April 1, 2025 • 35 mins
A new case with tremendous possible consequences for U.S. sexual and reproductive health and rights has made its way onto the Supreme Court docket. Medina v. Planned Parenthood of South Atlantic is a culmination of decades of anti-choice activist’s attacks to Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health care providers, specifically targeting efforts to kick these providers out of Medicaid. Jessica Mason Pieklo, Senior Vice President and Executive Editor of Rewire News Group and co-host of Boom! Lawyered, sits down to talk with us about the implications of this case for the country’s most vulnerable.
The question in front of the Supreme Court is whether the Medicaid statute confers a right to its recipients to go to providers of their choosing. Not only does this open doors to re-defining “qualified” and “unqualified” reproductive health care providers, it allows an opportunity for legal conservatives on the court to meander around Congressional conferring of rights via statute. Oftentimes, Planned Parenthood affiliates are the only option for low-income, Medicaid patients.
Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social
Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast
Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Welcome to Repro Fight Back a podcast on all
things related to sexual andreproductive health rights and
justice. Hi re pros . How'severybody doing? I'm your host
Jenny Wetter , and my pronounsare she her . So y'all, I feel
like a huge weight has beenlifted off my shoulders. Just
(00:24):
like having the report card outthere for everybody to see and,
and just have it done. I feelso much lighter and like now I
can get, just concentrate onthe rest of my job and digging
out from under the mountain ofemail that I am under I , yeah
, so nice to just have thatdone and I think the new
(00:48):
microsite looks great. I hopey'all have had a chance to go
and explore it@rereportcard.repros fightback.com. It's been
so much fun to be able to playon it and see comparisons
across indicators and justinstead of just the overall
grade. I think it's a greattool. I hope you all do as
(01:09):
well. It was a lot of work andI am just so proud of the work
that our team has done,especially Rachel and Heidi.
They put so much work in to getthis microsite ready in
particular , um, I'm just sograteful for all of the time
and effort they put into it.
And for the report card design,our amazing designer Tanya,
(01:31):
made a beautiful , uh, reportcard if you go to the PDFs,
like she just did anoutstanding job. And yeah, I'm
just so grateful to everybodyfor all of the time and effort
they put into the report cardand I'm just so happy to have
it done. Um, if you arelistening to this on When it
comes out, I am at the last dayof a conference and I am so
(01:55):
excited to be around a bunch ofTitle 10 providers and other
people who work on Title 10 .
If you're at the conference andyou've, and you hear this
episode, make sure to come stopby our booth. We've got fun
things that we're handing out,including some fun liberal Jane
stickers. We had her designedfor re Pros. We have fun bags ,
(02:18):
um, and I think we have someother fun things at the booth
too, so make sure to come byand say hi. I'm very excited to
do that. I'm recording thisbefore the conference, but I'm
just really excited to get totalk to people about the
podcast. It's always so muchfun and not only to get to meet
people who are listeners ormaybe listeners, but get to
(02:39):
hear ideas, particularly from agroup that does this work day
in and day out to hear aboutwhat things they would like us
to talk about on the podcast.
So I love doing that. And ifyou have ideas of things you'd
love to hear us talk about,always feel free to reach out.
You can reach out to us onsocial media at re Pros, fight
back on Facebook, Twitter andBlue squat , blue Sky . Sorry,
(03:01):
y'all , I don't knowwhere my mouth is at. Or re
Pros fb on Instagram. Or youcan email me at
jenny@reprofightback.com . Andthat's Jenny with an IE Yeah,
all the ways please. I alwayslove to hear what y'all think.
And I guess while I'm at it, ifI'm gonna do like housekeeping,
things like that, if you lovethe podcast, it'd be awesome if
(03:21):
you could rate and review us onyour favorite podcast platform.
It helps other people find thepodcast and always appreciate
the love from y'all. Okay, Ithink with that, let's turn to
this week's episode. I am veryexcited to have on the always
amazing Jessica Mason PLO withRewire News Group and host ,
(03:42):
co-host of Boom Lawyeredpodcast , uh, on with us to
talk about a case in front ofthe Supreme Court tomorrow
Medina versus PlannedParenthood of Southern Atlantic
Southeast Atlantic. Sorry, I'llbungled that a little bit, but
it's an important case that isflying a bit under the radar,
so I'm excited for y'all tohear about it. So with that,
let's go to my interview withJess. Hi Jess. Thanks so much
(04:06):
for being here.
Speaker 2 (04:07):
Oh, thanks so much for having me back. It's always
a treat. Um,
Speaker 1 (04:10):
So before we get started, let's just do a quick,
like who are you, you wanna doyour pronouns and stuff as
well?
Speaker 2 (04:16):
Sure. I am Jess plo . I use she her pronouns, and I
am the executive editor atRewire News Group and co-host
of our flagship podcast. Boom.
Lawyered.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
So I was gonna make sure to do this at the end, but
like, let's do it right now. Doyou have anything else you
would maybe like to promote,like maybe something that's
happening in DC this week?
Speaker 2 (04:36):
DC Friends. Oh my gosh. Um, you all are in it.
You are in the ringer. And soAmani Gandy and I are coming to
see you. We're gonna be therewith Liz Winsted and the
amazing abortion access frontfolks for a live podcast mashup
that you didn't know youneeded. Yes , it's boom Buzz
(04:56):
killed , and we will be at theBlack Cat on April 3rd. Doors
open at seven , um, show startsat eight. You can get tickets
online. Um, and please come seeus. Come laugh. We are gonna
have a ball.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
So that's like the bit of good news. I figured we
should just start with likesome happiness at the top
'cause
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
The rest is like less than happy, but okay. So I
feel like there's a big SupremeCourt case that's flying a bit
under the radar right now. LikeI was shocked. I went to prep
for this interview to make surethat I could have a decent
conversation with you aboutlike what is going on and I was
like googling and I was like,wait, news. It was like three
(05:41):
pages deep and it was mostly aDF and I was like , uh, what is
going on? Like there is hardlyany information about this
case. So can you tell us aboutthis case that is coming up ,
uh, this week?
