Ever since Roe vs Wade, the stance by the US Federal government has been not to directly fund abortions. It would seem to me that any language that could be construed as funding for abortion procedures could be seen as political and legislative activism. Usually such action is quite polarizing and is actually detrimental to the legislative process. Usually charged language such as abortion funding is inserted, knowing that it will be removed to make the bill at large more palatable to more moderate elements of the Democratic party.

The way I see it, that is is all it was, there never was any serious effort to keep it in the bill in the first place. The restrictive amendments to the bill simply carry on what has been standard policy for the government on this matter for decades. This whole episode merely allowed the liberal segment of the Democratic party to flex their muscles by suggesting abortion funding, and restricting it allowed the more moderate and centrist Democrats an opportunity to sign on to the bill at large and still be able to tout the "family values" line with their constituencies.

Basically, politics from beginning to end.