DWC Member Brownley Leads Legislation to Block Trump Admin’s Rollback of Veterans’ Reproductive Health Care – Chrissy Houlahan (.gov)

Report on the Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act and its Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Executive Summary

A legislative proposal, the Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act, has been introduced by Representative Julia Brownley in response to a proposed administrative rule change that would significantly restrict abortion access for U.S. veterans. The bill aims to codify the right for veterans and their dependents to receive abortion care and counseling through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). This initiative and the policy debate surrounding it directly intersect with several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning health, gender equality, and institutional justice.

2.0 Policy and Legislative Context

2.1 Proposed Administrative Rule Change

The Trump administration has issued a proposed rule to repeal a 2022 policy. The 2022 policy, finalized in March 2023, enabled the VA to provide abortion services in cases of rape, incest, and to protect the life and health of the veteran. The new proposed rule would reinstate a near-total ban, with a narrow exception only for the life of the pregnant individual. This would make the VA the only major federal health provider with such a restrictive policy.

2.2 The Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act

In response, the Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act was introduced to create a statutory right to abortion care through the VA. The legislation is designed to prevent access to reproductive healthcare from fluctuating with administrative changes, thereby providing stable and consistent care for veterans.

3.0 Analysis of Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The debate over veterans’ reproductive rights and the proposed legislation has significant implications for the advancement of several SDGs.

3.1 SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

This issue is fundamentally linked to SDG 3, which aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages.

• Target 3.7: The legislation seeks to ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive healthcare services, including counseling and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programs. Proponents argue that denying veterans access to comprehensive reproductive care is a failure to provide essential health services.
• Health Outcomes: Stakeholders, including the National Women’s Law Center, note that veterans already face significant health challenges such as PTSD and a heightened risk of suicide. Restricting access to abortion care is presented as a policy that would deepen these health harms, directly contravening the goals of SDG 3.

3.2 SDG 5: Gender Equality

The proposed legislation is framed as a critical measure for achieving gender equality, as outlined in SDG 5.

• Target 5.6: This target calls for ensuring universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. The bill’s supporters contend that the proposed administrative restrictions represent a direct attack on the bodily autonomy and freedom of the more than two million women veterans in the United States.
• Empowerment: By codifying the right to abortion care, the Act aims to ensure that women veterans have the freedom to make personal decisions about their health and futures, a core principle of gender equality and empowerment.

3.3 SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The proposed policy rollback would create significant disparities in healthcare access, an issue addressed by SDG 10.

• Unequal Access: If implemented, the rule would establish a system where veterans receive a lower standard of reproductive healthcare compared to individuals covered by other major federal health programs. This creates a distinct inequality for a specific population group that has served the nation.
• Vulnerable Groups: The legislation aims to close this gap and prevent the diverse population of women veterans from being subjected to a policy that could exacerbate existing inequalities in health outcomes.

3.4 SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act seeks to strengthen institutional integrity and provide legal justice, aligning with SDG 16.

• Accountable Institutions: A primary goal of the bill is to remove veterans’ healthcare access from the influence of “political agendas” and “shifting agency policies.” By enshrining these rights in law, it promotes a more stable, accountable, and effective institutional framework for the VA, as called for in Target 16.6.
• Access to Justice: The legislation is presented as a means to provide justice for veterans, ensuring their right to healthcare is guaranteed by law rather than administrative discretion. This ends the uncertainty created by policy changes between administrations.

4.0 Stakeholder Positions

4.1 Proponents of the Legislation

A broad coalition supports the Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act, citing the following arguments:

1. Rep. Julia Brownley: The bill is necessary to protect abortion access at the VA “once and for all” and ensure veterans are not subjected to the political agendas of departmental leadership.
2. Democratic Women’s Caucus: The Trump administration’s proposal is a “betrayal” of service, and the Act is essential to codify rights for veterans who fought for the country’s freedoms.
3. Congressional Reproductive Freedom Caucus: The administration’s plan undermines veterans’ bodily autonomy and the quality of their healthcare.
4. Rep. Mark Takano: The proposed ban on reproductive healthcare will endanger countless veterans and disrespects women veterans’ ability to make personal healthcare decisions.