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Yeah. So , um, you are right , uh, with the fire
hose of terrible news in Trump2.0 , um, in this tremendous
and re very real threat toMedicaid recipients , um, is
before the Supreme Court. Andit's a case called Medina
versus Planned ParenthoodSoutheast. And it is , um, for
(06:16):
longtime listeners theculmination of decades of
efforts truly by theanti-choice community to try
and kick Planned Parenthood,but really any reproductive
healthcare provider that , uh,services Medicaid patients out
of Medicaid generally. And sothis is truly an attack on
(06:40):
Medicaid recipients and we seeit coming in the form of
limiting or attempts to limitaccess to reproductive
healthcare generally. And sothis is pretty classic
anti-choice playbook here, findthe repro boogeyman and use it
(07:01):
as a way to come for poorpeople. And it feels like in
many ways that this case is theculmination of the Henry of
Henry Hyde's legacy and theconversation around the Hyde
Amendment that we continue tohave in this country. Um, and
that is whether or not if youare a low income person who
(07:23):
relies on Medicaid for yourhealth insurance coverage,
whether or not you get todecide who you get to see as a
health provider and whether ornot that health provider has to
provide you healthcare at all.
It's shocking. Yes,
Speaker 1 (07:35):
It is absolutely part of like the continuation
of the, the Hyde conversation,it also feels like a big part
of the defund Plan Parenthoodconversation with people
thinking there's like yes , aline item in the budget that
they're just like, okay, eraseno funding to Planned
Parenthood. This is, this iswhat they mean. They , this is
what they mean is preventingpeople on Medicaid from going
(07:57):
to Planned Parenthood.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
Right? And so it's exactly it. I mean, you're
right. There is no line itemthat goes to Planned
Parenthood, right? Like , um,if only, and I'm saying that
just in the sense of like, wow,that would be light years from
where we are right now. Um, butinstead what conservatives like
to do is monkey around withdefinitions within the Medicaid
(08:20):
statute and within , uh, therules governing it. And usually
this comes in the case and, andwe see it here in this , uh,
South Carolina challenge as towhether or not , uh, planned
Parenthood in this case is aqualified , uh, medical
provider within the definitionsof the Medicaid statute. So
(08:42):
Medicaid dictates that onlyqualified providers get the
funding and naturallyconservatives see that as an
opening to define who isqualified and who is not. If
you happen to providecomprehensive reproductive
healthcare , they like totarget you as being not
qualified under the statute.
Now, that's not the issuethat's teed up before the
(09:03):
Supreme Court in this casethough, which is why I think
this case is even moredangerous than whether or not
medical providers who offerabortion con and contraception
are qualified under Medicaid.
The question that the SupremeCourt is going to answer is
whether the Medicaid statuteconfers a right to its
(09:25):
recipients to go to providersof their choosing. That's the
inverse of that. Is PlannedParenthood a qualified , uh,
provider question? And it ismuch bigger and it is much more
dangerous because what it is isan opening for the legal
conservatives on the court tohave a walk about on how
(09:47):
Congress confers rights viastatute. And that should alarm
everyone who has been payingattention to the way this court
interprets rights and who hasthem and how they have been
historically recognized andcreated. Yeah,
Speaker 1 (10:07):
I definitely started like reading this stuff and I
was like, oh, this is way more,more complicated than I
originally had thought and getsmuch more legalese than , uh,
my depth. So I'm so glad thatyou were on to talk about like
what is actually at stake inthis case.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
The nugget of the case is whether or not poor
people have rights. I reallyneed listeners to understand
that because it is an openingto the larger conversation. Do
poor people have rights underMedicaid to see a healthcare
provider that they want tocheck that box? Do you know
poor people have rights underother public programs to access
(10:48):
those benefits that are accordwith those rights? Like this is
where the dominoes start tofall. We're seeing this in a
long line of attacks right nowon social safety programs, for
example, right? We know thatMedicaid generally is
completely in the budget. Crosshairs would have a tremendous
(11:10):
ripple effect in this case aswell. We know that section 5 0
4 of the Rehab Act right now isin the cross hairs from the
legal conservatives. That is astatute and real broad safety
net that requires accommodationin basically anything that
receives federal funding. Youknow, if you are somebody who
(11:33):
interacts with the federal orstate government in any way,
shape or form, you will betouched by the outcome of these
cases and these movements atsome point. Why do I say that?
Well, Medicaid, for example,covers a majority of pregnant
women in this country who arelow income seniors. This is a
(11:56):
joint program between thefederal government and the
states for providing benefitsthe same way that education has
been historically in thiscountry, the same way other,
you know , um, types of public, uh, services have been. So
for the Supreme Court to decidein this particular case, you
(12:16):
know what, no , maybe theMedicaid statute, all it does
is grant you the ability tohave insurance coverage, but
there's no right to access thatcare. That is a way that the
Supreme Court can create thefoundation that there is no
fundamental right to healthcarein this country. We saw it in
(12:37):
Dobbs. They can build on thatin Medina. Oof ,
Speaker 1 (12:41):
Okay. That, that hits hard. And I think the
other thing I've really alsobeen thinking about is how many
people think this Medicaidfight isn't their fight and how
it's not gonna impact thembecause, because they're not on
Medicaid and you know, a lot ofpeople go to hospitals that are
covered by Medicaid mm-hmm . And if , and if
(13:04):
those people no longer haveMedicaid like it , those
hospitals are gonna suffer. Andso a hospital you go to with
your non-Medicaid insurance mayno longer exist if they are not
able to treat patients who areon Medicaid because they're
losing the sources of funding.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
It's such an important point and that , and
one that is so, that just needsto be underscored because so
many of those hospitals alsohave wide range of specialties
under them as well. And that isin part because they can
operate thanks to Medicaidfunding and the ability to see
(13:42):
those patients. And so this issomething that you and I have
chatted about. You know, wewill not be having a
conversation, for example,around this case that asks the
question of why institutionsdon't have an obligation to see
Medicaid patients. This hasbecome a burden by design on
some public institutions, andit's because of a for-profit
(14:06):
healthcare system that reallyjust does not like folks on low
with low incomes. Like theywant to extract money from
patients. Um, and so that is,that is wrapped up in the
larger conversation as well.
