Bill Overview
Title: Prohibiting Abortion on Federal Lands Act
Description: This bill prohibits the federal government from promoting, supporting, or contracting with abortion entities, or otherwise expanding access to abortions on federal lands or in federal facilities, including military installations, national parks, court houses, and other federal buildings.
Sponsors: Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL]
Target Audience
Population: Women (and potentially transgender and non-binary individuals) of reproductive age reliant on federal facilities for abortion services globally
Estimated Size: 1000000
- The bill affects individuals who might seek abortion services on federal lands, and this group primarily includes women of reproductive age (15-49).
- According to global data, there are approximately 1.9 billion women of reproductive age (15-49).
- However, the bill explicitly impacts those who would seek abortions specifically in locations where federal jurisdiction applies.
- In many countries, either federal lands are not used for such services, or the impact of the bill would not resonate due to legal structures or lower reliance on federal lands for healthcare.
Reasoning
- There are around 70 million women of reproductive age (15-49) in the U.S., but only a small subgroup directly relies on federal lands for abortions.
- Those affected are likely in areas with significant federal land holdings, like military bases or remote national parks.
- Many individuals may not be directly impacted due to alternative access to abortion services outside these federal lands and facilities.
- The budget and program size suggest a limited number of facilities would be directly impacted, thus affecting a small population group relative to the whole country.
- Transgender and non-binary individuals relying on federal services are also part of the target group, though their exact numbers are harder to estimate.
Simulated Interviews
Military spouse (Fort Hood, Texas)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about how this will affect families living on the base who might need these services.
- Having limited access to healthcare options, this just adds another layer of stress.
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 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 6 |
Park Ranger (San Francisco, California)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not particularly worried since there are plenty of healthcare services available nearby.
- I think the policy is unnecessary and more symbolic than impactful locally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Student (Anchorage, Alaska)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's frustrating because there's already limited access to healthcare options around here.
- Many people depend on the federal clinic for various services, including reproductive healthcare.
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 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Government employee (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't feel this policy will directly affect my life.
- I understand the importance of healthcare access, but I have ample alternatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Environmental scientist (Las Vegas, Nevada)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm disappointed by the restriction on federal lands.
- This policy adds to uncertainties about personal rights and access to essential services.
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 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Tour guide (Grand Canyon Village, Arizona)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy introduces more hurdles to accessing full healthcare services.
- I fear it might dissuade people from seeking timely healthcare interventions.
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 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 5 |
Lawyer (New York, New York)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I doubt this policy will have a profound effect on access in large urban areas.
- It's more of a concern for those in remote locations than those in big cities.
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 |
Nurse (Honolulu, Hawaii)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could complicate service provision at our clinic.
- We might have to refer more cases externally, which could delay critical care.
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 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
University student (Cheyenne, Wyoming)
Age: 21 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems like it could limit emergency service availability.
- It's already tough to get specialized healthcare here without more restrictions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
Software engineer (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm unaffected directly by this, but I empathize with those who might struggle.
- It's an added restriction in a country already polarized on healthcare access.
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 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $12000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $16000000)
Year 3: $12000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $16000000)
Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $14000000)
Year 10: $8000000 (Low: $6000000, High: $12000000)
Year 100: $3000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $5000000)
Key Considerations
- The federal government needs to assess the jurisdictional reach of the law on different types of federal lands.
- Potential conflicts with state laws where federal land is located might necessitate additional legal guidance or policy alterations.
- The legislation could create precedents affecting other health services offered on federal properties.