Abortion, Every Day (10.16.23)

Three Alabama hospitals are losing their maternity units

In the States, a new strategy from anti-abortion groups in Ohio, and moves to quash a Nevada pro-choice ballot measure. In the Nation, an increased focus on the FACE Act. How The New York Times fell for Republican rhetorical maneuvering in The GOP’s War on Language. In Care Denied, a look at the impact of North Carolina’s ‘compromise’ ban. Three Alabama maternity wards shutter in The Care Crisis. And in The GOP’s Plan to Ban Birth Control, a look at what I’m calling passive contraception bans.

---

In the States

The closer we get to election day, the more desperate anti-abortion activists in Ohio have become. After months of lying about a pro-choice ballot measure in the state—claiming it would allow children to get gender affirming surgery and abortion throughout pregnancy—conservatives are trying something new. Now they’re also telling voters that they don’t need to support Issue 1 because abortion is already legal in the state.

The truth? Ohio passed a 6-week abortion ban that’s blocked as it gets battled out in courts. And the groups claiming that voters shouldn’t worry because abortion is already legal are the same organizations pushing for that ban to take effect! They know that without the protection of Issue 1, it will be a lot easier for them to enact the ban. It’s so incredibly dishonest.

In an hour-long forum on Issue 1 yesterday, for example, Mehek Cooke, a spokesperson for Protect Women Ohio, said that anyone who claims people in the state don’t have access to abortion at 22 weeks is “flat out lying.”

“And I think every Ohioan is smart enough to Google that. I think you Google ‘what step can you have an abortion at’ it says Ohioans at 22 weeks.”

You can watch the entire clip is here, but the absolute gall of “just Google it” honestly blows my mind. A few weeks ago, the president of Ohio Right to Life, Mike Gonidakis, said something similar during a radio interview:

“You can have an abortion up to and through the fifth month of pregnancy—or right around the fifth month of pregnancy—for rape, incest, life of the mother or for choice.”

Conservatives know that voters support abortion rights, so their last minute tactic is to claim the right to abortion is already safe—even as they work to undermine it. As Gabriel Mann, a spokesperson for Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights, said, “These extreme anti-abortion politicians know they are out of step with Ohio voters and can’t win unless they lie, cheat, and rig the rules.”

Related: The Ohio Capital Journal debunks conservatives’ lie that the pro-choice amendment would strip away parental rights.

The Palm Beach Post blasted Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody this weekend for trying to quash the state’s abortion rights ballot measure. As I told you last week, Moody is petitioning the state Supreme Court to stop the measure from heading to voters, claiming that the pro-choice amendment’s definition of ‘viability’ is deliberately vague. Remember: ‘viability’ is something pro-choice groups have been fighting over, because the standard is arbitrary. But abortion rights activists crafting ballot measures have included it as a way to preempt criticisms of supporting abortion ‘up until birth’. Moody is using that against pro-choicers—which is a good reminder that we should never let conservatives frame the terms of the debate.

Also in Florida, pro-choice activists are raising money for the multiple clinics that Republicans are trying to fine out of existence. (The state health department has been hitting clinics with tens of thousands in fines after enacting a long-dormant 24-hour waiting period.)

Speaking of ballot measures: I told you last month about a coalition of pro-choice groups in Nevada—Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom—that filed a petition to get an abortion rights measure on the 2024 ballot. But, as has been the case in every state with a pro-choice amendment, conservatives are trying to stop it from moving forward. (Abortion is legal in Nevada—but protections in the state constitution would add an important layer of security in a moment when Republicans are doing anything and everything to ban abortion against the wishes of voters.)

A new PAC called the Coalition for Parents and Children filed a lawsuit claiming the measure is illegal—in part because they say it violates the single subject rule. Their reasoning? Because the amendment prohibits government interference in decisions around abortion, birth control, miscarriage care, etc, the conservative group claims it can’t just be on one ballot measure.

This is exactly what conservatives tried to do in Ohio: they filed a suit seeking to split the amendment into multiple measures based on the idea that abortion was different than the other reproductive decisions that the measure listed, like miscarriage care and fertility treatments. Their hope was to force activists to collect twice as many signatures and make it impossible for them to move the measure forward. Thankfully, they were unsuccessful—hopefully that will be the case in Nevada as well.

As a column this week in the Nevada Independent points out, “Attempting to deny Nevadans the right to even consider the matter violates our constitutionally guaranteed right to self-government.”

Montana abortion provider Dr. Sam Dickman, the chief medical officer at Planned Parenthood Montana, gave a short interview about the attack on a Helena clinic last week. Dr. Dickman told the Montana Free Press that while everyone is grateful that no one was hurt or killed, “coming back to the clinic is hard.”

