Welcome to the Kansas reflector on reporter Tim carpenter. This is the 51st anniversary of the US Supreme Court's landmark decision in Roe v Wade that guaranteed Americans the right to abortion nationwide. Of course, the President was vanquished by the Supreme Court's conservative wing and in 2022, essentially allowing states to set their own boundaries on abortion. 21 States responded by bolstering abortion restrictions, including 14 abandoned procedure. In Kansas, the demise of Roe v. Wade invigorated voters to reject a proposed amendment to the Kansas Constitution, that would make it easier for the Republican led legislature to increase restrictions. In other words, the Kansas Supreme Courts view that a person's right to bodily autonomy is a foundational constitutional principle. And that remains in effect, and the legislature is forbidden from banning abortion here with us to delve into the politics of abortion is US Representative Sharif, David's a Democrat serving the third district of Johnson and Wyandotte counties, along with a handful of rural counties to the south. Welcome.
Hi, it's good to get to join you.
Thank you for taking time out of your busy day. Appreciate it. Well, representative is your 22 elect reelection campaign emphasize abortion rights. And I was wondering if you could just kind of for the listeners just generally share your your philosophy about this healthcare issue as it relates to your job in Congress. Mm
hmm. Yeah. Well, I I'm glad we're getting a chance to talk about this, because like you said, the certainly in 2022, it was not just a big part of the, you know, the political atmosphere, but also, in terms of real life impacts that people were feeling. You know, I when I came into, well, actually, when I was running for Congress, this was a topic that was probably brought up a little less often, but was certainly something people wanted to know about, you know, where am I at on the issue of, of choice, and I've always been very clear that I'm a, I'm a pro choice, you know, at that time candidate, now a member of Congress, and for me, that is a lot about just making sure that when it comes to issues of reproductive health care, abortion included, that people have the, like, full access to the complete range of of reproductive health care services. And when we, when we think about that, this day and age, a lot of times what that means is making sure that politicians and and the politics of it all or not, are not the ways that decisions get made about something that is very personal, and a decision around your reproductive health care should be made between a person and their doctor, you know, a woman should not be at the whim of any type of politics when it comes to making a healthcare decision. And at the end of the day, that's probably the most foundational piece of how I think about this is, you know, politicians and politics should not be should not be determining any kind of reproductive health care decisions for a woman that should be between her and her doctor and, and her family. Okay,
in Washington, you voted against two bills on abortion on January 18, passed the US House by narrow margins. And so let's get into those. First one. I'm going to kind of generally summarize the both of these, but on the first one, there is a measure that would require colleges and universities as I understand it, to provide information to female students about their right to carry a pregnancy to term. But there would be no mandate that information about contraception or other elements of reproductive health care would be shared with the students it passed like 2012 to 207. I think. So why did you vote no?
Well, I, you know, I, again, I'm not I'm not I'm not going to support measures that would have politicians interfering with with these types of health care decisions. And, you know, that bill is is one that really, I would say, hot hides a set of dishonest policies, you know, saying that you're trying to distribute or inform students about their existing rights, but then restricting the ability to, to to share information about the full range of reproductive health care options and, and also to restrict the ability to give information about contraception is I mean that that's a very key example of how, you know, politicians are deciding or trying to make health care decisions for other people. And yeah, I just couldn't in good conscience support, support that type of legislation.
You made a point there. And if I'm understanding correctly, that it's more nuanced, and I said, so. It one part of it is would be to require higher education institutions to distribute information. But would it also prohibit those same institutions from also sharing another perspective on reproduction?
Yeah, yeah, with the the inability to share information with a student who is in the middle of, of not just their their learning journey, but also trying to make very important healthcare decisions, restricting the range of information that they're able to get access to, is, you know, it just cuts against that. fundamental right of being able to make your own health care decisions with your with your doctor or healthcare provider.
I should point out here that Kansas has three other members of the US House Republicans, Ron Estes, Jacob Turner, and Tracy man each voted to apply this edict to colleges and universities in the country. The other bill involved pregnancy resource centers, which exists to centrally oppose abortion, but don't provide reproductive health services to women. I think he the Biden administration, people raise some concern recently that federal funding meant to help low income individuals with food rent or childcare services is being allocated to the senators, basically, to encourage women to go ahead and give birth this bill passed 2420 2014 to 208. And it would prevent the languages interesting, quote, unquote, federal agency from discriminating against these resource centers, you voted no on this. Why?
Well, again, you know, when we think about restricting access to reproductive health care, having a bill that would not only divert funds meant for food and rent and childcare, that that in and of itself is a is a piece that I would on its own be opposed to, but also, you know, these facilities are purposely deceiving folks who are seeking reproductive health care. And in many instances, we have seen that, that they are not sharing information about the full range, again, the full range of reproductive health care services that are available. Not only are they not available at those centers, but they also are not even sharing that they that they could get access to health care, reproductive health care, including abortions at in other facilities. And it's, again, a hiding behind the dishonest policy is, it's just it's not something that I can support in legislation, especially if it's going to interfere with a woman's health care decisions and, and, you know, her ability to actually get the health care, reproductive health care that she needs.
Again, it's worth mentioning that representatives Tracy man in the first district jakela Turner of the second, and Ron SS to the fourth district in Kansas voted for the use of federal funding under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program to support these pregnancy centers represented David's I'm curious, have you introduced legislation regarding birth control or abortion services, legislation yourself?
So there have been there have been times where I've introduced amendments that would help ensure that programs that provide access to to contraception, I've provided amendments to larger bills to ensure that that's the case. And then I've certainly worked with some of my colleagues who are who who are on the committees of jurisdiction and that sort of thing. I've co sponsored legislation, including the Women's Health Protection Act that would ensure that we're, that we're not Uh, that we're not restricting access to, that we're not restricting access to reproductive health care for people.