And I mean, I think the realityis folks are one accident away
from a debilitating event thatputs them or someone they love
(14:28):
on Medicaid. And we are verycavalier in this country, and
Covid did not teach us that,but it is the truth. We are one
accident away from someone. Welove being on Medicaid.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
And I think that leads to this other point of
like, why this is so important.
We're talking about PlannedParenthood is because not all
providers accept Medicaid.
Planned Parenthood does. Right?
And for reproductive health,for family planning, you can
get into Planned Parenthood,like they can see more patients
(15:02):
because this is what they do.
They know, and the theappointments can move faster
then if you go to like a , ageneral O-B-G-Y-N who may not
take Medicaid. So it is such acore part of sexual and
reproductive healthcare thatPlanned Parenthood is, well,
Medicaid in , in general isjust a huge sexual and
(15:23):
reproductive health program.
Yes. But then also thatpatients can go to the provider
they choose, which is oftenPlanned Parenthood.
Speaker 2 (15:31):
And given the nature of those healthcare
interactions, those patientsend up getting a majority of
their primary care throughthose Planned Parenthood
affiliates. So, you know, thatis the give and take of , um,
planned Parenthood as a, as ahealthcare provider in this
space. Right? I mean, we wouldlove to see all of the Planned
(15:53):
Parenthood affiliates , um,offer a , you know, wide
ranging abortion services, forexample. We know that's not the
case, but they see Medicaidpatients and those patients
that see them receivecomprehensive care oftentimes
beyond just reproductive care.
Sometimes those PlannedParenthood affiliates are the
only point of access for , uh,healthcare generally for
(16:15):
Medicaid patients. And so thisis really a targeted attack on
that pipeline. Okay.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
So I guess that covers basically like what's at
stake in this case? I knowthere's so much happening. What
, what else is like stressingyou right now?
Speaker 2 (16:36):
I mean,
Speaker 1 (16:37):
, I know
it's a long list, right? Like,
I
Speaker 2 (16:40):
Wanna know why David Weldon didn't get the votes.
, I'm really concernedabout what is unknown if I am
being honest. Uh , first ofall, kudos to everybody who,
who worked that campaign tomake sure yeah . That David
Weldon was not confirmed tohead the CDC , because that
(17:02):
would have been a nightmare.
But I also wanna know what wasso bad that Republicans were
like, yeah, no, we can't, we.
And so that is something thatis stressing me out because it
is part of the larger wholescale attack on the public
health infrastructure that weare seeing right now that
exists well beyond the attackson , uh, bodily autonomy and
(17:25):
reproductive , uh, health,health rights and justice . Uh,
we are undermining theeffectiveness of this nation in
just doing what it has donevery well. I mean, we all got
warts , but like, you know,broadly speaking, our stem
dominance, our real likepresence in public health both
(17:48):
domestically and globally, likeI am bewildered at the speed on
those attacks. And I thought Iwas pretty well prepared for
Trump 2.0. So that's, that'sabsolutely stressing me out.
The capitulation by , uh,centrist stems on everything
right now is super stressing meout. You know , um, I just,
Speaker 1 (18:12):
I'm thinking about like the lost data, like the
lost data sets . Like one ofthe big things that U-S-A-I-D
funded was the demographic andhealth surveys around the
world, and like yeah , theyhold the data sets so, so much
data one may not be continuedto be collected in the same way
(18:32):
without the US investment. And,and two , some of that historic
data, like people may haveparts of it, but they might not
have all of it. Um, just lost.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
I mean, demography is gonna be vibes now, Jenny .
Yeah . Just vibes not data .
Speaker 1 (18:46):
Isn't everything just vibes now?
Speaker 2 (18:48):
Yeah. And they're the worst. I mean, look, I I'm
not gonna say I'm not gonna,I'm not gonna stay down. Yeah ,
right. Weldon was a tremendouswin. The advocates who are
challenging everything rightnow out of Trump 2.0 are doing
amazing work in throwing sandin the gears. And I know that
(19:11):
there are people who , um, arestill employed in federal
capacities who are alsothrowing sand in the gears and
doing so behind the scenes andwithout notice and rightly so.
So those are the places where Iam really digging in right now
, um, and offering as muchsolidarity and support and, you
(19:33):
know, anything I can, becausehopelessness is a political
tool and I refuse to, I'm notnecessarily hopeful, but I'm
not going to stay hopeless.
Right. Um, I am really feeling, um, that work that folks are
doing and the need to supportit , um, and be very clear-eyed
(19:58):
about it in the moment.
Speaker 1 (19:59):
Yeah. And I just thinking of those people who
are still , uh, working for thegovernment and, and are doing
that, like throwing sand in thegears , like just what a
thankless like amazing job andlike
Speaker 2 (20:13):
Exactly. Still,
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Like I'm sure advocates are reaching out to
them mad that they're like, and, and so I, I just, I really
feel for those people who aredoing that work and Yeah . And
trying to do everything theyare able to do to slow things
down or stop things and whilealso being advocated at for not
doing enough. And that isadvocate's jobs, but also I, I
(20:36):
do feel for the person that'slike stuck in the middle trying
to , um, do it. And I also justfeel for like people I know
who've like less the USgovernment and are like
watching their life's work betorn apart. 'cause
Speaker 2 (20:50):
Yeah , I know. I mean, it's, it's, it's wild
times right now. The oligarchyis no fun.
