Bill Overview
Title: Ensuring Access to Abortion Act of 2022
Description: This bill prohibits anyone acting under state law from interfering with a person's ability to access out-of-state abortion services. ( Abortion services includes the use of any drugs that are approved to terminate pregnancies and any health care services related to an abortion, whether or not provided at the same time or on the same day.) Specifically, the bill prohibits any person acting under state law from preventing, restricting, impeding, or retaliating against health care providers who provide legal abortion services to out-of-state residents, any person or entity who helps health care providers to provide such services, any person who travels to another state to obtain such services, any person or entity who helps another person travel to another state to obtain such services, or the movement in interstate commerce of drugs that are approved to terminate pregnancies. The Department of Justice may enforce this bill through civil actions; the bill also establishes a private right of action for violations.
Sponsors: Rep. Fletcher, Lizzie [D-TX-7]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals seeking abortion services including cross-state access
Estimated Size: 630000
- The bill specifically focuses on individuals who seek abortion services, which can include a wide range of people including women of childbearing age. This age range is generally considered to be 15-49 years globally, according to the United Nations Population Division.
- The Guttmacher Institute estimates that globally, 121 million unintended pregnancies occur each year, with a significant proportion of these resulting in abortions.
- Globally, according to the World Health Organization, approximately 73 million induced abortions occur each year. Thus, the bill would potentially impact individuals within this context who seek abortions in contexts where barriers exist to accessing safe services within their own state or country.
- Since abortion policies and access vary significantly across countries and regions, individuals in countries with restrictive abortion laws or limited access to abortion services might be more directly impacted by such a bill if traveling to the U.S. for services or if they reside in the U.S.
Reasoning
- The Ensuring Access to Abortion Act of 2022 primarily impacts individuals of childbearing age, particularly females, who live in states with restrictive abortion laws. It provides legal protections for cross-state access to abortion services, ensuring freedom of movement for those seeking such services.
- The policy mainly targets a demographic that includes young adult women but also impacts other entities, including healthcare providers and those assisting in abortion access. Given this, the interviews sample a variety of people, including those directly and indirectly affected by the policy.
- The policy has budget constraints which limit its scope. Given the high cost of healthcare and legal actions, this budget necessitates efficient allocation, primarily safeguarding legal aspects related to cross-state abortion access.
- Scenarios in the interviews reflect diverse experiences, including those who are directly impacted (high or medium impact) and those who are less affected due to living in states with existing access (low or none). The population distribution reflects a realistic representation of various geographical and socio-economic backgrounds.
Simulated Interviews
college student (Texas)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I felt trapped when I discovered I was pregnant. Before this policy, I had no legal protection if I traveled out of state.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 1 |
software engineer (California)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While the policy doesn't impact me directly since California protects abortion access, I worry about others who aren't as fortunate.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
nurse (Mississippi)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's heartbreaking seeing women struggle to access care. This bill makes it easier for them to seek the help they need.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
teacher (New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy is essential. I want everyone across the country to have the same rights I do.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
part-time worker (Alabama)
Age: 19 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I didn't have many options before. This policy could really help people in my situation in the future.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 1 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 1 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 1 |
freelance writer (Florida)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy reassures me that if I ever need to seek services, I can safely travel for them.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
doctor (Oregon)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Although Oregon provides access, I support this bill to ensure equitable care regardless of state barriers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
retail manager (Louisiana)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Getting healthcare services shouldn't depend on your zip code. This bill helps level the playing field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 1 |
healthcare administrator (Illinois)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is about human rights and access to care. Every state should allow safe and legal options.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
waitress (Georgia)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I was afraid of what my partner or state laws might do if I pursue an out-of-state service. Now, I feel a bit safer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 1 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $10500000 (Low: $5250000, High: $21000000)
Year 3: $11025000 (Low: $5512500, High: $22050000)
Year 5: $12155000 (Low: $6561000, High: $24310000)
Year 10: $14918980 (Low: $8970000, High: $29850000)
Year 100: $130000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $150000000)
Key Considerations
- The legal complexity of enforcing the bill across multiple states with differing views on abortion rights.
- The DOJ's capacity to handle increased civil case loads if violations increase.
- Potential backlash or support influencing future legislative or legal challenges.