H. Con. Res. 78 (119th)Bill Overview

Expressing support for the recognition of March 10, 2026, as "Abortion Provider Appreciation Day".

Health|Health
Cosponsors
Support
Democratic
Introduced
Mar 12, 2026
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for co…

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief

This concurrent resolution expresses support for recognizing March 10, 2026, as "Abortion Provider Appreciation Day." It praises abortion providers and staff, documents violence and clinic closures since Dobbs v.

Jackson Women’s Health Organization, condemns the Supreme Court decision and certain federal actions, and affirms a congressional commitment to provider safety and unrestricted access to abortion care as an aspirational goal.

The resolution is symbolic and non‑binding.

Passage35/100

Low procedural and fiscal barriers favor passage in a supportive chamber, but highly partisan topic and likely Senate resistance reduce overall prospects.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a properly constructed commemorative concurrent resolution that clearly names and explains the designated day and sets out supporting statements.

Contention75/100

Whether the resolution is appropriate symbolic support or celebration of abortion

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Who this appears to help vs burden50% / 50%
Targeted stakeholdersLocal governments · Federal agencies
Likely helped
  • Targeted stakeholdersRaises public awareness of clinic violence and access barriers, possibly prompting policy debate or advocacy.
  • Targeted stakeholdersRecognizes and honors providers, which supporters say could improve morale and staff retention.
  • Targeted stakeholdersMay increase donations, volunteer support, and public engagement with reproductive health organizations.
Likely burdened
  • Local governmentsCould intensify protests and security needs at clinics, raising local safety and facility costs.
  • Federal agenciesMay be viewed as a federal political statement on an issue typically regulated by states.
  • Targeted stakeholdersIs symbolic and nonbinding, so critics argue it diverts legislative attention without legal effect.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Whether the resolution is appropriate symbolic support or celebration of abortion
Progressive95%

This persona would strongly welcome the resolution as an important symbolic defense of reproductive health workers.

They view it as overdue recognition of providers’ service and the threats they face, and as a useful signal of congressional solidarity with reproductive justice.

They would nonetheless note the resolution is symbolic and push for concrete policy action to follow.

Leans supportive
Centrist60%

A centrist would view the resolution as a largely symbolic measure that honors health workers and highlights clinic safety concerns.

They may agree with nonpartisan protections for staff and patients but worry the language explicitly condemning the Supreme Court and the administration makes it partisan.

They would prefer narrower, consensus‑focused language about safety and access without broader ideological declarations.

Split reaction
Conservative10%

A mainstream conservative would likely oppose the resolution’s framing, viewing it as celebrating abortion and criticizing the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision.

They would object to aspirational language advocating unrestricted access and to explicit critiques of the current administration and judicial decisions.

They may accept protecting clinics from violence, but oppose the resolution’s ideological thrust.

Likely resistant
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood35/100

Low procedural and fiscal barriers favor passage in a supportive chamber, but highly partisan topic and likely Senate resistance reduce overall prospects.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Level of floor support in each chamber
  • Senate procedural hurdles and filibuster dynamics
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Whether the resolution is appropriate symbolic support or celebration of abortion

Low procedural and fiscal barriers favor passage in a supportive chamber, but highly partisan topic and likely Senate resistance reduce ove…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a properly constructed commemorative concurrent resolution that clearly names and explains the designated day and sets out supporting statements.

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis