Your bag is empty.
Sex & Relationships
Ozempic Where? BBW Porn Is Exploding in Popularity As bodies get smaller across the board, bigger bodies are more in demand than ever in porn.
The future of abortion access is deeply uncertain. That is unless the next administration enacts a clear plan to restore and strengthen the availability of the procedure. Voters who’ve had or will need abortions deserve to know where the candidates stand on making sure abortion is not just a right, but is truly accessible. What are their visionary plans and how would they achieve it?
While reproductive health care has always been a much-discussed topic during campaign cycles, ever-increasing high stakes are adding more pressure than ever. With a case at the Supreme Court threatening to undo protections solidified in 2016, abortion rights supporters are wondering where presidential hopefuls stand and who will protect the right to an abortion and work to restore access. But we still don’t know.
After a resurgence of the #AskAboutAbortion campaign—an action I started during the 2016 Democratic primaries—moderators in this cycle began to ask candidates about their reproductive rights plans. But it still feels like the candidates don’t understand the gravity of the issue beyond the outdated “safe, legal, and rare” talking point brought up on the October debate stage.
Rather than yearning for a debate moderator to ask this and other important questions, I decided to reach out to the campaigns to ask myself.
The focus of a reproductive justice framework demands we address the economic and racist circumstances influencing a person’s ability to decide if, when, and how to grow their family and raise their family free from coercion and violence. The framework—created by Black women—has been in existence for 25 years, but it only recently made it to the presidential debate stage via Secretary Castro, Harris, and Warren–and that was only in part. As candidates prepare to hit the stage again tomorrow, we can’t predict whether they’ll talk in broad strokes or actually touch on some of the issues reproductive justice activists have worked on for decades. Now that Trump has packed the courts with anti-abortion justices, what’s the plan?
In November, most of the candidates responded to a New York Times survey indicating their positions on a number of reproductive rights issues, such as making medication abortion pills available over-the-counter and repealing the Hyde Amendment, the discriminatory policy that bars Medicaid insurance coverage of abortions. And while almost all of the Democratic candidates have declared their support for repealing the Hyde Amendment, we don’t know, for example, which candidates are willing to take the extra step of vetoing any legislation that would codify the Hyde Amendment into law. The distinction is critical—Republican senators have snuck the policy into unrelated bills to try and make it law, including in a 2015 human trafficking bill. While the language was eventually removed, it slipped past Democratic senators and threatened to expand the reach of the annual budget rider.
Rather than yearning for a debate moderator to ask this and other important questions, I decided to reach out to the campaigns to ask myself. Only four responded—South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg, former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, billionaire businessman Tom Steyer, and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren–but their answers paint an important picture of the potential political future of abortion access.
Patrick and Warren’s campaigns, for example, said they would use their veto power to strike down laws that would codify the Hyde Amendment. When asked if they supported efforts to remove financial barriers to abortion care, Patrick and Steyer said yes, and Buttigieg and Warren called for the passage of the Women’s Health Protection Act on top of increased efforts to reduce logistical barriers to abortions across the nation.
Several candidates told the New York Times that they would commit to making medication abortion pills available over-the-counter and all four campaigns I interviewed, including Patrick’s who didn’t respond to the New York Times survey, agreed. Patrick’s campaign explained he believed it “could help individuals who live in remote parts of the country or areas with few abortion clinics with access to healthcare.” Likewise, Warren stated, “as President, I will direct the FDA to lift restrictions on misoprostol and mifepristone so that they can be made available over the counter.”
I asked the campaigns how they might address prosecutorial overreach that’s allowed for the criminalization of people who self-managed an abortion. Buttigieg’s campaign cited the codification of Roe v. Wade (although it doesn’t currently prevent the charging of these women with a crime). Patrick’s campaign committed to ensuring “no federal resources are used to enforce laws that [limit] the ability to exercise constitutionally-secured rights,” while Warren reiterated that “[n]o one should be sent to jail or criminalized for ending their own pregnancy, and no doctor should be sent to jail or criminalized for performing an abortion.” Only Steyer pledged to expunge the records of anyone who was “previously convicted” of using medication abortion “at home illegally under current law.”
It’s great to see that some of the candidates are supportive of making abortion pills available over the counter.
I asked Dr. Daniel Grossman, professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, San Francisco what he thought upon hearing these responses from the politicians. “It’s great to see that some of the candidates are supportive of making abortion pills available over the counter,” he says. “I hope they would appoint an FDA commissioner who is equally supportive. But it’s also important for them to recognize that politicians should not interfere with the scientific review the FDA would conduct.”
When asked how their campaign’s presidential administration would work to increase abortion access for minors, only Steyer and Warren stated their opposition to parental involvement laws and committed to increasing access to abortion care for young people under 18. (Research has shown most minors do tell their parents about their desire to have an abortion and those who do not fear abuse or being thrown out of their homes.) Additionally, I wanted to know the campaigns’ commitment to young people who decide to not have an abortion or are unable to obtain one. The Patrick, Steyer, and Warren campaigns committed to instructing the Department of Education to support the rights of pregnant and parenting students. While Patrick didn’t give specifics, Steyer explained, “Under my administration, the Department of Education would establish and enforce guidelines for flexible scheduling, remote coursework, and in-school child-care for students with a newborn or young child.” Similarly, Warren would call on the Department of Education to support the rights of pregnant and parenting students and ensure access to free universal childcare “paid for by my Ultra-Millionaire Tax on the wealthiest 0.1% of Americans.”
For Gloria Malone, co-founder of No Teen Shame, this is the first she’d heard of candidates being asked about support for pregnant and parenting students. “It’s indicative of the conversation moving forward, and we need more,” she explained in a phone interview. “As a society, we have to undo the stigma towards young parents, to continue our education in shame-free and safe environments.”
A full-three quarters of abortion patients are poor and half paid for their abortions out of pocket, several women have already been charged with murder on suspicion of self-managing abortions.
There are so many reasons to demand more of presidential hopefuls’ plans. The FDA’s intense restrictions currently do not allow medication abortion to be dispensed at pharmacies or via mail, putting patients who are unable to travel to a clinic at a disadvantage. Overregulation of medication abortion and telemedicine provision of abortion blocks opportunities for localized or at-home care. Not to mention a full three-quarters of abortion patients are poor and half paid for their abortions out of pocket, several women have already been charged with murder on suspicion of self-managing abortions, young people are stigmatized no matter what they decide to do with their pregnancies and, according to a 2017 study of National Network of Abortion Fund callers, second-trimester patients had to travel three times farther than those in the first trimester.
Abortion access is on the ballot. Everyone who loves someone who had an abortion has the opportunity to weigh in on the conversation. It’s important we question candidates on their commitment to supporting everyone deciding if, when, and how to grow their families. As a nation, do we truly believe healthcare—including abortion—is a right or not? That, of course, is up to the voters.