Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8354

Bill Overview

Title: Defunding Abortion Transportation Act

Description: This bill prohibits federal Medicaid payment for nonemergency transportation that is used to access medical care or services for which federal payment is prohibited (e.g., abortion services).

Sponsors: Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1]

Target Audience

Population: Women who rely on Medicaid-funded transportation to access abortion services

Estimated Size: 6000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

part-time retail worker (rural Alabama)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I've relied on Medicaid transportation to get to my appointments.
  • Without this support, I'd have to take time off work.
  • This policy feels like an attack on low-income women needing healthcare.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 3 4
Year 2 3 5
Year 3 4 5
Year 5 4 5
Year 10 5 6
Year 20 5 6

student (urban Ohio)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Living in the city, I can manage without Medicaid transport, but it'll mean more money on public transport.
  • It adds stress during a time that's already hard.
  • I know people who have no other options.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 8 8

unemployed (suburban Texas)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't drive, and local transport options are not reliable or comprehensive.
  • This makes it much harder to access necessary medical services.
  • It seems punitive to someone already struggling.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 3 4
Year 2 3 5
Year 3 4 5
Year 5 4 5
Year 10 5 6
Year 20 5 7

server (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 19 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's frustrating because I barely make ends meet as it is.
  • Costs add up quickly when you have to find other transportation.
  • The policy doesn't consider people like me who want to take charge of their own lives.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 5 6
Year 5 6 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 8 8

full-time caregiver (rural Arkansas)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I rely on Medicaid to reach clinics that are far away.
  • This policy pressures me more financially.
  • It's concerning for my health and schedule.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 5
Year 2 4 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 5 6
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 6 7

nurse (New York City, New York)

Age: 26 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Public transport in NYC is good, but emergencies are a concern.
  • While I don't directly use Medicaid transport, it could be an option if needed in the future.
  • The policy could force people to unsafe or unsuitable alternatives.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 9
Year 20 9 9

restaurant manager (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Access to healthcare should be universal, not limited by transportation.
  • This pushes back on personal independence and freedom.
  • I can manage, but others in worse situations will suffer more.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 9 9

unemployed (Phoenix, Arizona)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Transport is vital for my medical needs.
  • This policy removes a crucial support system.
  • I feel neglected by the system.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 3 5
Year 2 3 5
Year 3 4 6
Year 5 4 6
Year 10 4 7
Year 20 5 7

teacher (Atlanta, Georgia)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy creates more barriers for women in difficult situations.
  • I realize my privilege in not being directly impacted.
  • Solidarity with those who need these services more urgently.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 8
Year 3 7 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 9
Year 20 8 9

graphic designer (Denver, Colorado)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see this creating more social inequity.
  • The policy feels like a step backward.
  • Access to healthcare should be prioritized, not diminished.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 7
Year 5 6 8
Year 10 7 8
Year 20 7 9

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $350000 (Low: $250000, High: $450000)

Year 2: $370000 (Low: $270000, High: $470000)

Year 3: $385000 (Low: $285000, High: $485000)

Year 5: $400000 (Low: $300000, High: $500000)

Year 10: $425000 (Low: $325000, High: $525000)

Year 100: $440000 (Low: $335000, High: $545000)

Key Considerations