4.2 Supporting Organizations

Numerous advocacy groups have endorsed the bill, including:

• National Women’s Law Center: Argues that blocking comprehensive reproductive healthcare deepens existing health harms for veterans.
• Power to Decide: Condemns the proposed policy change as “needlessly cruel” and a betrayal of the nation’s commitment to veterans.
• Planned Parenthood Action Fund: States that veterans should have the freedom to control their reproductive lives and that care should not be taken away to serve a political agenda.
• Center for Reproductive Rights: Emphasizes that the two million women veterans deserve to have their health, rights, and freedoms protected, including the right to abortion care.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

   • The article’s central theme is access to “comprehensive reproductive health care,” specifically “abortion care, medication, and counseling” for veterans through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). This directly relates to ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all at all ages, with a focus on a specific population group. The debate over the VA’s policy is a debate about providing essential health services.

2. SDG 5: Gender Equality

   • The article explicitly frames the issue as one affecting women, stating, “More than two million women veterans live in the United States today.” The proposed policy rollback is described as a “direct attack on women veterans’ freedom and bodily autonomy.” The fight for abortion access is presented as a fight for gender equality, ensuring that women veterans have control over their reproductive health and are not disproportionately disadvantaged by restrictive healthcare policies.

3. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • The article highlights disparities in healthcare access. It notes that the proposed rule would “once again make the VA the only major federal health provider with such an extreme restriction,” creating an inequality between veterans and those served by other federal agencies. Furthermore, the introduction of the Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act aims to “fight to close those gaps” in care and ensure that veterans are not subjected to a “patchwork of policies that change with every administration,” which creates inequality based on political timing.

4. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • The article discusses the need for stable, accountable, and non-partisan institutions. The proposed Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act aims to “enshrine in law a veteran’s right to access abortion care at VA” to “end the uncertainty created by shifting agency policies.” This effort to create a stable legal framework, free from “interference from political appointees or partisan agendas,” is a direct attempt to build a more effective and just institution (the VA healthcare system).

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Targets under SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being)

   • Target 3.7: “By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning, information and education…” The article’s focus on guaranteeing “abortion care, medication, and counseling” and “comprehensive reproductive health care” for veterans directly aligns with this target. The proposed legislation is a strategy to integrate these services into the VA’s national program.
   • Target 3.8: “Achieve universal health coverage, including… access to quality essential health-care services…” The article discusses veterans’ right to the “care they’ve earned” through the VA system. The debate is about defining what constitutes “essential health-care services” and ensuring the quality and scope of that coverage includes reproductive health.

2. Target under SDG 5 (Gender Equality)

   • Target 5.6: “Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights…” The article repeatedly uses language synonymous with this target, such as “reproductive freedom,” “bodily autonomy,” and the “right to abortion care.” The legislation seeks to codify these reproductive rights for women veterans.

3. Targets under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

   • Target 10.3: “Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices…” The article describes the proposed VA rule as an “extreme restriction” that creates inequality. The Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act is presented as legislation designed to eliminate this discriminatory policy and ensure veterans have equal access to care compared to other groups.

4. Target under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions)

   • Target 16.6: “Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.” The article criticizes the “uncertainty created by shifting agency policies” and the influence of “political agendas.” The proposed bill is a direct effort to make the VA’s healthcare provision more stable, accountable, and transparent by codifying rights in law, thus strengthening the institution.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Indicators for SDG 3 and SDG 5 (Targets 3.7 & 5.6)

   • Legal and Policy Framework: The primary indicator is the status of the VA’s policy on abortion. The article contrasts three distinct policies: the pre-2022 near-total ban, the 2022 rule allowing abortion in cases of rape, incest, and health/life of the veteran, and the proposed rule restricting it to only the life of the pregnant person. The passage or failure of the Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act would be a definitive indicator of whether access to reproductive healthcare is legally guaranteed.
   • Scope of Services: An implied indicator is the list of services available through the VA. Progress would be measured by whether “abortion care, medication, and counseling” are officially offered and accessible to veterans.

2. Indicator for SDG 10 (Target 10.3)

   • Policy Parity: An implied indicator is the comparison of the VA’s abortion policy to that of other “major federal health provider[s].” The article states the proposed rule would make the VA an outlier. Achieving parity with other federal agencies would indicate a reduction in this specific inequality.

3. Indicator for SDG 16 (Target 16.6)

   • Policy Stability: A key qualitative indicator is the stability of the healthcare policy. The article points out the problem of access that can “change with each administration.” Codifying the right to care in law, as proposed by the Reproductive Freedom for Veterans Act, would be a measure of progress toward creating a more stable and accountable institutional framework, removing it from the “rulemaking process.”

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: houlahan.house.gov