Speaker 1 (20:58):
Okay. So I guess we could go back to the case .
Okay. I , I'm just thinkingthrough like, there's so much,
so much happening aroundMedicaid right now that it does
feel like there is, it just, it, it , it feels so much right
now, and I'm just thinkingthrough all of the ways where
(21:20):
Medicaid is, plays such apivotal role. Like 41% of
births in this country arecovered by Medicaid. And so
watching these attacks and thenwatching access to family
planning come , may be underattack with this Medina case. I
just, and we're already in amaternal mortality crisis,
(21:41):
particularly for black women.
I, it's just like all of itcoming together to really
possibly have reallydevastating consequences mm-hmm
. And it is justweighing on me right now.
Speaker 2 (21:53):
I mean, I think that that's a reasonable response to
the times because there's not a, I mean, there's not really an
answer to that that's clean.
Yeah . Um , at any rate , uh,in the , in this current
moment. But it is incrediblyimportant to connect the dots.
And I think that that's onething that the Medina case
really does, is it allows us tohave a conversation about how
(22:17):
Medicaid folds into thedelivery of healthcare services
in this country generally. Andthe fact that, you know, to
sort of bring it back to the,my my observation that this
feels like a full circle momentin the, in the conversation of
Henry Hyde's legacy, the ideathat conservatives have always
(22:40):
said that they may not be ableto block reproductive
healthcare for everybody, butthey will absolutely block it
for folks with low incomes. Andthat's what Henry Hyde said in
passing the Hyde Amendment outof the gates. And that's the
(23:01):
spirit in which theconservatives have, and some
centrist democrats haveembraced this fight. And so I
think we just in this momentwhere, you know, we , uh, the,
you know, I said theoligarchy's no fun, but really
we find ourselves deeplyingrained in a , in class
(23:25):
warfare from the top down rightnow in this country, to see
this as a way to further limitthe ability of people who are
not born into wealth to livetheir full civic lives is real.
Because what does it mean torestrict access to healthcare ?
Well, it makes going to yourjob harder. It makes earning a
(23:49):
living consistently harder. Itmakes all of the things that
bodily autonomy and policiesthat embrace and endorse that
as far as a full civic lifepossible. Right. I mean, let's
have the conversation aboutthis case in the same breath as
the Doge cuts, because who arethose affecting a large swath
(24:14):
of workers with disabilities,disabled veterans, those are
folks who are beneficiaries offederal programs and dollars in
some ways they're getting cutout. This is, they're, they're
in alliance now with SouthCarolina Medicaid recipients in
(24:35):
this case in many ways. Andwhoever can is the organizer
that can get these folks in theroom talking to each other, has
the answer to this moment.
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (24:46):
I, I think it is so important to be talking, making
sure that we are connectingthose dots and having those
cross-cutting conversationsbecause we get so focused on
our siloed part of thatconversation, whether that's
abortion or some people arefocused on birth control, or
some people are , are focusedon people with disabilities or
(25:09):
the L-G-B-T-Q community, and weneed to make sure that we are
connecting the dots of how thisis across all of these issues
and has impacts on all of thecommunities.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
Exactly. Exactly.
Because by keeping thatconversation siloed by a
shotgun approach of attacksfrom the conservative legal
movement, the ability toseparate and isolate these ,
uh, these folks and us all frombeing in community is a
(25:39):
political strategy. It's apolitical strategy and it's
working. And the times in whichit has not worked have been
those moments where folksreally did collectively come
together around this. And so,you know, I do if to the extent
that, that we can be lookingfor silver linings in this
(26:00):
particular moment, I do see agalvanizing opportunity in just
the parade of horribles that wehave seen on under , uh, Trump
2.0 so far. And we know thatit's emboldening psych fans in
state legislatures. So this isnot just something that is a,
oh, that's a DC fight , orthat's not gonna hit me here in
(26:24):
Colorado or California.
Medi-Cal serves like 80% ofCalifornians right now, and
that's the state Medicaidprogram. And I think that's
another thing that folks maybedon't understand is that, you
know, they hear Medicaid and,and don't know that that's
actually a program that they'reusing because states name it
(26:46):
their own thing. So they'relike, no, you can cut Medicaid,
but hands off Medi-Cal babe.
That's the same thing. Yep .
Speaker 1 (26:55):
Or I'm even thinking back to the fights over the a
CA of like, oh , get rid of theaca, but I want Medicaid or Yes
.
Speaker 2 (27:05):
Right. Like, or like, you know , um, repeal
Obamacare. Yeah . But, youknow, hands off my insurance
like sweetheart. Yeah. Butagain, I mean, you know, same
playbook, right? Like we canlook back and, and like roll
our eyes and sigh and all ofthat stuff, but it is the same
(27:28):
tactical playbook. And this iswhere I think the conservative
legal movement deserves abouquet of dried flowers
because they have reallywaited, right. They have
pursued this line of attack forthe entirety of my career in
this space since I have been alegal journalist. I have not, I
(27:50):
, there has not been a momentwhere I have not talked about
efforts to defund PlannedParenthood or to unwind , uh,
Medicaid or, you know, somecombination of both. And I have
been doing this now, going ontwo full decades to give
listeners a sense of how longfolks like, you know, the
(28:13):
Alliance or a DF and like, youknow, all of those folks, the
Beckett fund, all of them.
Right? 20 years. 20 years. Imean, I remember when Texas
made a whole new public healthprogram.. Yes.
Speaker 1 (28:29):
I was just thinking of Texas. I was thinking of
that with also Texas gettingrid of their family planning
funding. Yeah . And then seeinglike, oh , oh. Like our , oops
, our , oops. I guess we doneed to fund that.
