Bill Overview
Title: Reproductive Health Travel Fund Act of 2022
Description: This bill authorizes the Department of the Treasury to award grants to pay for travel, childcare, and other expenses of an individual seeking access to abortion services. Eligible grant recipients must be nonprofit or community-based organizations that assist individuals seeking abortion services through programs that are unbiased and medically and factually accurate. The grants may not be used to pay for abortion procedures.
Sponsors: Sen. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI]
Target Audience
Population: People seeking access to abortion services, involving travel
Estimated Size: 500000
- Approximately 73 million induced abortions occurred worldwide each year between 2015 and 2019. The number indicates a substantial potential global need for abortion-related travel support, recognizing that not all individuals will require this or have access to it.
- Access to abortion services, including the necessity to travel to obtain them, is unevenly distributed globally and within countries due to varying legal, ethical, and medical landscapes.
- In the US, data from the Guttmacher Institute indicates that national rates reflect about 930,160 abortions in 2020, with demand potentially growing as a result of increased travel barriers.
- Following the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision, access in the US became more fragmented, increasing the likelihood of travel for reproductive services.
- Significant potential beneficiaries extend beyond individuals needing abortion, including those involved in supportive care such as childcare and nonprofit organizations ensuring access.
Reasoning
- The policy aims to aid those in need of travel support for seeking abortion services, reflecting significant segments of the population affected by recent legislative changes.
- Given the budget allocated for the policy and the target population, a significant portion of those seeking abortions who face travel barriers will be impacted.
- The policy coverage extends indirectly to childcare needs and logistical support, benefiting a wider demographic extending beyond just the individuals directly seeking abortions.
- While impacts will be concentrated among those most affected by current barriers, a proportion of the population will not experience direct change due to availability of local services or differing personal circumstances.
- Budget limits imply that only a fraction of the entire potential population needing support could be effectively covered, necessitating prioritization.
Simulated Interviews
Student (Texas)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to reproductive health services is a right, and travel assistance would tremendously ease the financial burden.
- Without local options, travel is necessary, but currently too costly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Nonprofit Worker (New York)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The additional funding could expand our capacity to help those in need significantly.
- Policy would make a difference for many facing logistical and economic hurdles.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Healthcare Provider (California)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Support for travel would reduce the stress and delay for many patients suffering under restricted options.
- This fund can complement existing services to streamline access.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retail Worker (Alabama)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Droneing costs of travel and childcare make seeking services impossible without support.
- This grant would allow me to focus more on work and family without additional financial strain.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Tech Specialist (Illinois)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While my access is direct, I see so many struggling, and this fund could help them.
- Only realistic support for my friends and colleagues out of state.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Freelance Artist (Florida)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything that covers costs for other concerns so I can focus on essential healthcare is beneficial.
- Feeling of support is as important as financial relief.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Unemployed (Montana)
Age: 56 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Travel for such services in itself is daunting, without assistance, efforts are futile.
- A travel fund would provide necessary hope for the financially insecure.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Mechanic (Colorado)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We neither benefit directly, but knowing others have this safety net broadens our support framework.
- Financial peace of mind can amplify overall healthcare across communities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Barista (West Virginia)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 9.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving access helps my community. As someone who provides support, it fills a gap in aid.
- Empathy and funds can be transformational.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Nurse (Nevada)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There’s a clear need for travel accommodations for healthcare access.
- Seeing less stress in my patients would be a professional win.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Year 2: $1050000000 (Low: $840000000, High: $1260000000)
Year 3: $1102500000 (Low: $882000000, High: $1323000000)
Year 5: $1215500000 (Low: $972400000, High: $1458600000)
Year 10: $1488500000 (Low: $1190800000, High: $1786200000)
Year 100: $2000000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2400000000)
Key Considerations
- The evolving legal landscape for reproductive rights makes the long-term need for such travel support challenging to predict with certainty.
- The level of adherence and eligibility rules applied by nonprofit organizations distributing the funds will impact the program's reach and effectiveness.
- Socio-political factors and potential changes in state-level restrictions could drastically alter travel patterns and necessary funding levels.
- Monitoring and evaluating program outcomes and efficiencies will be crucial in maintaining accountability and ensuring funds are appropriately utilized.