step further and said Hyde protections must be added to a reinsurance bill sponsored by Collins and Sen. Bill Nelson Clarence (Bill) William NelsonDemocrats sound alarm on possible election chaos Trump, facing trouble in Florida, goes all in NASA names DC headquarters after agency's first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson MORE (D-Fla.)

ADVERTISEMENT

NRLC warns that votes for Alexander-Murray and Collins-Nelson, or any appropriations measure that contains the bills, will be included in its scorecard of key "right-to-life" votes of the 115th Congress.

"We strongly urge Congress not to continue this unprotected appropriation of money to prop up plans that cover abortion," the group wrote in a letter to lawmakers.

"NRLC respectfully urges you to vote to reject the Alexander-Murray and Collins-Nelson proposals unless they are amended to exclude payments to cover abortion on demand."

The Family Research Council also said it would score against the spending deal if Alexander-Murray and Collins-Nelson weren't amended to include the funding restrictions.

They note that a similar bill introduced earlier this year from Sen. Orrin Hatch Orrin Grant HatchBottom line Bottom line Senate GOP divided over whether they'd fill Supreme Court vacancy MORE (R-Utah) and Rep. Kevin Brady Kevin Patrick BradyBusinesses, states pass on Trump payroll tax deferral Trump order on drug prices faces long road to finish line On The Money: US deficit hits trillion amid pandemic | McConnell: Chance for relief deal 'doesn't look that good' | House employees won't have payroll taxes deferred MORE (R-Texas) would fund the CSRs "while also providing Hyde-like pro-life protections that restrict these funds from being used to subsidize plans that cover elective abortion."