More Voters, Especially Women, Now Say Abortion Is Their Top Issue
New York Times, August 31, 2024
Attitudes on abortion are deeply entrenched and have motivated voters across the American political landscape for decades. But in a post-Roe world, with abortion access sharply limited or at stake in several states, voters who want to protect abortion rights are increasingly energized. Although the economy remains the No. 1 issue for voters, a growing share of voters in swing states now say abortion is central to their decision this fall, according to New York Times/Siena College polls earlier this month. This represents an increase since May, when President Joe Biden was still the Democratic presidential nominee. And by a wide margin, more say they trust Vice President Kamala Harris over former President Donald J. Trump to handle abortion. Mr. Trump has repeatedly changed his position on the issue, despite appointing Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case that found a constitutional right to abortion. On Thursday, he even suggested that he might support a Florida ballot measure that would expand abortion rights — which he and his campaign quickly tried to walk back. But his shifting stance may reflect hope among Democrats, and concern among Republicans, that backlash to abortion restrictions may drive voters to the polls. That may be especially the case for women — particularly now that Kamala Harris is at the top of the Democratic ticket. For women younger than 45, abortion has overtaken the economy as the single most important issue to their vote. “I think any woman should be able to access an abortion if they need it,” said Audrey Herman, 19, who plans to vote for the first time this year. “It’s the No. 1 reason why I feel so strongly about getting Kamala into the White House.”
Supreme Court Rejects Oklahoma’s Bid for Federal Grants in Dispute Over Abortion Counseling
New York Times, September 3, 2024
The Supreme Court on Tuesday turned down a request from Oklahoma to restore millions in federal family-planning grants that the Biden administration withheld after the state announced that it would no longer provide access to abortion counseling services. Oklahoma had sought emergency relief after a divided three-judge panel of an appeals court in July temporarily paused the funding as a lower-court dispute played out over whether state officials could refuse to refer pregnant women to counseling services that presented abortion as an option. The court’s brief, unsigned order gave no reasons, as is common when it acts on emergency applications. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch dissented, saying they would have reinstated the grants. The case was the latest instance in which the justices have addressed a dispute over restrictions on abortion after they overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. Since then, 22 states, including Oklahoma, have either banned or limited access to the procedure. The dispute centers on when states should receive federal grants focused on family planning. In establishing the program in 1970, Congress directed the Department of Health and Human Services to lay out eligibility requirements. Among them: Applicants must offer counseling and referrals for all manner of issues, including abortion. Oklahoma’s health department was among the grant recipients for 2022. But after the Supreme Court eliminated the constitutional right to abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Health and Human Services Department told grant recipients that they must continue to offer counseling and referrals for all options, including abortion. Months later, Oklahoma raised concerns about the stipulation, arguing that it stood at odds with its strict abortion laws. The federal agency responded by suggesting that Oklahoma provide such referrals through a national call-in phone line. Even as the state accepted the grant in March 2023, agreeing to disclose the call-in number as a condition, shortly after, it “decided to stop sharing” that information, the appeals panel wrote.
Abortion Has Huge Financial Consequences in a Woman’s Life – And in the Economy
NPR, September 3, 2024
Mostly, Natalie remembers feeling very, very alone. At 24 years old, she was just out of college, struggling to pay bills and find a good job. And she was pregnant. “I had kind of an on-again, off-again boyfriend, and I was taking birth control and we used condoms, so we thought there’s not a really good chance of getting pregnant,” she says. “But when you’re young, sometimes your body has other ideas.” She asked NPR not to use her last name because she fears professional repercussions for telling her story publicly. This was 2010. She was living in Missouri at her uncle’s house, looking for a job where she could use her bachelor’s degree in biology and chemistry — especially one that came with health benefits. She had been uninsured since her dad died when she was a teenager, and her mom wasn’t around or able to offer her very much support. In the meantime, she was working at a daycare center and made barely enough money to support herself. But it wasn’t just Natalie’s immediate future that was at stake — it was her long-term financial security, too. Natalie’s experience illustrates the profound economic consequences that an unplanned pregnancy can have on a woman’s life. The decisions women make — and the options that are available to them — can have lasting effects on their finances, their families, and the economy as a whole. Those options have changed in sometimes unexpected ways since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade two years ago and allowed states to impose strict limits on abortion. The most common reason women seek abortion is not having the economic resources to care for a child, according to data from the Turnaway Study. The landmark research project followed hundreds of women for years after they sought abortions and in some cases were turned away. “We all understand — if we’re parents, or know anybody who’s a parent, or are paying any attention to parents — the ways in which having children impacts the economic lives of families,” says Caitlin Myers, an economist at Middlebury College. “For women in particular, it’s the single biggest economic decision most of them will make in their lifetimes.”
