CLARIFICATION: Updated 10/26/2020 at 3:30pm MT to include more links and clarify the debate over the constitutional versus legislative process.

The battle rages on after last month's last-minute move in the Pennsylvania Senate to include anti-abortion language in a budget bill, as well as other constitutional amendments that could restrict voting access.

In about a month, the Pennsylvania General Assembly will revisit a controversial proposal with five separate amendments to the state Constitution. Groups that oppose Senate Bill 106 are using the next few weeks to rally their forces.

SB 106 says "This constitution does not grant the right to tax-payer funded abortion or any other right relating to abortion."

The amendment itself does not restriction abortion or make it illegal, however it would allow state legislators to make future decisions which opponents say would most likely open the door to restrictions.

Laura Nevitt - executive director of the Keystone Progress Education Fund - said in the meantime, groups like hers are reaching out to voice concerns about SB 106, particularly the prospect of an abortion ban.

"The work now is just about educating people about what this constitutional amendment actually would do," said Nevitt, "why it is not good for the people who live in Pennsylvania, and making every effort and attempt possible to prevent it from getting on the ballot."

The Pennsylvania House Republican Caucus describes SB 106 as a "Constitutional Clarification," and says it "does not change current law," but leaves the decision about whether the state will allow abortions up to the General Assembly.

In a Muhlenberg College poll mid-September, 30% of Pennsylvania voters polled said they think abortion should be illegal in all or most cases; 61% percent said it should be legal in all or most cases. Only 8% said they are undecided.

Democrats say GOP lawmakers are using the constitutional amendment process because they know Gov. Tom Wolf would veto legislation about such hot-button issues as abortion and voting access.

The Senate Republican Caucus counters that Pennsylvania voters - through their elected officials - should be allowed to decide these issues.

But this method also means the resolution has to survive two legislative sessions before the amendments could be put on the ballot for a public vote. The second session began Sept. 12.

The Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape also strongly opposes SB 106 and predicts if it's passed, it would be used to block individuals' access to abortions, even in cases of rape or incest.

Donna Greco - public policy and legislative affairs director for the coalition - said their view is that it violates bodily autonomy and reproductive freedom. But for now, she said, a person still has the right to get an abortion.

"Currently, abortion is still legal and protected in Pennsylvania," said Greco, "as well as the range of reproductive healthcare, contraception, emergency contraception. So right now, those services are still legal here throughout the Commonwealth."

In the meantime, Gov. Wolf already filed a lawsuit to protect reproductive rights in the Commonwealth. He holds that the amendments are "constitutionally invalid."



get more stories like this via email

Health clinics in New England and elsewhere are coping with a sharp uptick in requests for long-acting contraceptives in the wake of the election.

Planned Parenthood centers in New Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont report more than double their weekly average appointment inquiries for intrauterine devices - or IUD's - and the birth control implant.

Planned Parenthood of Northern New England CEO Nicole Clegg said the organization had exceeded its monthly average for vasectomy consultations by mid-November.

"There's a lot of anxiety," said Clegg, "that people have around whether or not they're going to have access to their preferred birth control choice."

Clegg said patients are also calling with concerns about the availability of gender-affirming care.

She said the increase mirrors what the organization experienced after President-elect Donald Trump's first win in 2016, and the eventual overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022.

In New Hampshire, abortion remains accessible up to twenty-four weeks of pregnancy, but health care advocates note that state law does not expressly protect abortion rights and that anything could change under the new Republican trifecta at the statehouse.

Clegg said New Englanders are already showing a heightened interest in volunteering at health centers to ensure patients can get the care they need.

"We've had these intense fights before," said Clegg, "and time and time again the American public has stood up for Planned Parenthood and our rights. We think they'll do the same again this time."

Clegg said a loss of federal funds would reduce peoples' access to vital, preventative health care services.

The co-leaders of Trump's new Department of Government Efficiency have already vowed to cut $300 million earmarked for groups like Planned Parenthood, which they claim pursue a progressive agenda.





get more stories like this via email

A majority of South Dakotans have voted to maintain a strict abortion ban but other factors are shifting the landscape for reproductive care in the state.

Of the 10 states voting on abortion during the 2024 election, South Dakota was one of three to keep a ban in place.

Kim Floren, director of the Justice through Empowerment Network, which provides financial assistance to people seeking abortions, said the state's view on the issue is not new but concern is growing over how the federal government may affect reproductive rights.

"I'm feeling the panic from people who are in areas that maybe haven't experienced what we've experienced as far as barriers go," Floren noted. "The reality is that we as a community can figure out how to take care of one another."

The Justice through Empowerment Network provides assistance with travel and transportation, child care, lodging, interpreters, birth control and medical procedure funding. Floren pointed out the organization supports 30 to 40 people per month. The final tally for Amendment G, which would have established a right to abortion in the state's constitution, was 41% for and 59% against.

South Dakotans voted in 2006 and 2008 against near-total abortion bans but Floren stressed since then, President-elect Donald Trump's first term made people feel "emboldened to be more vocal." Still, she acknowledged his second term will begin in a different context than his first.

"Before Dobbs, we did not have all of these reliable, safe websites where you can order abortion pills from and have them sent to your house for extremely cheap," Floren observed. "In some ways, access here has gotten better."

Floren added Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota will return to his post after running for vice president on the Democratic ticket. Walz in 2023 signed a bill protecting patients who travel to Minnesota for abortion care and their providers from legal penalties in other states.


get more stories like this via email

It is now up to Wisconsin Supreme Court justices to decide the fate of an abortion law from the mid-1800s.

A circuit court determined last year an 1849 law does not apply to "medically consented" abortions in Wisconsin. The high court heard arguments Monday about whether a 1985 state law overrides the older one, allowing abortions before the point at which a fetus could survive outside the womb.

Jenny Higgins, professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said while the impact of this case is critically important, even if the 1849 law is determined to be unenforceable, returning to the status quo would mean a dire landscape for abortion access.

"Even though abortion is technically available at clinics in Wisconsin right now, it's heavily restricted," Higgins explained. "Because of insurance and Medicaid prohibitions, people have to pay out-of-pocket for a service that should be covered by insurance."

The 1849 law, which was brought to light after Roe v. Wade was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court, prompted a statewide freeze on abortion services for more than a year. Higgins noted if Wisconsin's high court rules the law still applies today, the state would be looking at another abortion freeze.

Abortion access disproportionately affects those who are already the most marginalized, Higgins pointed out. She noted while people from all walks of life may find themselves needing abortion care, factors like poverty and racism make it much harder for some to achieve reproductive autonomy, compared to those with more economic and social resources.

"Those effects make it much harder for folks to be able to access contraceptive care, be in relationships that are stable and healthy and communicative, to be able to see past the end of the day into one's future if you are, again, mostly focused on your own economic scarcity or figuring out how to feed your kids, or figuring out how not to get evicted," Higgins outlined.

The 1976 Hyde Amendment, established three years after Roe v. Wade, prohibits the use of federal funds for abortion. Higgins hopes federal lawmakers will focus more on this amendment when considering the barriers to abortion care.


get more stories like this via email