“My colleagues who work in the clinic every day have been incredibly resilient and courageous—they re-opened today [Thursday] and we’re very glad to be seeing patients there again…But even if we put aside these totally outrageous violent tactics, it’s also important to note that personal freedom is incredibly important to voters in Montana and they’ve made it very clear that they don’t want more restrictions on abortion access.”

Sending so much love and support to everyone in Montana—I hope folks there know how grateful we are for their work.

In Virginia, POLITICO reports on how Gov. Glenn Youngkin and other Republicans believe they have the answer to the GOP’s woes on abortion: say you don’t support a ban while pushing a ban, and focus on abortion later in pregnancy. (More on what’s happening in Virginia in the “The GOP’s War on Language” section.)

Finally, in absolutely terrifying news, anti-abortion ‘abolitionist’, Dusty Deevers, has won the Republican primary nomination for Oklahoma’s District 32 Senate seat. So-called abolitionists are the most extreme arm of the anti-abortion movement, and think abortion should be treated as murder—and that women should get the death penalty for having them. (You can read more about them here and here.)

Quick hits:

• A pro-choice candidate for Louisiana Attorney General has thrown her hat in the ring;

• The Associated Press talks to Kentucky voters about the gubernatorial race;

• The Guardian on Tennessee’s Allie Phillips, who is running for office after being denied an abortion;

• And congratulations to first-ever executive director of the Wisconsin Medical Fund, Ali Muldrow!

In the Nation

The Washington Post published a piece this weekend about the increase in charges against anti-abortion activists using the FACE Act—the law that makes it a federal crime to block clinic entrances by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction:

“Since President Biden took office in 2021, the Justice Department has brought 20 criminal prosecutions and one civil case under the FACE Act against a total of 46 defendants, according to federal officials, with all but one of the cases involving charges for disruptions at abortion clinics. That one exception is a criminal case against four abortion rights activists accused of spray-painting threatening messages last year at three Florida reproductive health centers that counsel patients against abortion.”

That’s right, graffiti. In any case, this uptick in cases is part of the reason that Republicans are looking to repeal the FACE Act—even though harassment and violence against abortion clinics has significantly increased since Roe was overturned. Their move to repeal the act come alongside an increase in lawsuits against local and state buffer zone laws: essentially, conservatives are trying to make it as easy as possible for anti-abortion extremists to harass clinic staff and patients.

In international news, a reason to hope. It looks like Poland is ousting its right-wing nationalist conservative party, with opposition leader Donald Tusk declaring victory. Here’s why that’s important to us: Tusk has been outspoken about loosening the (severe) abortion restrictions in Poland, saying he would prioritize legalizing abortion up until 12 weeks of pregnancy. And Polish experts have pointed to Tusk’s focus on abortion as a major factor in the victory—which came with a record turn-out. It’s a sign of how powerful abortion rights are, and just how much influence they can wield in elections here and abroad.

Quick hits:

• Bloomberg Law on the Republican attacks on the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act over abortion;

• And POLITICO on the GOP’s birth control discord. (We knew this was coming!)

The GOP’s War on Language: NYT Edition

Over the weekend, The New York Times reported on Kari Lake’s abortion switch-up: After an unsuccessful bid for Arizona governor, Lake is running for U.S. Senate—and saying that she no longer supports a federal abortion ban.

The Times says it’s a sign that more Republicans are moving away from supporting federal abortion restrictions. That’s just not true. The GOP is just using clever rhetorical tricks around the word ‘ban’ to make it seem as if they’re softening on abortion. And the Times fell for it.

For example, the NYT reports that the National Republican Senatorial Committee is telling candidates to “clearly state their opposition to a national abortion ban.” I wrote about this exact thing last month—and pointed out that what the group is actually advising candidates to say is they oppose a national ban but support “reasonable limits on late-term abortions when babies can feel pain.”

“Reasonable limits” is the same thing as “consensus” or “standard”—it’s just another word for ‘ban’. They’re telling candidates to say they don’t support a national ban while supporting a national ban. And remember: ‘late term’ is not a medical term, but a made-up standard that conservatives define at will. Most recently, they’ve said that anything after 12 weeks is ‘late’.

So suddenly we’ve gone from ‘no national ban’ to a 12-week federal ‘limit’ on abortion.

In another example, the Times cites Pennsylvania Republican David McCormick. While McCormick did say he doesn’t support a federal ban, here’s the entirety of his comments:

“This is also an issue where I think we have to show a lot of compassion and look for common ground. We should have contraception and we have reasonable limits on late-term abortion, and that is a compassionate position and a consensus position—and that’s the position I support.” (Emphasis mine)

All the keywords that I’ve been writing about for a year are there: he’s talking about a ban.

This is why it’s so important that mainstream media reporters are paying attention to the way that conservatives are fucking with language. After all, it’s not as if they’re hiding it! Look at what’s happening in Virginia, where Republicans are supporting a 15-week abortion ban, but putting out ads saying that their ban is not a ban.

