Abortion, Every Day (7.17.23)

Ron DeSantis says as president, he'd work with 'localities' to ban abortion

In the States

It’s so rare that I get to bring you good news on a Monday, so this is a real treat: A judge ruled today to temporarily block Iowa’s near-total abortion ban while the challenge to the law makes its way through the courts. That means abortions in Iowa are once again legal up until 20 weeks. At least for now.

Gov. Kim Reynolds, who signed the ban into law on Friday, vowed to take the case to the state Supreme Court. And while the justices there are all Republican-appointed, experts like law professor Mary Ziegler think it’s possible that the Court will rule the ban unconstitutional.

In the meantime, this will take some pressure off of healthcare providers in the state, who were juggling fear and uncertainty along with their patients. Knowing that Reynolds was signing the law into effect on Friday, abortion clinics tried to fit as many appointments as possible before then—with other patients being referred out-of-state because doctors weren’t sure they’d be able to see them by the law’s approximately 6-week cut-off. In short, it was a shit show. From OGYN Dr. Amy Bingaman:

“I've had a lot of patients that are really angry. I think there's a fair amount of anger out of it, for losing our bodily autonomy, which is frankly what it feels like.”

And OBGYN Dr. Emily Boevers said, “Forcing experts in women’s health to withhold care from our patients, it goes against many of our moral codes.”

Also keep in mind that before it was blocked, the Iowa ban went into effect with zero guidelines for criminal or civil penalties. Yes, that’s right: Republicans banned abortion without telling providers what the risks were to their jobs and freedom. Iowa state senator Janet Petersen spoke to MSNBC about the position that put doctors in, and Republicans’ long-term attack on abortion and reproductive rights in the state:

Meanwhile, Republicans in Ohio are hoping that their special election next month will raise the standards on ballot measures—making it harder, if not impossible, for pro-choice activists to restore abortion rights. But one of the most notable things we’ve been tracking in the state is the way that conservatives’ anti-abortion strategy doesn’t really focus on…abortion. Anti-choice groups, for example, spent millions of dollars on a television ad campaign telling voters that the measure would allow their children to have gender-affirming surgery without parental permission—in part because they know abortion rights are so popular.

They needed to find a message they thought would actually resonate, and anti-trans bigotry was it.

Now, in the final weeks before that August election, anti-abortion groups are doubling down on their anti-LGBTQ strategy. The latest ad from Protect Women Ohio, urging people to vote for Issue 1—which would raise ballot measure standards—doesn’t even mention the word ‘abortion’. Not once. Instead, it shows an image of a drag queen, stating that supporting Issue 1 will “keep this madness out of Ohio classrooms.” (Neither Issue 1 or the proposed abortion rights amendment has anything to do with education.) Completely shameless.

Speaking of shamelessness in Ohio: Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose—who has been leading the charge in attacking ballot measure standards—announced today that he’s running for U.S. Senate.

Kansas is looking is looking for an organization to lead their ‘Alternatives to Abortion’ program—and is willing to give them $2 million to do it. I told you earlier this month about a similar program in Missouri, and how it’s essentially a way to funnel money into religious anti-abortion organizations. Alternatives to Abortion (or A2A) programs don’t actually offer material support to pregnant people—they raise awareness of anti-abortion centers, and then dispense money to anti-abortion subcontractors. In Kansas’ case, that means taxpayer money going to crisis pregnancy centers and ‘maternity homes’. Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed the funding for the program, but was overrode by Republicans.

You all know what anti-abortion centers actually do, but it never hurts to have a reminder: Over in Illinois, where pro-choice activists protested in front of one of the centers in Chicago recently, Alicia Hurtado of the Chicago Abortion Fund says that some of their clients have been “forcibly restrained…told they were going to hell, shown ultrasounds against their will.”

Doctors are reporting an increased interest in sterilization from patients in North Carolina, where an abortion ban just went into effect. One OBGYN group, for example, reported that the number of sterilizations they performed doubled over the last year. Physicians in the state are also seeing a “definite uptick” in patients seeking longterm birth control like IUDs—either for themselves or for their children.

OBGYN Alyse Kelly Jones says, “I’ve had some moms bringing in their teenage daughters who aren’t even ready for contraception saying, ‘Put an IUD in my daughter.’” And who could blame them? That’s the first thing I’d be doing if I had a teenager.

The former head of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida warns that we’re sliding into authoritarianism, flagging the way that state Attorney General Ashley Moody is seeking to overturned 50 years of precedent on abortion rights by the state Supreme Court. Howard Simon writes that of all the strategies to resist the descent out of democracy, “none now more important or urgent than getting petitions signed to put an explicit right to abortion on the ballot.” Agreed.