Speaker 2 (28:41):
Yeah. You know, so, you know, we can, we can, you
know, make some jokes aboutthat and , and everything, but
really like, you know, have ,as folks are, are listening to
this episode, really thinkabout the various ways in which
we are seeing conservativestarget folks who are not in the
(29:02):
1% not to like use that kind ofcorny class jargon, but truly
this is about taking away fromfolks who are contributing,
right? It's not like the folkswho are Medicaid beneficiaries
aren't contributing into thesystem that doles out Medicaid
(29:22):
dollars. They absolutely are.
Elon Musk just thinks hedeserves that money more.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Okay. So that's all kind of bleak, but as, as you
said, not hopeless. We , we arenot hopeless. So what can the
audience do right now? How canthey get involved in some of
these fights?
Speaker 2 (29:41):
That's an excellent question. Everybody has a lane.
And I think that that's reallyimportant to acknowledge out of
the gates because we are in amoment that is not going to be
solved in one electoral cycle.
It is not, there's not onecourt case that's gonna be
like, whew , okay, back tonormal folks like that, that
(30:02):
ship has sailed. So first andforemost, spend a little time
figure out what your lane is.
Maybe that lane right now iscalling your representatives
and senators and calling thesenators in other places to
remind them that we are allconnected and advocating like
that. Maybe your lane isfinding resources and donating
(30:27):
to local direct , uh, support ,uh, organizations that are
helping folks right now getbasic needs, whether that their
orgs that provide folksassistance in accessing
abortion care, whether they'refood banks and, you know,
community shelters. I mean, oneof the things that we are not
talking enough about is thechaos on the local level for a
(30:50):
lot of social services thatthis administration has
unleashed. Places like, youknow, domestic violence
shelters , um, places thatprovide services to , uh, youth
and young adults. Folks, youknow, services for folks who
have aged out of foster careand are trying to find their
way. These are organizationsand services that are upended
(31:14):
that are in complete likeupheaval right now with all of
this chaos serving some of ourmost vulnerable populations.
And they need help right now.
Um, so that is absolutely oneway and really build community
where and how you can , um,we've talked about it a little
bit, but this is an effort tokeep folks isolated and siloed
(31:37):
and overwhelmed. And a strategyagainst that is to be in
community and when possible todo so joyfully art, music,
literature, all of that is soimportant right now because
fascists hate joy.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
I really love the like, find your lane as
somebody who is like the peoplepleaser and feels like I need
to do all the things. I alwaysfeel like I'm a failure when
I'm not doing all the things.
Um, so I , I am a huge fan oflike, reminding people Yeah.
That you don't need to do allthe things. It's okay if you
can't show up for that protestif it , if you can't call your
(32:17):
person because of 'cause ofwhatever. Like, you'll find
your way that works for you inthis moment.
Speaker 2 (32:23):
Exactly. And it's not possible for one person to
do all the things. And if webuy into that, we burn out,
which is also a politicalstrategy.
Speaker 1 (32:35):
Jess, thank you so much for being here. I'm so
bummed I'm gonna miss you , uh,when you're in DC but I know it
will be a great show and I hopeour, some of our DC audience
can attend in my place. Please
Speaker 2 (32:48):
Do. And if you do show up, say hi. We real ,
like, I love actually meetingpeople in the wild. I know that
I may not like it , butI, but really Imani and I do.
Um, and it is just, you know ,um, we are gonna be out , um,
in DC for this case anyway, andwhen the opportunity , uh, with
(33:08):
Liz came up and she said, youknow, it's just really seems
like folks could, could usesome, you know , um, some
targeted good humor right now.
Um , we said, yeah, let's doit. So , uh, hopefully we'll
see you there, folks. Can't
Speaker 1 (33:23):
Wait. Thanks Jess.
Speaker 2 (33:24):
Thank you so much, Jenny .
Speaker 1 (33:25):
Okay, y'all, I hope you enjoyed my conversation
with Jess. Um , hearing aboutthis case was really important.
Like I said, it's been flying abit under the radar, so I'm
glad that we were able to talkabout it and can focus on what
that will mean for people .
Okay. With that, I will seeeverybody next week. If you
have any questions, comments,or topics you would like us to
(33:47):
cover, always feel free toshoot me an email. You can
reach me at jenny jn , nie@reprofightback.com , or you
can find us on social media.
We're at Repro Fight back onFacebook and Twitter or repro
FB on Instagram. If you loveour podcast and wanna make sure
more people find it, take thetime to rate and review us on
(34:08):
your favorite podcast platform.
Or if you wanna make sure tosupport the podcast, you can
also donate on our website atre pros fight back.com . Thanks
all .
Welcome to Repro Fight Back a podcast on all
things related to sexual andreproductive health rights and
justice. Hi re pros . How'severybody doing? I'm your host
Jenny Wetter , and my pronounsare she her . So y'all, I feel
like a huge weight has beenlifted off my shoulders. Just
(00:24):
like having the report card outthere for everybody to see and,
and just have it done. I feelso much lighter and like now I
can get, just concentrate onthe rest of my job and digging
out from under the mountain ofemail that I am under I , yeah
, so nice to just have thatdone and I think the new
(00:48):
microsite looks great. I hopey'all have had a chance to go
and explore it@rereportcard.repros fightback.com. It's been
so much fun to be able to playon it and see comparisons
across indicators and justinstead of just the overall
grade. I think it's a greattool. I hope you all do as
(01:09):
well. It was a lot of work andI am just so proud of the work
that our team has done,especially Rachel and Heidi.
They put so much work in to getthis microsite ready in
particular , um, I'm just sograteful for all of the time
and effort they put into it.
And for the report card design,our amazing designer Tanya,
(01:31):
made a beautiful , uh, reportcard if you go to the PDFs,
like she just did anoutstanding job. And yeah, I'm
just so grateful to everybodyfor all of the time and effort
they put into the report cardand I'm just so happy to have
it done. Um, if you arelistening to this on When it
comes out, I am at the last dayof a conference and I am so
(01:55):
excited to be around a bunch ofTitle 10 providers and other
people who work on Title 10 .
