Federal funding freezes and state-level budget cuts test the resilience of Washington’s historical role as a stronghold for reproductive rights.
Last month, Washington lawmakers approved a budget cut of $8.5 million from the Abortion Access Project, an initiative aimed at ensuring equitable access to abortion services, marking the largest rollback in the state’s history. The Abortion Access Project was established after the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court.
Preparing for unknowns
After the overturn, Washington braced itself by purchasing 30,000 doses of mifepristone, a medication used for abortion, in response to the uncertainty surrounding access nationwide. The action was a preemptive step by a state government to secure availability.
Despite the state’s efforts to safeguard access, individuals still felt compelled to prepare on a personal level. Abigail Harrison, a lifelong Washingtonian, felt the potential scarcity. “In my community, we were looking to buy abortion pills that do not need a prescription off the internet in hopes to create our own ‘stash’ if need be.”
Harrison didn’t consider stockpiling abortion pills until the overturning of Roe, when her thinking changed. “I was scared about the status of abortion in general and knew that once it was turned over for individual states to decide, many would choose to completely axe access,” she said.
She said friends began discussing contingency plans in case someone in their circle needed reproductive care. The fear was not only about access but about broader policy implications too.
“The thought of not even having the option was incredibly scary,” Harrison said. “What if we needed to access reproductive care within extenuating circumstances? Is this legislation going to trickle into birth control access and other forms of family planning?”
Harrison’s concerns reflect trends observed by the organization, including increased use of contraceptives such as IUDs and sterilization in the state and nationally, said Eowyn Savela, director of public affairs and strategic initiatives at Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho. “Patients are making choices about their long-term reproductive health at a time when they are not certain they will have the same rights to control their own bodies in the future.”
While services at Mount Baker clinics have not been interrupted, the organization noted that uncertainty is affecting decision-making for patients.
“The chaos at the federal level has a chilling effect on patients seeking essential reproductive and sexual health care,” Savela said. “People don’t know what services are still available or are covered by their insurance or are safe for them to access if they are undocumented immigrants.”
Funding, federal policy shifts
“The biggest threat to abortion access in Washington state right now is funding for service provid
Last month, Washington lawmakers approved a budget cut of $8.5 million from the Abortion Access Project, an initiative aimed at ensuring equitable access to abortion services, marking the largest rollback in the state’s history. The Abortion Access Project was established after the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court.
Preparing for unknowns
After the overturn, Washington braced itself by purchasing 30,000 doses of mifepristone, a medication used for abortion, in response to the uncertainty surrounding access nationwide. The action was a preemptive step by a state government to secure availability.
Despite the state’s efforts to safeguard access, individuals still felt compelled to prepare on a personal level. Abigail Harrison, a lifelong Washingtonian, felt the potential scarcity. “In my community, we were looking to buy abortion pills that do not need a prescription off the internet in hopes to create our own ‘stash’ if need be.”
Harrison didn’t consider stockpiling abortion pills until the overturning of Roe, when her thinking changed. “I was scared about the status of abortion in general and knew that once it was turned over for individual states to decide, many would choose to completely axe access,” she said.
She said friends began discussing contingency plans in case someone in their circle needed reproductive care. The fear was not only about access but about broader policy implications too.
“The thought of not even having the option was incredibly scary,” Harrison said. “What if we needed to access reproductive care within extenuating circumstances? Is this legislation going to trickle into birth control access and other forms of family planning?”
Harrison’s concerns reflect trends observed by the organization, including increased use of contraceptives such as IUDs and sterilization in the state and nationally, said Eowyn Savela, director of public affairs and strategic initiatives at Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho. “Patients are making choices about their long-term reproductive health at a time when they are not certain they will have the same rights to control their own bodies in the future.”
While services at Mount Baker clinics have not been interrupted, the organization noted that uncertainty is affecting decision-making for patients.
“The chaos at the federal level has a chilling effect on patients seeking essential reproductive and sexual health care,” Savela said. “People don’t know what services are still available or are covered by their insurance or are safe for them to access if they are undocumented immigrants.”
Funding, federal policy shifts
“The biggest threat to abortion access in Washington state right now is funding for service providers,” said Savela. “During the first Trump administration, abortion providers, including Mount Baker Planned Parenthood, lost access to Title X family planning funding, and we expect that to happen again.”
