Bill Overview
Title: Prohibiting Federal Emergencies for Abortion Act
Description: This bill prohibits the President and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from declaring a federal emergency relating to abortion. Specifically, neither the President nor HHS may declare a national emergency for purposes of (1) promoting, supporting, or expanding access to abortion; or (2) taking adverse action against or litigating against states that prohibit or otherwise restrict abortion.
Sponsors: Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL]
Target Audience
Population: Women of reproductive age and abortion care providers
Estimated Size: 83000000
- The bill impacts individuals who seek abortions by potentially limiting federal responses in emergencies that affect abortion access.
- Health facilities and providers involved in abortion services may be impacted by a lack of federal support in emergencies.
- States that restrict or prohibit abortion could potentially face fewer federal challenges.
- The bill could impact advocacy groups focused on reproductive rights, who might rely on federal support measures during emergencies.
- Women of reproductive age, around 1.9 billion globally, could be indirectly impacted by the federal policy change.
Reasoning
- The policy is likely to have varied impacts across different demographics, with a more significant impact on those directly involved in or reliant on abortion services.
- Women of reproductive age represent a significant portion of the potentially affected population.
- Health providers and facilities that offer abortion services may see a moderate to high impact due to the reduced ability for federal intervention in emergencies.
- Advocacy groups may face increased challenges, affecting their operational capacity and outreach.
- Many in the population will see no direct impact, especially those not involved in reproductive health services.
- Given the budget constraint, any federal actions would have to be highly targeted and cost-effective.
Simulated Interviews
Nurse (Austin, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned that if an emergency happens, like a severe supply disruption of essential medicines or resources, we will be left without help.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Lawyer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is quite alarming as it may empower states to restrict rights further without fear of federal pushback.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
College Student (Savannah, GA)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about the future of reproductive rights and accessibility. This policy adds uncertainty for students like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Obstetrician (Salt Lake City, UT)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Professionally, I'm concerned about what limitations this policy may place on my ability to provide comprehensive care.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Retail Worker (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Federal support can be crucial in emergencies. I fear that we'll lack necessary aid when most needed.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
State Senator (Columbus, OH)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy provides states with needed autonomy without federal overreach.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Reproductive Health Researcher (Seattle, WA)
Age: 33 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could set a concerning national precedent, leading to degraded access to abortion services.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Fast Food Worker (Baton Rouge, LA)
Age: 21 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about losing access to crucial resources when emergencies strike.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Policy Analyst (Miami, FL)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy limits federal action in pivotal areas, which can have a domino effect on various health services.
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 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
School Teacher (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy restricts necessary federal support in emergencies, impacting women's rights negatively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)
Year 2: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)
Year 3: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)
Year 5: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)
Year 10: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)
Year 100: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)
Key Considerations
- The prohibition could limit the federal government's ability to respond to healthcare crises affecting abortion access during emergencies.
- State governments might interpret the absence of federal emergency declarations as an encouragement to pursue further restrictions on abortion.
- The bill might have indirect effects on healthcare access in scenarios of natural disasters or public health emergencies.