A Republican claiming they don’t support a national ban means nothing. Candidates need to be asked if they support federal legislation of any kind on abortion. They need to be asked what they mean by ‘ban’. And for the love of all that’s good in this world: Stop taking their fucking word for it!

Care Denied

Let’s talk about North Carolina. As you know, Republicans passed a ban on abortion after 12 weeks—legislation they called a ‘compromise’—after former Democrat Trish Cotham switched parties. Naturally, the law makes it as difficult as possible to obtain an abortion in those first 12 weeks, including a requirement that patients have two in-person appointments before getting care (even when taking abortion medication).

NC Health News looks at how those restrictions have impacted care in the state, and as OBGYN Amy Bryant noted, “I can say pretty definitively that none of this has resulted in higher quality medical care for our patients.”

Because of the requirement that patients have two-person appointments, clinic staff are having to juggle twice as many appointments for the same number of abortions. From abortion provider Matt Zerden, Planned Parenthood South Atlantic’s associate medical director:

“Every patient who's going to receive an abortion has to come through the doors twice, get checked in twice, have an encounter in a medical record system twice—all the things. It's an enormous amount of resources….it’s just occupying minutes, space and capacity that we can't be delivering other care. All the care that we provide at Planned Parenthood South Atlantic is necessary and in short supply so it just makes everything more limited.”

And of course, the strain isn’t just on doctors and clinic staff—but patients, who need to drive long distances (twice!), take off work for longer, book hotels and pay for child care. Zerden says for those patients, “It’s really been devastating.”

And that’s what’s so important to remember about these so-called compromise bills, and restrictions that the GOP claim are about ensuring patient safety—their only real purpose is to make it harder, if not impossible, for people to get care.

The Care Crisis

Three different maternity wards in Alabama will close in the next few months, widening the disastrous maternal health care gap in the state. NBC News reports that the closures will leave Shelby and Monroe counties without any place for women to give birth—and that some will have to drive up to 100 miles to find a hospital with a labor and delivery unit.

Alabama has the highest maternal mortality rate in the country, the third highest infant mortality rate, and the March of Dimes reports that more than a third of the counties in the state are maternity care deserts.

Since Roe was overturned, we’ve watched maternity wards shutter across multiple anti-choice states—with hospitals unable to retain or recruit OBGYNS, who don’t want to work in a place where they could be arrested for doing their jobs. And who can blame them?

On Friday, The Washington Post covered a vital piece of that OBGYN exodus from anti-choice states: the way that residents have been forced to leave their states in order to get abortion training. And once they realize how limited they are in their home states, many are deciding to practice elsewhere.

South Dakota OBGYN Erica Schipper, for example, who teaches medical students at the USD Sanford School of Medicine, says, “When I look at some of the brightest up-and-coming medical students who we’ve sent away for their residency, we’re hoping they’ll come back, but I suspect they’re thinking twice.”

And Morgan Schriever, a second-year OBGYN resident from South Dakota who is training in Illinois, says she planned to move back home—but is reconsidering after her abortion training:

“Being in practice in Illinois, I come across these scenarios where I picture myself in South Dakota and I’m like, ‘Oh, my God. How would I have handled this?’ I’m just not sure I want to put myself in that position where essentially my license is on the line.”

A reminder that more than half of the counties in South Dakota have no OBGYNs.

The GOP’s Plan to Ban Birth Control

In Part II of Abortion, Every Day’s series on the GOP’s plan to ban birth control, I wrote about how Republicans don’t need to pass a law outlawing contraception—they just have to make it impossible to obtain. The example I used was the proliferation of crisis pregnancy centers—which have a policy against advising on birth control, unless it’s to lie about it. Conservatives are counting on that disinformation, along with the spread of reproductive health deserts, to ensure that people can’t get the care they need.

But it’s not just crisis pregnancy centers that are doing that dirty work. In addition to stripping away any remaining comprehensive sex education in conservative states, Republicans are enacting what can best be described as a passive ban on birth control.

In Iowa, for example, the Des Moines Register reports that since the state started a family planning program—created specifically to stop groups like Planned Parenthood from getting state funding—they’ve seen a nearly 83% drop in people using its services.

In 2017, Republicans discontinued the state’s participation the federal Medicaid family planning network, leaving $3 million behind—and replaced it with a state-run version. The program is meant to help low- and moderate- incoming people in the state get birth control and other kinds of reproductive healthcare services. But the state decided not to spend any money to advertise or promote the program—meaning that Iowans would only know about it if they actively sought it out.

As a result, only 423 people were served by the program in 2021. This is how they ban contraception—not with a single law, but by the slow erosion of access.

Anyway, happy Monday! 🙃