If you're at the conference andyou've, and you hear this
episode, make sure to come stopby our booth. We've got fun
things that we're handing out,including some fun liberal Jane
stickers. We had her designedfor re Pros. We have fun bags ,
(02:18):
um, and I think we have someother fun things at the booth
too, so make sure to come byand say hi. I'm very excited to
do that. I'm recording thisbefore the conference, but I'm
just really excited to get totalk to people about the
podcast. It's always so muchfun and not only to get to meet
people who are listeners ormaybe listeners, but get to
(02:39):
hear ideas, particularly from agroup that does this work day
in and day out to hear aboutwhat things they would like us
to talk about on the podcast.
So I love doing that. And ifyou have ideas of things you'd
love to hear us talk about,always feel free to reach out.
You can reach out to us onsocial media at re Pros, fight
back on Facebook, Twitter andBlue squat , blue Sky . Sorry,
(03:01):
y'all
Pros fb on Instagram. Or youcan email me at
jenny@reprofightback.com . Andthat's Jenny with an IE Yeah,
all the ways please. I alwayslove to hear what y'all think.
And I guess while I'm at it, ifI'm gonna do like housekeeping,
things like that, if you lovethe podcast, it'd be awesome if
(03:21):
you could rate and review us onyour favorite podcast platform.
It helps other people find thepodcast and always appreciate
the love from y'all. Okay, Ithink with that, let's turn to
this week's episode. I am veryexcited to have on the always
amazing Jessica Mason PLO withRewire News Group and host ,
(03:42):
co-host of Boom Lawyeredpodcast , uh, on with us to
talk about a case in front ofthe Supreme Court tomorrow
Medina versus PlannedParenthood of Southern Atlantic
Southeast Atlantic. Sorry, I'llbungled that a little bit, but
it's an important case that isflying a bit under the radar,
so I'm excited for y'all tohear about it. So with that,
let's go to my interview withJess. Hi Jess. Thanks so much
(04:06):
for being here.
Speaker 2 (04:07):
Oh, thanks so much for having me back. It's always
a treat. Um,
Speaker 1 (04:10):
So before we get started, let's just do a quick,
like who are you, you wanna doyour pronouns and stuff as
well?
Speaker 2 (04:16):
Sure. I am Jess plo . I use she her pronouns, and I
am the executive editor atRewire News Group and co-host
of our flagship podcast. Boom.
Lawyered.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
So I was gonna make sure to do this at the end, but
like, let's do it right now. Doyou have anything else you
would maybe like to promote,like maybe something that's
happening in DC this week?
Speaker 2 (04:36):
DC Friends. Oh my gosh. Um, you all are in it.
You are in the ringer. And soAmani Gandy and I are coming to
see you. We're gonna be therewith Liz Winsted and the
amazing abortion access frontfolks for a live podcast mashup
that you didn't know youneeded. Yes , it's boom Buzz
(04:56):
killed , and we will be at theBlack Cat on April 3rd. Doors
open at seven , um, show startsat eight. You can get tickets
online. Um, and please come seeus. Come laugh. We are gonna
have a ball.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
So that's like the bit of good news. I figured we
should just start with likesome happiness at the top
'cause
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
The rest is like less than happy, but okay. So I
feel like there's a big SupremeCourt case that's flying a bit
under the radar right now. LikeI was shocked. I went to prep
for this interview to make surethat I could have a decent
conversation with you aboutlike what is going on and I was
like googling and I was like,wait, news. It was like three
(05:41):
pages deep and it was mostly aDF and I was like , uh, what is
going on? Like there is hardlyany information about this
case. So can you tell us aboutthis case that is coming up ,
uh, this week?
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Yeah. So , um, you are right , uh, with the fire
hose of terrible news in Trump2.0 , um, in this tremendous
and re very real threat toMedicaid recipients , um, is
before the Supreme Court. Andit's a case called Medina
versus Planned ParenthoodSoutheast. And it is , um, for
(06:16):
longtime listeners theculmination of decades of
efforts truly by theanti-choice community to try
and kick Planned Parenthood,but really any reproductive
healthcare provider that , uh,services Medicaid patients out
of Medicaid generally. And sothis is truly an attack on
(06:40):
Medicaid recipients and we seeit coming in the form of
limiting or attempts to limitaccess to reproductive
healthcare generally. And sothis is pretty classic
anti-choice playbook here, findthe repro boogeyman and use it
(07:01):
as a way to come for poorpeople. And it feels like in
many ways that this case is theculmination of the Henry of
Henry Hyde's legacy and theconversation around the Hyde
Amendment that we continue tohave in this country. Um, and
that is whether or not if youare a low income person who
(07:23):
relies on Medicaid for yourhealth insurance coverage,
whether or not you get todecide who you get to see as a
health provider and whether ornot that health provider has to
provide you healthcare at all.
It's shocking. Yes,
Speaker 1 (07:35):
It is absolutely part of like the continuation
of the, the Hyde conversation,it also feels like a big part
of the defund Plan Parenthoodconversation with people
thinking there's like yes , aline item in the budget that
they're just like, okay, eraseno funding to Planned
Parenthood. This is, this iswhat they mean. They , this is
what they mean is preventingpeople on Medicaid from going
(07:57):
to Planned Parenthood.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
Right? And so it's exactly it. I mean, you're
right. There is no line itemthat goes to Planned
Parenthood, right? Like , um,if only, and I'm saying that
just in the sense of like, wow,that would be light years from
where we are right now. Um, butinstead what conservatives like
to do is monkey around withdefinitions within the Medicaid
(08:20):
statute and within , uh, therules governing it. And usually
this comes in the case and, andwe see it here in this , uh,
South Carolina challenge as towhether or not , uh, planned
Parenthood in this case is aqualified , uh, medical
provider within the definitionsof the Medicaid statute. So
(08:42):
Medicaid dictates that onlyqualified providers get the
funding and naturallyconservatives see that as an
opening to define who isqualified and who is not. If
you happen to providecomprehensive reproductive
healthcare , they like totarget you as being not
qualified under the statute.