And in Georgia, where women were allowed to claim a child tax credit for pregnancies, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that Republicans didn’t really think through their policy before it was implemented. (Imagine that!) Apparently lawmakers didn’t ask what it would cost the state before the exemption went into effect, and—unlike other exemptions—filers don’t have to provide any proof of pregnancy in order to get the tax credit. And while the state revenue department doesn’t have firm numbers yet, experts say they haven’t seen many people taking advantage of the exemption at all. It’s almost as if this was a poorly-thought-out PR move never really intended to help families!

Finally, Texas was named the worst state in the U.S. to live in by CNBC—in part thanks to the state’s abortion ban. In fact, in the wake of Texas’ abortion ban, the state fell out of the top five ranking for the first time in the 16 years that CNBC has been doing this ranking.

Quick hits:

• Mother Jones with some background on Missouri Republicans’ war on the abortion rights ballot measure in the state;

• Nebraska Democrats are considering a censure of a Democratic state senator who supported the recently-passed anti-abortion/anti-trans bill;

• Salon on the challenge to Idaho’s ‘abortion trafficking’ law;

• The Guardian on the challenge to Iowa’s abortion ban;

• And Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sam Brown attacked his Democratic opponent as “out-of-touch” for supporting abortion rights, despite the fact that 62% of voters in the state want to enshrine reproductive rights in the state constitution.

In the Nation

Over the last few weeks, the Pentagon’s abortion policy—which allows for time off and travel reimbursement if a service member needs to leave the state for care—has been under the national spotlight. First because Sen. Tommy Tuberville was holding up military promotions in protest, and now because Republicans are working to undo the policy via defense budget amendments. So, lots of assholery to go around.

But the new conservative messaging on the policy really takes the cake: This weekend, Fox News asked Sen. Tom Cotton what women in uniform should do if they’re stationed somewhere that doesn’t allow abortion but need to access care. Cotton replied that “the military should not be paying for abortion tourism.”

The National Review’s Rich Lowry repeated that line yesterday, in a column suggesting that the Pentagon had “become a chapter of Planned Parenthood.” He wrote, “The Pentagon is funding abortion tourism for troops…”

‘Abortion tourism’ is quite a take on basic health care who agreed to serve the country! Today, White House national security spokesman John Kirby put the policy into a much more respectful perspective:

“When you sign up and you make that contract, you have every right to expect that the organization—in this case, the military—is going to take care of you and they’re going to take care of your family. And make sure that you can serve with dignity and respect no matter who you are or who you love or how you worship or don’t.”

Quick hits:

• Reuters with abortion legislation to watch out for;

• The New York Times on Democrats ERA revival;

• ANSIRH’s Dr. Daniel Grossman spoke to CNN about the FDA’s approval of over-the-counter birth control pills;

• And Democratic U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy says Republicans will implement a national abortion ban if they get control of Congress: “It’s 100% certain.”

Stats & Studies

Grace reported this statistic last week, but I wanted to revive it for a moment: A poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 1 in 10 Americans say they know someone who has either been unable to get an abortion, or who has been forced to travel for abortion care over the past year. 

It’s a number that gets at something I’ve been saying quite a bit here: It’s only a matter of time before everyone in the country has been touched in some way by the consequences of abortion bans—whether they themselves are impacted, or someone in their family or community. And I don’t just mean that people will know someone who was denied an abortion; the ripple effects of abortion bans go much further than that.

How long will it be before every American knows someone who wasn’t able to find a maternity ward less than an hour away because of the OBGYN exodus in anti-choice states? Or before we all know someone who has had to wait months for a pap smear, because of the way that pro-choice states and doctors are inundated with medical refugees?

I truly believe it’s this human, real life impact that’s going to damage Republicans the most in the end.

The Care Crisis

Speaking of the real life impact of abortion bans: If you’re a regular reader, you know that OBGYNs and maternal fetal medicine specialists have been leaving anti-abortion states in droves—with Idaho leading the pack. Earlier this year, for example, a study showed that nearly half of the OBGYNs in the state were either leaving or considering leaving because of the abortion ban. Multiple hospitals have also been forced to shut down their maternity wards as administrators are unable to recruit or retain medical professionals to the state.

The state’s response? They dismantled its maternal mortality committee, deliberately making it harder to track the real life impact of the state’s ban.

This weekend, The Guardian spoke to a few of the OBGYNs and maternal-fetal medicine specialists who stayed; and the picture they paint is about as bleak as you can imagine. More than half of Idaho’s maternal-fetal medicine specialists have left or will leave by the end of this year, which has increased Dr. Stacy Seyb’s patient load by nearly 30%, for example. He told The Guardian that soon in the state, “we’ll see a collapse in women’s healthcare.”

