Bill Overview
Title: No Pro-Abortion Task Force Act
Description: This bill prohibits federal funding of the Reproductive Healthcare Access Task Force. The Department of Health and Human Services launched the task force on January 21, 2022, to identify and coordinate departmental activities related to accessing sexual and reproductive health care.
Sponsors: Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
Target Audience
Population: People seeking reproductive health care services
Estimated Size: 50000000
- The Reproductive Healthcare Access Task Force focuses on sexual and reproductive health care, which includes abortion services.
- Restricting federal funding for this task force may impact individuals seeking reproductive health care services, including sexual health information, contraceptives, and abortion services.
- Individuals who rely on federal programs for reproductive health care access may be affected, especially those with low incomes or those who live in areas with limited access to health services.
- Healthcare providers and organizations that work with the task force may also be affected by changes in funding and support.
Reasoning
- To appropriately assess the population affected by the 'No Pro-Abortion Task Force Act', I'll consider individuals from various demographics including age, gender, and socio-economic background, focusing particularly on those who depend more on federal aid for reproductive health services.
- I will ensure to cover diverse locations, as accessibility to healthcare can significantly vary between urban and rural settings, and can influence the degree to which the policy affects individuals.
- While the budget cap indicates a moderate scale initiative, the significant potential long-term impact necessitates evaluating wellbeing over extended periods, as withdrawal of resources may take time to materialize in personal circumstances.
- The number of people directly impacted is fairly high given the defined target population size of 50 million, which includes individuals seeking different types of reproductive health services, not limited to abortion.
- It's vital to capture voices of those minimally impacted as well, to paint a full picture of the policy's reach.
Simulated Interviews
waitress (New York, NY)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on federal assistance for my healthcare needs, including birth control.
- If this policy defunds important programs, I worry about losing access to affordable healthcare.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 7 |
teacher (Austin, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about losing access to reliable family planning resources.
- Policies like this may force women to make difficult choices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 7 |
student (rural Kentucky)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about navigating my health needs without federal help.
- Traveling to urban centers for care isn’t easy or affordable for me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 2 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 6 |
healthcare provider at a federally funded clinic (Miami, FL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will likely reduce funding for essential services we provide.
- I am particularly worried about our ability to continue offering free contraceptive services.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 7 |
HR manager (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 56 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support women’s access to reproductive health services.
- This bill could set back years of progress on women's rights.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 9 |
college student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 19 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to affordable reproductive health care is crucial for me and my peers.
- I fear that this policy will negatively impact accessibility.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 8 |
nurse (Bismarck, ND)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My concern is for underserved areas where this funding is most critical.
- Rural areas don’t have the resources to fill the gap if federal support is reduced.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 8 |
non-profit manager (Seattle, WA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 9.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We partner with government funded tasks forces for community health programs.
- Cutting funding can jeopardize essential outreach efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 9 |
doctor (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies that restrict healthcare funding concerns me greatly.
- The health of low-income patients will suffer without proper funding.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 9 |
unemployed (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm already struggling to maintain my health with current resources.
- This policy could place me in an even tougher spot financially and healthwise.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 2 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $220000000)
Year 2: $205000000 (Low: $185000000, High: $225000000)
Year 3: $210000000 (Low: $190000000, High: $230000000)
Year 5: $220000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $240000000)
Year 10: $250000000 (Low: $230000000, High: $270000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)
Key Considerations
- Current annual federal funding to the task force is estimated at around $50 million, but savings vary based on actual task force allocation and potential overlap with other departmental activities.
- The direct budgetary savings need to be considered against potential increased costs or inefficiencies incurred elsewhere without the task force's coordinating role.
- There might be indirect socio-economic costs and state-level expenditure adjustments that are not captured as federal budgetary impacts.