Now, that's not the issuethat's teed up before the
(09:03):
Supreme Court in this casethough, which is why I think
this case is even moredangerous than whether or not
medical providers who offerabortion con and contraception
are qualified under Medicaid.
The question that the SupremeCourt is going to answer is
whether the Medicaid statuteconfers a right to its
(09:25):
recipients to go to providersof their choosing. That's the
inverse of that. Is PlannedParenthood a qualified , uh,
provider question? And it ismuch bigger and it is much more
dangerous because what it is isan opening for the legal
conservatives on the court tohave a walk about on how
(09:47):
Congress confers rights viastatute. And that should alarm
everyone who has been payingattention to the way this court
interprets rights and who hasthem and how they have been
historically recognized andcreated. Yeah,
Speaker 1 (10:07):
I definitely started like reading this stuff and I
was like, oh, this is way more,more complicated than I
originally had thought and getsmuch more legalese than , uh,
my depth. So I'm so glad thatyou were on to talk about like
what is actually at stake inthis case.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
The nugget of the case is whether or not poor
people have rights. I reallyneed listeners to understand
that because it is an openingto the larger conversation. Do
poor people have rights underMedicaid to see a healthcare
provider that they want tocheck that box? Do you know
poor people have rights underother public programs to access
(10:48):
those benefits that are accordwith those rights? Like this is
where the dominoes start tofall. We're seeing this in a
long line of attacks right nowon social safety programs, for
example, right? We know thatMedicaid generally is
completely in the budget. Crosshairs would have a tremendous
(11:10):
ripple effect in this case aswell. We know that section 5 0
4 of the Rehab Act right now isin the cross hairs from the
legal conservatives. That is astatute and real broad safety
net that requires accommodationin basically anything that
receives federal funding. Youknow, if you are somebody who
(11:33):
interacts with the federal orstate government in any way,
shape or form, you will betouched by the outcome of these
cases and these movements atsome point. Why do I say that?
Well, Medicaid, for example,covers a majority of pregnant
women in this country who arelow income seniors. This is a
(11:56):
joint program between thefederal government and the
states for providing benefitsthe same way that education has
been historically in thiscountry, the same way other,
you know , um, types of public, uh, services have been. So
for the Supreme Court to decidein this particular case, you
(12:16):
know what, no , maybe theMedicaid statute, all it does
is grant you the ability tohave insurance coverage, but
there's no right to access thatcare. That is a way that the
Supreme Court can create thefoundation that there is no
fundamental right to healthcarein this country. We saw it in
(12:37):
Dobbs. They can build on thatin Medina. Oof ,
Speaker 1 (12:41):
Okay. That, that hits hard. And I think the
other thing I've really alsobeen thinking about is how many
people think this Medicaidfight isn't their fight and how
it's not gonna impact thembecause, because they're not on
Medicaid and you know, a lot ofpeople go to hospitals that are
covered by Medicaid mm-hmm
(13:04):
those people no longer haveMedicaid like it , those
hospitals are gonna suffer. Andso a hospital you go to with
your non-Medicaid insurance mayno longer exist if they are not
able to treat patients who areon Medicaid because they're
losing the sources of funding.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
It's such an important point and that , and
one that is so, that just needsto be underscored because so
many of those hospitals alsohave wide range of specialties
under them as well. And that isin part because they can
operate thanks to Medicaidfunding and the ability to see
(13:42):
those patients. And so this issomething that you and I have
chatted about. You know, wewill not be having a
conversation, for example,around this case that asks the
question of why institutionsdon't have an obligation to see
Medicaid patients. This hasbecome a burden by design on
some public institutions, andit's because of a for-profit
(14:06):
healthcare system that reallyjust does not like folks on low
with low incomes. Like theywant to extract money from
patients. Um, and so that is,that is wrapped up in the
larger conversation as well.
And I mean, I think the realityis folks are one accident away
from a debilitating event thatputs them or someone they love
(14:28):
on Medicaid. And we are verycavalier in this country, and
Covid did not teach us that,but it is the truth. We are one
accident away from someone. Welove being on Medicaid.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
And I think that leads to this other point of
like, why this is so important.
We're talking about PlannedParenthood is because not all
providers accept Medicaid.
Planned Parenthood does. Right?
And for reproductive health,for family planning, you can
get into Planned Parenthood,like they can see more patients
(15:02):
because this is what they do.
They know, and the theappointments can move faster
then if you go to like a , ageneral O-B-G-Y-N who may not
take Medicaid. So it is such acore part of sexual and
reproductive healthcare thatPlanned Parenthood is, well,
Medicaid in , in general isjust a huge sexual and
(15:23):
reproductive health program.
Yes. But then also thatpatients can go to the provider
they choose, which is oftenPlanned Parenthood.
Speaker 2 (15:31):
And given the nature of those healthcare
interactions, those patientsend up getting a majority of
their primary care throughthose Planned Parenthood
affiliates. So, you know, thatis the give and take of , um,
planned Parenthood as a, as ahealthcare provider in this
space. Right? I mean, we wouldlove to see all of the Planned
(15:53):
Parenthood affiliates , um,offer a , you know, wide
ranging abortion services, forexample. We know that's not the
case, but they see Medicaidpatients and those patients
that see them receivecomprehensive care oftentimes
beyond just reproductive care.
Sometimes those PlannedParenthood affiliates are the
only point of access for , uh,healthcare generally for
(16:15):
Medicaid patients. And so thisis really a targeted attack on
that pipeline. Okay.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
So I guess that covers basically like what's at
stake in this case? I knowthere's so much happening. What
, what else is like stressingyou right now?
Speaker 2 (16:36):
I mean,
Speaker 1 (16:37):
I
Speaker 2 (16:40):
Wanna know why David Weldon didn't get the votes.
being honest. Uh , first ofall, kudos to everybody who,
who worked that campaign tomake sure yeah . That David
Weldon was not confirmed tohead the CDC , because that
(17:02):
would have been a nightmare.