States With Strictest Abortion Laws Offer the Least Support for Women and Families
NBC News, September 4, 2024
States with abortion bans are falling short in helping low-income families, experts say. New research from Northwestern Medicine in Chicago compared state abortion laws to public programs meant to help families, such as paid parental leave and state-funded nutrition programs for families with children. “States with the most severe abortion restrictions have the least public infrastructure to support families,” said Dr. Nigel Madden, a maternal-fetal medicine physician at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, who led the study published Wednesday in the American Journal of Public Health. Previous research has shown that about half of the number of women who seek abortions live below the federal poverty line, while three-quarters do not have enough money to cover housing, transportation and food. About 60% already have at least one child at home. The majority of women in the United States who want an abortion can still get one, said Caitlin Myers, a professor of economics at Middlebury College who studies the economic implications of reproductive policies. “But here is this minority of people who are trapped by the bans,” said Myers, who was not involved with the new research. “They cannot order pills online or travel to have an abortion in another state. They are disproportionately the poorest and most vulnerable of an already largely poor and vulnerable group of people who are seeking abortions.” More than 28 million women who could become pregnant live in states with the most restrictive laws. Compared to less restrictive states, those with the most restrictive abortion bans had the lowest median percentage of Medicaid coverage outside of pregnancy and the highest rates of uninsured women of reproductive age. They also had the highest percentage of births covered by Medicaid, 44%. The most restrictive states also had the highest median percentage –– meaning about half of the states had percentages higher than and half had lower –– of births in which families paid out of pocket, at 4%.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Defends Strong Idaho Abortion Dissent: “I Had a Difference of Opinion”
CBS News, September 3, 2024
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson defended her dissenting opinion in a case concerning an Idaho abortion dispute earlier this year, saying she wanted to “express as clearly as possible” her views on the issue. In June, the high court reinstated a lower court order that blocked Idaho from enforcing its near-total ban when an abortion is needed to preserve the health of the mother while legal proceedings continue, allowing abortions to be performed during certain medical emergencies in the state, although the court did not address the underlying issue at play. “While this court dawdles and the country waits, pregnant people experiencing emergency medical conditions remain in a precarious position, as their doctors are kept in the dark about what the law requires,” she wrote. “A dissent is the opportunity for the justices to express their differing views with respect to what the majority has done,” Jackson said Tuesday on “CBS Mornings.” “And I had a difference of opinion, and I wanted to make clear why I thought what I did in that situation.” The case was the first concerning state abortion law that the justices considered since the Supreme Court rolled back a constitutional right to abortion in Roe v. Wade in 2022, creating a patchwork of access throughout the country and clashes over state-level bans. Jackson said Tuesday that she wanted to make her views on the matter as clear as possible, adding that “the court has a tradition of that” when asked whether she was worried the opinion would be considered too strong. “Lots of justices use terms and phrases that they want to use in order to make a significant point,” Jackson said.
ICYMI: In Case You Missed It
For this year's Women's Equality Day, @jocelyncfrye penned an op-ed in @MsMagazine on how we must fight back against this rogue Supreme Court's continued attacks on women's equality. https://t.co/351DXwoRdf
— National Partnership (@NPWF) September 3, 2024
We respect your privacy. Read our policy.
Note: The information contained in this publication reflects media coverage of women’s health issues and does not necessarily reflect the views of the National Partnership for Women & Families.