Last month the Trump administration froze nearly $66 million in Title X funding, affecting 16 organizations nationwide, including Planned Parenthood. This move has significant implications for Washington, where Title X funds support essential services like birth control, cancer screenings and STI testing for low-income populations.
“Abortion rights are meaningless without true access to care, which at the most basic level requires funding for providers and health center operations,” said Savela. “These cuts will likely have deep impacts on services in the state, including closing health centers, increasing costs for patients, decreasing service hours and putting further strain on an already stressed system.”
Balancing budget and health goals
Savela was optimistic ahead of the recent legislative session that newly passed bills could improve access to care. The legislature passed SB 5632, which strengthens Washington’s Shield Law by expanding protections for providers of abortion and gender-affirming care, out-of-state patients seeking these services and those who assist them. However, she now cautions that a lack of funding may limit the bill’s effectiveness.
As of late 2024, Washington faced a budget deficit projected to be between $10 billion and $12 billion over the next four years. On Feb. 15, Gov. Bob Ferguson proposed a plan to save approximately $4 billion.
A more urgent concern at the moment is Medicaid. According to Savela, 30% of their patients are covered by Medicaid, and across the state, Planned Parenthood affiliates depend on $22 million annually from Medicaid.
Investing in reproductive health care leads to significant long-term savings. Savela said that for every dollar Washington spends on family planning services, the state saves approximately $7 in associated long-term costs.
“Limiting access to reproductive and sexual health care doesn’t just hurt individuals, it weakens our entire health care system,” said Savela. “Providers are leaving [abortion] ban states and creating ‘maternity care deserts’ in their wake.”
Looking ahead: policy, funding health
The coming months will be critical in determining how Washington balances its role as a sanctuary for reproductive rights with the financial realities imposed by shifting political landscapes. “The situation right now is dynamic,” said Brynn Freal of Anacortes, a member of the Washington Community Action Network.
“I am a proud born-and-raised Washingtonian,” Harrison said. “I have lived and worked in this state, voted here my entire life, I love it and can’t imagine living anywhere else. But if there comes a day where abortion were to be overturned or legislation passed that restricts a person’s right to choose, that would be a deal-breaker.”
The Salish Current originally published this article on May 12, 2025.
“Abortion rights are meaningless without true access to care, which at the most basic level requires funding for providers and health center operations,” said Savela. “These cuts will likely have deep impacts on services in the state, including closing health centers, increasing costs for patients, decreasing service hours and putting further strain on an already stressed system.”
Balancing budget and health goals
Savela was optimistic ahead of the recent legislative session that newly passed bills could improve access to care. The legislature passed SB 5632, which strengthens Washington’s Shield Law by expanding protections for providers of abortion and gender-affirming care, out-of-state patients seeking these services and those who assist them. However, she now cautions that a lack of funding may limit the bill’s effectiveness.
As of late 2024, Washington faced a budget deficit projected to be between $10 billion and $12 billion over the next four years. On Feb. 15, Gov. Bob Ferguson proposed a plan to save approximately $4 billion.
A more urgent concern at the moment is Medicaid. According to Savela, 30% of their patients are covered by Medicaid, and across the state, Planned Parenthood affiliates depend on $22 million annually from Medicaid.
Investing in reproductive health care leads to significant long-term savings. Savela said that for every dollar Washington spends on family planning services, the state saves approximately $7 in associated long-term costs.
“Limiting access to reproductive and sexual health care doesn’t just hurt individuals, it weakens our entire health care system,” said Savela. “Providers are leaving [abortion] ban states and creating ‘maternity care deserts’ in their wake.”
Looking ahead: policy, funding health
The coming months will be critical in determining how Washington balances its role as a sanctuary for reproductive rights with the financial realities imposed by shifting political landscapes. “The situation right now is dynamic,” said Brynn Freal of Anacortes, a member of the Washington Community Action Network.
“I am a proud born-and-raised Washingtonian,” Harrison said. “I have lived and worked in this state, voted here my entire life, I love it and can’t imagine living anywhere else. But if there comes a day where abortion were to be overturned or legislation passed that restricts a person’s right to choose, that would be a deal-breaker.”
The Salish Current originally published this article on May 12, 2025.
