Home » Policy by Issue » Women & Reproductive Rights

Women & Reproductive Rights

Summary of Impacts

Project 2025 recommends reducing environmental regulations on business which will lead to higher emissions and environmental harm. It suggests withdrawing from international environmental agreements which will lead to the breakdown of global efforts to fight climate change. It aims to cut funding for research into climate change and renewable energy, weakening future technological innovation.

Key Quotes

“Remove the U.S. from any association with U.N. and other efforts to push sustainable-development schemes connected to food production”
(Bakst 325)

“Revisit the designation of PFAS chemicals as ‘hazardous substances'”
(Gunasekara Page 463)

“Make the design, development, and deployment of new nuclear warheads a top priority.”
(McNamee 430)

Impacts on Women & Reproductive Rights

Project 2025 proposes several policies that could greatly restrict reproductive rights. One major policy is to stop federal funding for organizations that provide or promote abortion services. This would not only make it harder for women to access abortions but also limit their access to other important reproductive healthcare services like birth control, cancer screenings, and general gynecological care.

Another policy in the playbook emphasizes allowing healthcare providers to refuse services, like abortions, if they have religious or moral objections. This means that doctors and nurses could say no to providing important medical care based on their personal beliefs, which could make it much harder for women to get the services they need, including contraception and abortion.

The playbook also supports bringing back Trump-era rules that limit the Title X family planning program from funding places that provide or even talk about abortions. This would mostly hurt low-income women who rely on Title X for affordable reproductive healthcare.

Additionally, Project 2025 promotes abstinence-only education in schools, which teaches that avoiding sex until marriage is the best way to prevent pregnancy and STIs. Studies have shown that abstinence-only education doesn’t work as well as comprehensive sex education, which teaches about birth control and safe sex practices. By pushing these restrictive policies, “Project 2025” would make it harder for women, especially those in marginalized communities, to make informed choices about their reproductive health and access necessary healthcare.

Quotes from the Mandate

Page numbers refer to the Mandate for Leadership PDF

“Two of the first actions of a pro-life Administration should be for HHS to withdraw the Medicaid guidance… and for DOJ OLC to withdraw and disavow its interpretation of the Hyde Amendment.” (General Welfare, Dept. of Health, Page 503)

The Hyde Amendment prohibits the use of federal funding, such as Medicaid and Medicare, to be used for abortion. Since 1996, it has included exemptions for life-saving care and pregnancy terminations as a result of rape or incest.
In August 2022, President Biden issued an Executive Order that urged the Department of Health and Human Services Secretary to extend Medicaid funding to assist patients travelling out-of-state to receive abortion care. In response, the Department of Health and Human Services issued an “Action Plan to Protect and Strengthen Reproductive Care” that included new Medicaid provisions and the Department of Justice Office of Legal Council (DOJ OLC) issued an opinion stating that the Hyde Amendment only applied to abortion procedures, and as such, federal funds could be used to assist patients with abortion travel costs.
Project 2025 aims to eliminate abortion at a federal level. By withdrawing the current interpretation of the Hyde Amendment, abortion care would be even more difficult to access as more states pass legislation to criminalize it. This would be particularly harmful to low-income individuals who would lose out on one of the few existing forms of monetary abortion assistance.

“Prohibit abortion travel funding” (General Welfare, Dept. of Health, Page 503)

After Roe v. Wade was overturned, the Biden Administration issued a letter inviting states to apply for Medicaid 1115 waivers. These waivers aim to help women who live in anti-abortion states access necessary reproductive healthcare.
The author calls for withdrawing all related guidance and waivers, which would make it far more difficult for women (particularly low-income women) to access reproductive healthcare. While this policy would likely lead to more women’s (preventable) deaths, abortion bans make data analysis difficult.

“Pass a law requiring equal (or greater) benefits for pro-life support for mothers and clarifying abortion exclusions. Congress should pass a law requiring that to the extent an employer provides employee benefits for abortion, it must provide equal or greater benefits for pregnancy, childbirth, maternity, and adoption. That law should also clarify that no employer is required to provide any accommodations or benefits for abortion.” (General Welfare, Dept. of Labor, Page 617)

This policy could harm women in the workplace by making it harder for them to access reproductive healthcare and stigmatizing those who seek an abortion. It will also add extra work for employers who provide benefits related to pregnancy and childbirth.

“Keep anti-life ‘benefits’ out of benefit plans… Congress and DOL should clarify that ERISA does not preempt states’ power to restrict abortion, surrogacy, or other anti-life ‘benefits.'” (General Welfare, Dept. of Labor, Page 617)

ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) sets minimum standards for employer benefit plans and can safeguard abortion access even in states with restrictive abortion laws. If an ERISA plan covers abortion as a benefit, it preempts state laws that attempt to bar plans from paying for out-of-state abortions or obligate plans to “report” on abortions obtained by plan members.
The author’s proposed policy would remove one of the few remaining ways women in anti-abortion states can access reproductive healthcare safely. It could also result in employers being unable to offer comprehensive health benefits, disproportionately affecting women and those in need of reproductive health services.

“Withdraw Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) guidance on abortion.” (General Welfare, Dept. of Health, Page 529)

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) protects sensitive patient health information (PHI) from being shared without the patient’s consent. The specific guidance they’re referring to prohibits using or sharing PHI related to lawful reproductive healthcare, and requires signed attestation that any PHI requests won’t be used for purposes of investigating or imposing liability.
Withdrawing this guidance would mean that abortion records (and other reproductive healthcare) would be unsealed and the women within the records could be subject to legal action. As states criminalize abortion, women could be subject to felony charges, incarceration, steep fines and potentially lose civil rights such as voting. Additionally, with the criminal cases, women would stand to lose employment, housing and general day-to-day security in their lives.

“Where admissible in regulatory action, HUD should implement reforms reducing the implicit anti-marriage bias in housing assistance programs, strengthen work and work-readiness requirements, implement maximum term limits for residents in PBRA and TBRA programs, and end Housing First policies so that the department prioritizes mental health and substance abuse issues before jumping to permanent interventions in homelessness.” (Section III, Chapter 15, Page 541)

The PBRA [Project Based Rental Assistance] provides low-income families with decent, safe, and affordable housing. As of 2024, 1.2 million families would potentially lose housing if term limits were enacted. The TBRA [Tenant-Based Rental Assistance] helps individual households, rather than subsidizing particular rental projects and renters would be in danger of losing housing. Housing First is a program that helps get homeless individuals off the streets and into clean, affordable housing. Ending Housing First would mean that anyone who would qualify for the program would remain on the streets.