And Dr. John Werdel, the medical director for women’s services at St Luke’s Medical Center, says getting doctors to come to Idaho has been a challenge. His group found one older OBGYN who agreed to come on board for a few years before retiring, but recruiting younger doctors looking to lay down roots has been near-impossible. Even the younger nurses, he says, are either leaving or asking to be moved out of obstetrics.

2024

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has largely avoided talking about abortion too much on the campaign trail—he knows how unpopular his recently-passed 6-week ban is. But in a Sunday Fox News interview, the presidential hopeful said something notable that seems to have flown mostly under the radar. When asked about a national abortion ban, DeSantis talked about how it would be difficult to pass, and then said this:

“And so I think we’re going to really have a strong bottom up approach. We’re going to be working with states and localities to be able to advance the cause of life.” (Emphasis mine)

One of the things I’ve been covering here at Abortion, Every Day is the anti-choice movement’s strategy of banning abortion in pro-choice states via local town ordinances. They’re going into states where abortion is legal and passing anti-abortion laws in small towns and cities. (Especially in border towns: a strategy to prevent abortion clinics from opening in places they could more easily help out-of-state patients.)

DeSantis’ comments here—saying he wants to work with localities to ban abortion—seem to indicate that he’s in support of local governments trying to supersede state authority. Which is pretty fucking notable!

Something else to watch out for in 2024 messaging: I know you’re sick of the word ‘consensus’, but I’m not going to stop harping on it! At the Family Leadership Summit this weekend—where Republican presidential candidates made their case in front of a conservative Christian crowd—former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson said that when it comes to abortion, state should decide for themselves but added this caveat:

“What’s been proposed at the national level of 15 weeks with the exceptions that I’ve talked about, is a place that we might be able to arrive at a consensus around in this country, very similar to what the standard is in Europe.”

It’s anti-abortion BINGO: ‘consensus’, ‘standard’, even Europe! What’s important about this is that Hutchinson is talking about passing a national ban while still claiming to support states’ rights. This is something we’ve heard before and will hear again: Republicans saying abortion is up to state governments, and that the nation will simply set a ‘standard’. With the anti-abortion move away from the word ‘ban’, it’s a messaging strategy that could have some serious impact.

Mainstream Media Watch

When it came to media muck-ups, today was a doozy. Let’s start with The New York Times, which ran an article about how women felt about the FDA approving over-the-counter birth control pills. The piece warns that some women are worried about the pills’ safety, and quotes Melina Luna Smith, who the Times says “runs a nonprofit organization”:

“So you could go pick it up if you’re, like, 12?…So much is happening to your body when you’re young, so I think it’s important to have somebody speaking to that—some medical guidance.”

What the reporter doesn’t mention, however, is that Smith doesn’t just run any nonprofit: she’s the founder of a Christian publishing group that “designs Gospel resources for kids and teens to bring the Bible to life.” So it’s not a coincidence that her quote sounds so similar to anti-choice talking points on birth control that we’ve covered here for months. I don’t take issue with the Times including a response Smith or anyone with similar beliefs—but maybe let’s be transparent about who they are, instead of positioning her a regular woman-on-the-street.

We’re not done yet! If you want to see the danger of ‘both-sides’ journalism in action, the Topeka Capital-Journal’s coverage of anti-abortion centers and is a perfect example. Here’s how they explained what the non-medical religious groups do:

“Kansans for Life and other supporters of anti-abortion counseling centers, commonly referred to as pregnancy resource centers or crisis pregnancy centers, say they provide helpful resources to pregnant people to help them choose to bear a child to term.

But opponents, such as Planned Parenthood, say they often spread medical misinformation about abortion and pressure vulnerable people not to get an abortion.”

They’re framing the objective, well-documented truth about anti-abortion centers as a belief by their opposition. But there aren’t two sides to this: There is actually a demonstrable truth to be told about these groups. But mainstream media outlets are letting the fear of

Speaking of anti-abortion groups being given free riegn in the media: It’s disappointing to see publications like USA Today giving Ohio anti-choice organizations a platform to spread their unchecked (and false) bullshit.

You Love to See It

More op-eds like this please! Sixteen-year old Sophia Rick Yudell of Arizona writes about what it’s like to be a young person wondering if they’ll be forced into pregnancy:

“I’m 16 years old, a junior in high school, looking to the not-so-distant future in which I’ll be attending college far from home. What if I were to get pregnant against my will? What if I were to get pregnant in my teens, without the means of raising a child?…As I look toward my future, I want the world to go back to the way it was, when women were free to make our own choices about how and when we would start a family, taking on the enormous responsibility of caring for a baby.”

These are the people who abortion bans impact. That’s exactly who I want to hear from. The more young people we have writing, the better.