I wanted to ask you about some of the commentary written and otherwise by US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Clarence Thomas, the question whether contraception, I think should be allowed unconstitutional what that's that goes beyond abortion. You know, what do you think of that?
Um, I I think the the quickest answer is to say, I'm very concerned to have a Supreme Court justice calling, calling into question. people's right to access contraception is, I mean, it's very concerning it. You know, when Dobbs was when Dobbs overturned Roe v. Wade, a lot of people were scared, of course, about their ability to access access, reproductive health care, including abortion, but also because of because of some of the words of, of Justice Thomas, calling into question, contraception, which is a major part of a lot of people's reproductive health care, a major part of people's family planning? It is. It's one of the reasons that people were so scared when the Dobbs decision came out. And then we're seeing Oh, go ahead. No, no, I
interrupted, you. Go ahead.
And I think we're, you know, we're seeing we're seeing attempts to undermine people's ability to get access to missa prestone? You know, and I know that that is not, that's not the same thing as contraception by any means. But I think that when you hear a Supreme Court justice, calling into question, the right to access contraception, you in an opinion, where they're trying to restrict a person's right to choose, and right to access, the full range of reproductive health care. It's it all of this together, just gives a lot of people both, you know, patients, and the health care providers, a lot of fear and anxiety.
I think he's signed on to a brief, didn't you about with some other members of Congress regarding allowance of of these drugs to remain on the market?
Mm hmm. Yeah. And actually there was. I want to say it was about 240. Members, it might, the number might be a little more, a little less, but we signed on to an amicus brief to the Supreme Court. Because mifepristone is a is has been proven a safe and effective medication. It's been used by millions of people, millions of women, and it's been on the market, and it's one of those. This is one of those instances where we see the we see the impacts of of the jobs decision playing out in a way that just really has the like there's a there's a real chance that people are going to have a major impact on their on their health care decisions because of these decisions because of the Supreme Court's dobs decision.
little closer to home here recently a group of a or vowed right wing Republican conservatives and the Kansas house introduced a bill that would nearly ban abortion in the state it would I I'm not an attorney, of course, but I would presume it would be viewed as unconstitutional in Kansas. It's not an outright ban, but the measure would prohibit abortion except in circumstances when a pregnant woman or a girl's life was in immediate jeopardy. Sort of a message Bill, you imagine?
Yeah, I am. You know, I would say that seeing seeing the actions and these weather their bill proposals or legislative platforms from the Kansas Republican Party is I mean, to me, it seems very misguided, you know, if you even if you just based solely on the August 2022, ballot amendment, constitutional amendment that was on the ballot, you saw people from all over the state from both parties. It was a broad coalition of people that that spoke pretty clearly about these extreme attempts to restrict reproductive health care. And, you know, this is these are, these are clear examples of what our I would say, you know, partisan or extreme policies that are they're not good for our state, and certainly, you know, restrict would be restricting folks freedoms. And it's, yeah, I would call it a misguided attempt to, to, to restrict to restrict our freedoms.
Know, there's two more quick questions here. And I'll let you go. I know you got things to do. But there's this, I want you to comment on this idea of establishing in law that anybody could file a lawsuit against a healthcare provider or somebody who provided an abortion. I mean, the fear factor of that is pretty intense.
Yeah, I would, again, I would call that isn't that's an extreme. That's an extreme position to take and an extreme policy, you know, when when we're talking about people being able to access reproductive health care. And the pushback that we're seeing from some of these, some of these pieces of legislation that are very extreme, it's took crimped to talk about criminalizing people seeking health care to talk about criminalizing doctors who are providing what they deemed to be medically necessary health care. When we're talking about decisions that should be between a doctor and in their patient, you know, a woman in her family, it's I I'm just going to use the word misguided again, it does seem, it does seem like there's an element of, you know, the fear factor that you mentioned, is very real. And we've seen the impacts, you know, here in the Kansas City Metro Area, because we're right on the state line. There were doctors and people providing care at hospitals on the Missouri side of the state line, who were who were very concerned about their ability to actually provide the care that their patients needed, because of the the Missouri laws that took effect as soon as Dobbs came out. And, you know, doctors should not be worrying about criminal prosecution getting sued, and calling their lawyers when they're, when they're talking to their patients about what is the best course of action? What is the, you know, when you're making those decisions? I think most people want their doctor thinking about what most people want their doctor to be thinking about what is healthiest for them and their family.
And not wondering what certain words in the statute book mean, I want to close out just a quick look back at the Kansas vote on the constitutional amendment regarding abortion, it failed by 6040 margin. And I don't think it it received a majority vote for it in any of the four congressional districts but what do you make of politicians in Kansas and elsewhere that refuse to accept the will of the people on this issue?
I honestly don't know what to make of it. You know, I all I know is that when I'm talking to folks who are are worried that their kids or grandkids or future generations are going to be growing up with with fewer rights than they grew up with. When people are talking about they're worried being worried about extremism and and you know, protecting their their rights. to choose, I just, I just know that the most effective thing I can do is, is be clear about my wanting to protect those rights and that, you know, if it comes to taking votes or you know, voting for or against something that's going to continue, you know, if something is going to erode a person's right, then I'm gonna, I'm gonna vote no on that. And if we're talking about making sure that politicians are not interfering with reproductive health care decisions, you know, I'm gonna I'm gonna fight for that. I don't want politicians and politics to be the deciding factor in those things.
I want to thank US Representative Sharif, David's a Democrat, serving in representing Kansas and Washington for your time today and your willingness to share your insights into this important issue. Thank you much.
