(CNSNews.com) - An amendment to the Senate defense authorization bill that would lift the ban on privately funded abortions at U.S. military facilities currently is being considered by a joint House-Senate conference committee.

But pro-life groups predict the amendment will be dropped before the bill is sent to the White House for President Bush's signature.

"We're confident that the Senate's position will fail and that the current pro-life policy will be retained because it is supported by the House and by President Bush," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director with the National Right to Life Committee.

Last month, the Democrat-led Senate approved by 52 - 40 an amendment by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) to the defense authorization bill that would lift the military abortion ban. In 2000, a similar measure was defeated by a vote of 50 - 49 in the Senate.

However, observers said adoption of the Murray amendment by such a large margin this year was more a function of random absenteeism than evidence of senators switching their position on the issue.

Eight senators, seven of whom supported the pro-life position, were absent on Friday, June 21, when the vote was taken, Johnson noted.

"It wouldn't have changed the outcome if they had all been there, but the margin obviously would have been a lot closer," he said.

"So it's not as lopsided as it may appear at first blush," he added.

There were no switches in the Senate, other than Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska.), a pro-abortion senator who never supported the pro-life position, Johnson said.

In May, House members voted, also on party lines, to reject a similar amendment to the House version of the defense authorization bill. Lawmakers voted 215 - 202 against a proposal by Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.) that called for the lifting of the abortion ban at military hospitals overseas.

While the Sanchez amendment only applied to overseas facilities, the Senate amendment repeals the ban altogether, opening up all military medical facilities in the United States to provide abortion services, Johnson said.

Federal law currently prohibits the use of military facilities for abortions, except in cases of rape and incest, and when the life of the mother is in danger.

In 1993, President Clinton issued an executive order that allowed women to pay for abortions with their own money at military hospitals overseas. However, Congress effectively overruled the executive order in December 1995 and reinstated the ban.

Pro-abortion members of Congress have tried unsuccessfully every year since 1996 to lift the ban. However, the margin of defeat appears to be narrowing. Last year, the amendment was rejected by a margin of 18 votes; this year, the difference was 13 votes.

Abortion rights advocates argue that the ban discriminates against women by prohibiting them from exercising a legally protected right simply because they are stationed overseas.

Abortion is illegal in many countries in which U.S. personnel are stationed. In addition, traveling to the United States to obtain an abortion is difficult and potentially cost prohibitive, especially for younger enlisted women.

"At a time when we are sending more men and women abroad to fight terrorism it is more important than ever to reaffirm the fundamental rights of Americans," Kate Michelman, president of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, said in a statement.

Michael Schwartz, vice president of government relations with Concerned Women for America, said, however, a compromise in conference committee could cost the United States valuable defense resources.

"The real question is what the conservatives will have to give up in terms of national defense in order to get the liberals to drop their abortion mandate," Schwartz said. "It's not by coincidence that the same people who are so avid to kill the unborn are also always inclined to disarm America and leave our already born population vulnerable, and that's the real tragedy of this."

Mo Woltering, director of public policy with the American Life League, said he hoped, even if Congress failed to keep the amendment out, that the president would stand firm and veto it.

"We don't want any abortions taking place, and we certainly don't want taxpayer money going to either fund those abortions or even provide the facilities for those abortions," Woltering said.