PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP - Ms. Houlahan asked unanimous consent that she may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 1742, a bill originally introduced by Representative Sherrill, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Sherrill, Mikie [D-NJ-11] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP - Ms. Houlahan asked unanimous consent that she may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 1742, a bill originally introduced by Representative Sherrill, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1742 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1742 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1742 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1742 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-27 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Access to Reproductive Care for Servicemembers Act would require approval of leave for specified abortion and fertility care for military members or their dependents. It would require reimbursement of travel-related costs when timely care is unavailable nearby. Members and dependents would not have to tell commanders which procedure they receive, and members would receive privacy and adverse-action protections.
This Act may be cited as the Access to Reproductive Care for Servicemembers Act.
shall, with respect to non-covered reproductive health care (including abortion care) for a member of the Armed Forces or the dependent of such a member— (1) consider such care to be time-sensitive and therefore approve leave for such non-covered reproductive health care; and (2) not require the member or dependent to disclose to a commanding officer the time-sensitive care or procedure being received during such leave.
The Secretary concerned shall reimburse a member or dependent of a member for costs incurred while receiving non-covered reproductive health care services if timely access to such services is not available near the member or dependent’s location.
Health care providers of the Defense Health Agency and commanding officers shall, to the greatest extent practicable, protect the privacy of a member who takes leave under this section
No member of the Armed Forces may be subject to any adverse action for requesting, taking, providing, or approving an action authorized by this section.
Section 2 presents Congress’s stated reasons for the proposal, including concerns that leave restrictions and logistical, insurance, and cost barriers limit reproductive care. These are legislative findings offered in support of the bill, not established outcomes of its provisions.
Congress finds the following:
Members of the Armed Forces seeking care off-base may be limited in their ability to do so due to restrictions on leave or travel imposed by their unit.
These logistical and systemic barriers include discriminatory restrictions on insurance coverage, high out-of-pocket costs, and limited availability of health care facilities.
The responsible Secretary would have to treat qualifying care for a military member or dependent as time-sensitive and approve leave. The Secretary could not require the member or dependent to disclose the care or procedure to a commanding officer.
The Secretary concerned (as such term is defined in section 101 of title 10, United States Code) shall, with respect to non-covered reproductive health care (including abortion care) for a member of the Armed Forces or the dependent of such a member— (1) consider such care to be time-sensitive and therefore approve leave for such non-covered reproductive health care; and (2) not require the member or dependent to disclose to a commanding officer the time-sensitive care or procedure being received during such leave.
When timely qualifying care is unavailable near the member or dependent, the responsible Secretary would have to reimburse costs including meals, lodging, and round-trip transportation to the care location. Meal reimbursement would include taxes and tips; lodging reimbursement would also include service charges.
The Secretary concerned shall reimburse a member or dependent of a member for costs incurred while receiving non-covered reproductive health care services if timely access to such services is not available near the member or dependent’s location. Such costs shall include— (1) the cost of meals, including taxes and tips; (2) the cost of lodging, including taxes, tips, and services charges; (3) the cost of round-trip transportation between the member or dependent’s location and the non-covered reproductive health care service location
Under the travel-reimbursement provision, a member or dependent who requests escorts or attendants could receive reimbursement for standard travel and transportation allowances for one or more necessary companions.
Such costs shall include—
if a member of the Armed Forces or a dependent of such a member requests one or more escorts or attendants, the cost of standard travel and transportation allowances for one or more necessary escorts or attendants.
Defense Health Agency providers and commanding officers would have to protect a member’s privacy to the greatest extent practicable, including when the member requests leave and returns to duty. This is a qualified privacy obligation, not an absolute confidentiality guarantee.
Health care providers of the Defense Health Agency and commanding officers shall, to the greatest extent practicable, protect the privacy of a member who takes leave under this section, including when such member makes a request for such leave and when such member returns to duty.
The bill would prohibit adverse action against military members for requesting, taking, providing, or approving an action authorized by Section 3.
No member of the Armed Forces may be subject to any adverse action for requesting, taking, providing, or approving an action authorized by this section.
The bill’s definition of qualifying “non-covered reproductive health care” includes abortion care other than abortion care permitted under Title 10, Section 1093. The bill references that existing law without reproducing its rules.
In this section, the term non-covered reproductive health care includes— (1) abortion care other than abortion care permitted under section 1093 of title 10, United States Code
Qualifying care would also include assisted reproductive technology—fertility procedures such as ovarian stimulation, egg retrieval, sperm collection and processing, insemination, and in vitro fertilization. The listed services include needed egg-retrieval medications and procedures, freezing eggs or sperm for preservation, and several forms of reproductive-cell or embryo transfer.
assisted reproductive technology, including— (A) ovarian stimulation and egg retrieval, including any needed medications and procedures required for retrieval, processing, and utilization of an egg for assisted reproductive technology or cryopreservation; (B) sperm collection and processing for assisted reproductive technology or cryopreservation; (C) intrauterine insemination; and (D) in vitro fertilization, including— (i) in vitro fertilization with fresh embryo transfer; (ii) gamete intrafallopian transfer; (iii) zygote intrafollopian transfer; (iv) pronuclear stage tubal transfer; (v) tubal embryo transfer; and (vi) frozen embryo transfer.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 19, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Armed Services on February 27, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T23:36:02Z.
2025-02-27: Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services. 2025-02-27: Introduced in House
The supplied September 19, 2026 snapshot records that, on February 11, 2026, the House agreed without objection to Ms. Houlahan becoming the first sponsor for adding cosponsors and requesting reprints. The entry identifies Representative Sherrill as the original introducing member.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T23:36:02Z.
2026-02-11: ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP - Ms. Houlahan asked unanimous consent that she may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 1742, a bill originally introduced by Representative Sherrill, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-27. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish formal earmark status or absence in accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential carve-out or special exemption was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. Coverage of the program’s intended beneficiaries does not by itself constitute such a benefit. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 19, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI