Why does government want to hide data regarding the abortion of babies. What are they hiding? Do they think we would be appalled if we knew how many baies were killed? Do thry think we could not handle that many government approved deaths? I thought the abortion crowd was PROUD of their work. So why not give us the facts?
“California is one of only three states that do not report abortion data to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Project 2025’s proposed federal mandate directly conflicts with the state’s strong protections for patient privacy and could dismantle the legal and ethical foundations that have made California a refuge for those seeking reproductive care.”
Shouldn’t Nesom be proud of all the babies he aprproved to be killed. He believes in abortion till birth—so why is he afraid to let the public know about The Killing Fields of California?
Project 2025 to California: Report abortion data or lose billions in Medicaid
by Monique O. Madan, CalMatters, 9/11/24 https://calmatters.org/politics/2024/09/project2025-trump-california-abortion-surveillance/
In summary
If the next Republican president implements Project 2025, California will face an ultimatum: report sensitive abortion data to the CDC or jeopardize Medicaid funding.
Project 2025, the 900-page conservative playbook for the next Republican president, issues an ultimatum for California: track and report abortion data to the federal government or risk losing billions in Medicaid funding for reproductive health.
California is one of only three states that do not report abortion data to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Project 2025’s proposed federal mandate directly conflicts with the state’s strong protections for patient privacy and could dismantle the legal and ethical foundations that have made California a refuge for those seeking reproductive care.
The blueprint, crafted by Donald Trump allies and leaders in his first administration, clearly targets states with abortion protections like California, seeking the kind of data that could be used to target abortion-seekers or even criminally punish out-of-staters who come to the state for reproductive health services.
“Because liberal states have now become sanctuaries for abortion tourism, [the Department of Health and Human Services] should use every available tool, including the cutting of funds, to ensure that every state reports exactly how many abortions take place within its borders, at what gestational age of the child, for what reason, the mother’s state of residence, and by what method,” reads the chapter on abortion reporting.
Roger Severino, who served as the Department of Health and Human Services’ director of the Office for Civil Rights under Trump, authored Project 2025’s abortion surveillance plan. He is now the vice president of domestic policy at the Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank behind Project 2025. He declined an interview with CalMatters.
As Project 2025 and reproductive health have become major campaign themes, Trump continues to distance himself from the right-wing plan. He’s repeatedly called some of the project’s proposals “abysmal” and has said “I have no idea who is behind it.” Paul Dans, the Project 2025 director and a former top adviser in Trump’s administration, resigned from the Heritage Foundation in July after Trump began to disengage from the plan.
In yesterday’s presidential debate, Vice President Kamala Harris explicitly warned about Project 2025’s plans to monitor “your pregnancies, your miscarriages.”
On the stage, Trump denied supporting a national abortion ban, in part because the fall of Roe led to his desire for each state to implement its own policy. “This is an issue that’s torn our country apart for 52 years,” Trump said on the debate stage. “Every legal scholar, every Democrat, every Republican, liberal, conservative, they all wanted this issue to be brought back to the states where the people could vote. And that’s what happened.”
Harris’ home state has a long history of protecting reproductive rights. The state legalized abortion in 1967, six years before the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, and has since enacted numerous laws to ensure access to abortion care.
The California Constitution includes an explicit right to privacy, which has been interpreted by state courts to guarantee the right to choose an abortion.
California, along with Maryland and New Hampshire, does not require abortion providers to report patient data to the federal government, as Severino points out. The California Department of Public Health said just days after Roe v. Wade was overturned that it does not report abortion data to the federal government because it is not required to do so. The states that do collect data generally use it for public health analysis that can help improve abortion access by identifying gaps and needs
Under Project 2025, all 50 states would be required to submit to the federal government data such as the reason for the abortion, fetus’ gestational age, the birthing parent’s state of residence, whether the procedure was surgical or pill-induced, and more.
Cat Duffy, a policy analyst at the National Health Law Program, said the intention of collecting this data “is not one of scientific exploration.”
“It’s to create a culture of fear, which will spread, not just to abortion seekers, but pregnant people as well, who will be afraid of going to the doctor and what they tell the doctor,” she said.
Medi-Cal and access to critical care
The data they would report would not be factual so it does not make any difference. One aborted child for the purpose of birth control is too many. There are too many contraceptive options to avoid pregnancies including absentness.