Logic on abortion law runs counter to gun law

This month ushers in new laws that take effect in states all across the country.

In New York, for instance, the Concealed Carry Improvement Act strengthens requirements for firearm permits and keeps New Yorkers safe. It joins other states in enforcing greater legal protections by curbing gun deaths and mass shootings.

New York ranks second in the country, by some measures, for passing firearm restrictions, but despite this, it is reported that 70% of gun crime in New York is from weapons procured out-of-state. How do we enforce protections when individuals in neighboring states like Ohio and Pennsylvania with less restrictive laws bring or sell firearms over state lines?

This dilemma escapes Gov. Kathy Hochul. Like states that disrespect our gun restrictions, New York reciprocates an even greater contempt for states that have abortion restrictions. New York’s Reproductive Freedom and Equity Grant Program, which advanced in the State Senate Health Committee this week, would subsidize abortions for out-of-state women if it passes.

Currently, New York’s Family Planning Benefits include the service of free abortion for any state resident under 223% of the Federal Poverty Level. However, if the new reproductive freedom and equity bill becomes law, some 190,000 to 280,000 women from other states might travel to New York seeking an abortion. And the measure states it would subsidize “Anyone who seeks abortion in the state” and “regardless of their ability to pay.”

Is it an irony that New York shares in another second-place state distinction that diverges from our sensible gun protection measures: The Kaiser Family Foundation named our state second for the highest rate of abortions. The bill is called by opponents a more transparent name, the Free Abortions for Out-of-Staters Act. The fine print indicates taxpayers would cover travel, child care housing, and paid employment leave for out-of-state abortion seekers.

A co-sponsor, former state Assembly member Yuh-Line Niou, describes it as a way “to expand our capacity to deal with the major influx of out-of-state patients.”

If it makes sense that non-residents of our state are generally not eligible for a New York state pistol license, why should non-residents of our state be eligible for an abortion? And not just eligible, but paid for to some extent by New York state.

For me, this is greater than a budget concern. New York enacted restrictions on guns to protect human beings, and we can assume Pennsylvania and Ohio enacted restrictions on abortion to protect human beings. Limits on both gun rights and abortion rights advance non-violent protections.

Offering financial incentives to abortion clinics and non-profit organizations to increase access for women who travel from states with restrictive abortion laws makes this measure an even greater un-neighborly infringement. What would New Yorkers think if Ohio subsidized gun manufacturers to provide firearm permits to residents of New York? And their travel expenses, too?

Should there not be some interstate cooperation to honor a state’s laws intended to protect people?

Carol Crossed is president of the Board of Directors of Feminists Choosing Life of New York.