Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3713

Bill Overview

Title: Reproductive Choice Act

Description: This bill provides statutory authority for certain Supreme Court holdings on abortion rights and restrictions in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey . In Roe , the Court held that the Constitution protects a woman's decision to terminate her pregnancy. In Casey , the Court reaffirmed this holding and additionally held that state abortion regulations may not place a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before fetal viability (i.e., an undue burden). However, a state may (1) restrict abortions after viability, except when a pregnancy endangers the life or health of the woman; and (2) enact regulations to further the health or safety of a woman seeking an abortion, except for unnecessary health regulations that present a substantial obstacle to a woman seeking an abortion. The bill provides statutory authority for these holdings. It also specifies that the bill does not affect laws regarding conscience protection.

Sponsors: Sen. Collins, Susan M. [R-ME]

Target Audience

Population: Women of childbearing age and related stakeholders

Estimated Size: 64000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Retail Worker (Texas)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I worry about what would happen if I got pregnant again and needed an abortion. Knowing I have the right to choose is very important to me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 8 4
Year 10 8 3
Year 20 8 3

Nurse (California)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While I personally don't plan to have an abortion, I believe it's crucial that the choice remains available for those who might need it. It's about supporting women's autonomy.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Teacher (Florida)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy ensures that my partner and I have options if we face an unplanned pregnancy. It's comforting to know that autonomy is protected.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

College Student (New York)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I’m relieved that efforts are being made to protect reproductive rights. This bill gives me hope for future generations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Stay-at-home mom (Alabama)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe life is precious, and knowing this policy exists is troubling, but I understand the importance of choice for others.

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

Doctor (Ohio)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could make my work easier in terms of patient access. Women's health shouldn’t be politicized.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

IT specialist (Mississippi)

Age: 31 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having gone through a challenging pregnancy decision, this policy provides vital reassurance if I face similar challenges again.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 6 3
Year 3 7 3
Year 5 8 3
Year 10 8 3
Year 20 8 3

State legislator (Wyoming)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While I don't agree with the policy, I recognize the importance of aligning federal and state regulations for consistency.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Waitress (Colorado)

Age: 23 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Access to abortion is a relief, especially as I'm not financially ready for a child.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired (Nevada)

Age: 57 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I’ve fought for women’s rights my whole life; it’s gratifying to see legislative steps to protect our choices.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)

Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)

Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)

Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)

Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)

Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)

Key Considerations