New State Budget Will Cover Some Abortion Transportation Costs, But Only for Travel Within California

California groups that help people access abortion care say final changes to the nearly $308 million state budget that lawmakers passed Wednesday night won’t help residents from other states  travel here for care.

While the budget includes a $20 million “Abortion Practical Support Fund” to cover some transportation, lodging, food and child care costs for lower-income people seeking abortions, those small grants would only apply to in-state travel. That means the state would potentially help a patient from Texas, for instance, pay for a hotel room or transportation once they’re in California, but would not cover their costs to get here.

The fund will also accept private donations, but it’s unclear whether that money could be used to cover out-of-state travel expenses.

“It really means nothing if people can’t get here,” said Jessica Pinckney, executive director of Access Reproductive Justice, a California nonprofit that helps patients pay for the logistics of getting an abortion. “With increased gas prices and everything, I mean even a fairly short flight can cost, you know, close to $1,000.”

While Gov. Gavin Newsom has pledged to make California a sanctuary for people seeking abortions, his office says it wants to focus on expanding and strengthening abortion services within the state — rather than using public money to pay for interstate travel.

“The budget strengthens reproductive health care in California for all who seek these critical services — focusing specifically on bolstering the clinical and security infrastructure of facilities throughout the state, cutting costs for people who can’t afford these services, and expanding access and education across the board,” Alex Stack, a spokesperson for the governor, said in an email.

Newsom’s decision, included in a budget agreement reached over the weekend, came as a surprise to many state abortion-rights advocates who have been working with his administration for nearly a year to prepare for a potential surge of patients arriving from other states. That prospect is now very much a reality following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Friday to overturn Roe v. Wade, effectively rescinding the constitutional right to abortion.

At a news conference on Friday, just hours after the court ruling was announced, Newsom noted that the budget also includes some $200 million to support clinics — including $40 million to cover procedures for those who can’t afford to pay for them, regardless of where they come from. That funding, he said, could free up the budgets of some providers, enabling them to use their own money to help patients travel to California if they choose to do so.

“We’re being realistic. You’re going to ask, ‘Are we going to pay for everyone’s travel and accommodations for 33 million people, of which 10% may seek care in California?’ Come on. We have to be realistic about what we can absorb,” Newsom said. “It’s not just the government providing and supporting. It’s all of us. It’s you, it’s me, it’s everyone contributing.”

But Pinckney, of Access Reproductive Justice, stressed that travel is often one of the biggest barriers patients face in seeking reproductive care.

“Including out-of-state travel is absolutely necessary to reduce the barriers and burdens to those who are coming from hostile states,” she contended.

That said, support for travel within California is important, too, she added, because some 40% of the state’s 58 counties — accounting for about 3% of California’s female population — don’t have abortion clinics.

“There certainly is a benefit to having in-state travel financial support for Californians,” she said. “But the out-of-state piece really gets at the folks who are being impacted by the fall of Roe.”

Pinckney said she and other advocates intend to ask lawmakers for an amendment that would allow public money to also cover out-of-state travel expenses. Her group, which normally raises between $3,000 and $8,000 per month, has received more than $100,000 in the days since the Supreme Court ruling.

Last year, the group helped about 500 people, she said, and this year those numbers have doubled each month.

“We need public funding in order to encourage private funders to contribute,” she said.

This post includes reporting from KQED’s April Dembosky and Adam Beam of The Associated Press.