Houston Chronicle

Measure may curb access to abortion

Trump’s plan would pull funds from clinics that offer procedure

- By Andrea Zelinski

AUSTIN — The Trump administra­tion’s plan to yank federal funding from clinics that provide or recommend abortions would make the controvers­ial procedure even more difficult to get in Texas.

That’s what people on both sides of the abortion debate are saying as they await rules from President Donald Trump that his staff said will mirror a Reagan-era policy that survived a legal challenge but was never fully implemente­d.

“It has implicatio­ns beyond just Planned Parenthood is going to lose funding. It can actually impact health care on a larger scale,” said Heather Busby, former executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Texas who now leads the Circle of Health Internatio­nal.

The Trump administra­tion had planned to announce the new rule Friday, dealing a win just before election season to anti-abortion conservati­ves who want the president to curtail access to the procedure. Although the administra­tion has yet to release details, people close to the president say the policy would withhold money from facilities or organizati­ons that either promote or refer patients to abortion providers.

Should the rule go into place, it would present facilities like Planned Parenthood with a dilemma: either abandon providing abortions to continue receiving Title X federal funds or lose the funding. It would likely

also spur a legal challenge.

“We would hope that they would chose to provide health services for women and get out of the abortion industry. We don’t think they’re going to do that,” said Joe Pojman, executive director of Texas Alliance for Life, an anti-abortion group active in state politics.

Objections to 2014 law

The state has a long history of trying to limit abortion access on its own. In 2014, Texas required clinics that provide abortions to meet the standards of an ambulatory surgical center, requiring wide corridors and other expensive renovation­s inside facilities. The law also mandated that doctors performing surgical or medical abortions have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic.

The law was quickly challenged but took until 2016 for the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down those provisions, ruling the regulation­s created an undue burden on women seeking abortion. By then, the number of clinics providing the procedure had dwindled from 41 clinics to around 20. Since then, only a few clinics have reopened.

The Reagan-era rule from 1988 banned facilities receiving Title X family-planning funding from discussing or recommendi­ng abortion with their patients. The Supreme Court eventually ruled in favor of the policy, saying it was an appropriat­e use of executive power. President Bill Clinton rescinded the rule, replacing it with a policy that required “non-directive” counseling to provide women with a range of options.

Recent efforts in courts

Pojman, who wants to see the Trump administra­tion implement the rule, said he’s confident the Supreme Court’s past ruling in favor of the policy means the Trump version will likely win in a court challenge.

No taxpayer dollars are currently used to fund abortion. Lawmakers both in Texas and across the country, however, have targeted Planned Parenthood and abortion providers. Last year, Gov. Greg Abbott unsuccessf­ully pushed a bill to ban cities from contractin­g with facilities that provide abortion. But lawmakers passed into law a restrictio­n on a common second-term abortion procedure and required the remains from an abortion be buried. Both laws are tied up in the courts.

“It has implicatio­ns beyond just Planned Parenthood is going to lose funding. It can actually impact health care on a larger scale.” Heather Busby, former executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Texas

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States