Targeted Regulation of Abortion Provider (TRAP) laws impose unique and burdensome regulations on doctors and health care facilities which perform abortions. Supporters claim these laws provide safer conditions for women undergoing this procedure. However, most TRAP laws require abortion clinics to install unnecessary expensive equipment, perform extensive renovations that may not be physically possible, or mandate higher employee qualifications than needed. Some TRAP laws allow unannounced state inspections when patients are present. Other TRAP laws require abortion clinics to have hospital admitting privileges which can be nearly impossible to attain.

Critics say this regulation is unnecessary because abortion is our safest and most common medical procedure. Less than 0.3% of all patients experiencing a complication require hospitalization. This excellent safety record often prevents abortion clinics from attaining hospital admitting privileges, many of which require at least 5 admissions a year.

Supporters claim there is no legitimate reason to require abortion providers to have admitting privileges. There are now at least 23 states with TRAP laws, many of them identical. They say the only purpose of these laws is to force abortion providers out of business. They also say TRAP laws are discriminatory because they don’t apply to other facilities that provide outpatient surgery or other basic medical services.

Proposed Legislation: Reintroduction of H.R.12 - Women’s Health Protection Act of 2023
Prospective Sponsor: Rep. Judy Chu (CA)

• I oppose reforming current TRAP law policy and wish to donate resources to the campaign committee of Speaker Mike Johnson (LA).
• I support protecting a person's ability to decide whether to continue or end a pregnancy and safeguarding healthcare providers' ability to provide abortion services by:
  
  1.) Creating a federal right to access abortion services before fetal viability, with exceptions to protect the life or health of the pregnant person after viability.
  
  2.) Banning state laws that impose unnecessary restrictions on abortion providers, like mandatory counseling or waiting periods, and restrictions on telemedicine abortion.
  
  3.) Preventing states from interfering with a person's ability to travel to another state to obtain an abortion.
  
  4.) Allowing individuals to sue states that attempt to enforce restrictive abortion laws.
  
  And wish to donate resources to the campaign committee of Rep. Judy Chu (CA) and/or to an advocate group currently working with this issue.