Washington lawmakers try to expand access to abortion with multiple bills this session
OLYMPIA – Washington Democrats are trying to give the Department of Corrections the authority to distribute the abortion medication mifepristone to health providers and clinics.
Gov. Jay Inslee last week announced the state had purchased 30,000 doses of the medication ahead of the Texas ruling that rescinded the Food and Drug Administration approval of the drug, an effort to protect Washington’s residents access to it. But the Department of Health needs legislative approval to distribute it.
The bill to do so was voted out of committee Wednesday. It was one of a number of bills in the Legislature this year to expand access to abortion.
Some are awaiting final signature from Inslee. Others could be on his desk soon.
Here’s a look at what may soon become law in Washington:
Access to abortion medication
Ahead of the Texas ruling rescinding the Food and Drug Administration approval of mifepristone, Inslee said Washington was purchasing a three-year supply. The drug is used in abortion procedures within the first 10 weeks of pregnancy.
The 30,000 doses cost the state almost $1.3 million. It was purchased by the Department of Corrections, which is the largest state-run pharmacy program.
Democratic lawmakers then introduced legislation that would allow the Department of Corrections to distribute the medication to public and private providers and health clinics across the state.
The proposal would require the Department of Corrections to establish and operate the program. The department could only sell, distribute or deliver the medication to providers and health care entities for the purpose of providing abortion care or medical management of early pregnancy loss.
The medication could only be sold at list price plus a $5 fee to pay for storage and delivery.
The department has a staff of 34 in its pharmacy, which distributes to 12 prisons across the state, Corrections Secretary Cheryl Strange told a Senate committee on Monday. She said she wasn’t sure yet if allowing the department to distribute to public and private providers would require additional employees or funding from the state.
The bill received its first public hearing on Monday, drawing mostly criticism from people who oppose abortion and supported the decision from a Texas judge reversing the FDA’s approval of mifepristone.
Supporters of the bill, however, applauded the committee and Inslee for working to protect Washington residents’ access to abortion and the medication, which they said is safe and effective.
The bill passed out of the Senate Ways and Means Committee on Wednesday on a party-line vote.
During the committee vote, Republicans expressed concerns about giving the department authority to distribute the medication.
Sen. Lynda Wilson, R-Vancouver, the top Republican on the committee, said purchasing and distributing the medication was “very outside” the department’s traditional work.
“This was a highly unusual purchase by the government,” Wilson said.
She also expressed concerns about the department’s logistical ability to distribute the drug, considering the staffing and financial requirements.
Democrats, on the other hand, said the department already runs a pharmacy program and is the best fit to run this program. They also said it was important that the state ensure abortion medication is accessible and affordable in Washington.
“I believe that we are in uncertain times here,” Sen. Karen Keiser, D-Kent, said. “We cannot predict what will happen next in the area of reproductive health care.”
The proposal must still head to the full Senate and get approval in the state House of Representatives before becoming law.
Abortion shield law
The state Senate passed a bill Monday to create a “shield law” in Washington to help protect people from other states from being prosecuted for receiving legal abortions or gender-affirming care in Washington.
The bill restricts the ability of courts or law enforcement to enforce subpoenas, warrants, criminal processes, extradition and other court orders at the request of another state seeking information about such cases.
A new law in Idaho makes it a crime to help a minor seek an abortion in another state or obtain medication to induce in abortion without parental consent. Those who commit what the law calls “abortion trafficking” would be subject to two to five years in prison.
The shield law in Washington could protect people from being prosecuted. But Inslee said last month that the shield law could not control what happens in Idaho courts.
During debate on the bill in the Senate, Sen. Mike Padden, R-Spokane Valley, expressed concerns with Washington’s ability to pass laws that would affect people in other states, adding he believed it was unconstitutional.
“That’s one thing when they affect the citizens of our state, but it’s another thing when we are trying to negate the laws of other states in order to promote abortion tourism or promote these operations on our young people,” Padden said.
Supporters of the bill pushed back on that argument.
Sen. Yasmin Trudeau, D-Tacoma, said people in other states should not be afraid for what might happen to them when they return to their home state after doing something that Washington considers legal.
“This is an issue of freedom,” she said. “This is freedom for people across the country.”
The bill passed the state Senate 29-20 after passing the state House 59-38 in February.
It now heads to the governor’s desk.
Eliminating cost-sharing for abortions
Health insurance companies may no longer impose cost-sharing charges, such as co-pays, for abortion services, if they already provide coverage of the procedure.
Beginning in 2024, health plans that provide coverage for abortion of a pregnancy would no longer require co-pays by the patients, if a bill that passed the Legislature last week is signed by Inslee.
The bill passed the state Senate 29-19 and the state House of Representatives 57-39. Both votes were on party lines.
Under current law, health plans that provide coverage for maternity care or services must also provide coverage for the voluntary abortion of a pregnancy.
Protecting licenses for providers
A bill passed in the state Senate last week would protect the licenses of providers who perform abortions or gender-affirming care.
The proposal specifies that providing abortion care or gender-affirming treatment is not considered “unprofessional conduct” and would not be the basis for professional discipline.
If a provider received a disciplinary action in another state because they provided reproductive health services or gender-affirming treatment, it wouldn’t count as unprofessional conduct or be the basis for discipline in Washington.
The bill passed the state Senate 28-19 and the state House of Representatives 57-40, but must receive final approval from the House before heading to Inslee’s desk. The bill passed on party lines in both chambers.
Protecting health data
Consumers’ health data may soon have more protections if a bill that passed the state Senate last week makes its way to Inslee’s desk.
Under the proposal, consumers would have the right to access, delete or withdraw consent from the collection, sharing or selling of their health data by submitting a request to a regulated entity, such as a data broker, or small business.
The data company would have to provide a secure way for consumers to submit a request and then respond within 45 days of the request.
Under the proposal, consumer health data could not be collected or shared without prior consent. A privacy policy that shares what data is collected, why it’s collected and how they can access it would have to be given to consumers.
Supporters say the proposal is an attempt to help consumers who use programs like menstrual tracking apps from ensuring their data is safe and could potentially protect people from harassment or even prosecution for their health care decisions. Opponents, however, say the bill is too broad and could have too many unintended consequences.
The proposal passed the state Senate 27-21 with one Democrat, Sen. Mark Mullet of Issaquah, voting against it. It passed the state House of Representatives 57-39 on party lines and must receive final approval from the House before heading to Inslee’s desk.