But I also wanna know what wasso bad that Republicans were
like, yeah, no, we can't, we.
And so that is something thatis stressing me out because it
is part of the larger wholescale attack on the public
health infrastructure that weare seeing right now that
exists well beyond the attackson , uh, bodily autonomy and
(17:25):
reproductive , uh, health,health rights and justice . Uh,
we are undermining theeffectiveness of this nation in
just doing what it has donevery well. I mean, we all got
warts , but like, you know,broadly speaking, our stem
dominance, our real likepresence in public health both
(17:48):
domestically and globally, likeI am bewildered at the speed on
those attacks. And I thought Iwas pretty well prepared for
Trump 2.0. So that's, that'sabsolutely stressing me out.
The capitulation by , uh,centrist stems on everything
right now is super stressing meout. You know , um, I just,
Speaker 1 (18:12):
I'm thinking about like the lost data, like the
lost data sets . Like one ofthe big things that U-S-A-I-D
funded was the demographic andhealth surveys around the
world, and like yeah , theyhold the data sets so, so much
data one may not be continuedto be collected in the same way
(18:32):
without the US investment. And,and two , some of that historic
data, like people may haveparts of it, but they might not
have all of it. Um, just lost.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
I mean, demography is gonna be vibes now, Jenny .
Yeah . Just vibes not data .
Speaker 1 (18:46):
Isn't everything just vibes now?
Speaker 2 (18:48):
Yeah. And they're the worst. I mean, look, I I'm
not gonna say I'm not gonna,I'm not gonna stay down. Yeah ,
right. Weldon was a tremendouswin. The advocates who are
challenging everything rightnow out of Trump 2.0 are doing
amazing work in throwing sandin the gears. And I know that
(19:11):
there are people who , um, arestill employed in federal
capacities who are alsothrowing sand in the gears and
doing so behind the scenes andwithout notice and rightly so.
So those are the places where Iam really digging in right now
, um, and offering as muchsolidarity and support and, you
(19:33):
know, anything I can, becausehopelessness is a political
tool and I refuse to, I'm notnecessarily hopeful, but I'm
not going to stay hopeless.
Right. Um, I am really feeling, um, that work that folks are
doing and the need to supportit , um, and be very clear-eyed
(19:58):
about it in the moment.
Speaker 1 (19:59):
Yeah. And I just thinking of those people who
are still , uh, working for thegovernment and, and are doing
that, like throwing sand in thegears , like just what a
thankless like amazing job andlike
Speaker 2 (20:13):
Exactly. Still,
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Like I'm sure advocates are reaching out to
them mad that they're like, and, and so I, I just, I really
feel for those people who aredoing that work and Yeah . And
trying to do everything theyare able to do to slow things
down or stop things and whilealso being advocated at for not
doing enough. And that isadvocate's jobs, but also I, I
(20:36):
do feel for the person that'slike stuck in the middle trying
to , um, do it. And I also justfeel for like people I know
who've like less the USgovernment and are like
watching their life's work betorn apart. 'cause
Speaker 2 (20:50):
Yeah , I know. I mean, it's, it's, it's wild
times right now. The oligarchyis no fun.
Speaker 1 (20:58):
Okay. So I guess we could go back to the case .
Okay. I , I'm just thinkingthrough like, there's so much,
so much happening aroundMedicaid right now that it does
feel like there is, it just, it, it , it feels so much right
now, and I'm just thinkingthrough all of the ways where
(21:20):
Medicaid is, plays such apivotal role. Like 41% of
births in this country arecovered by Medicaid. And so
watching these attacks and thenwatching access to family
planning come , may be underattack with this Medina case. I
just, and we're already in amaternal mortality crisis,
(21:41):
particularly for black women.
I, it's just like all of itcoming together to really
possibly have reallydevastating consequences mm-hmm
Speaker 2 (21:53):
I mean, I think that that's a reasonable response to
the times because there's not a, I mean, there's not really an
answer to that that's clean.
Yeah . Um , at any rate , uh,in the , in this current
moment. But it is incrediblyimportant to connect the dots.
And I think that that's onething that the Medina case
really does, is it allows us tohave a conversation about how
(22:17):
Medicaid folds into thedelivery of healthcare services
in this country generally. Andthe fact that, you know, to
sort of bring it back to the,my my observation that this
feels like a full circle momentin the, in the conversation of
Henry Hyde's legacy, the ideathat conservatives have always
(22:40):
said that they may not be ableto block reproductive
healthcare for everybody, butthey will absolutely block it
for folks with low incomes. Andthat's what Henry Hyde said in
passing the Hyde Amendment outof the gates. And that's the
(23:01):
spirit in which theconservatives have, and some
centrist democrats haveembraced this fight. And so I
think we just in this momentwhere, you know, we , uh, the,
you know, I said theoligarchy's no fun, but really
we find ourselves deeplyingrained in a , in class
(23:25):
warfare from the top down rightnow in this country, to see
this as a way to further limitthe ability of people who are
not born into wealth to livetheir full civic lives is real.
Because what does it mean torestrict access to healthcare ?
Well, it makes going to yourjob harder. It makes earning a
(23:49):
living consistently harder. Itmakes all of the things that
bodily autonomy and policiesthat embrace and endorse that
as far as a full civic lifepossible. Right. I mean, let's
have the conversation aboutthis case in the same breath as
the Doge cuts, because who arethose affecting a large swath
(24:14):
of workers with disabilities,disabled veterans, those are
folks who are beneficiaries offederal programs and dollars in
some ways they're getting cutout. This is, they're, they're
in alliance now with SouthCarolina Medicaid recipients in
(24:35):
this case in many ways. Andwhoever can is the organizer
that can get these folks in theroom talking to each other, has
the answer to this moment.
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (24:46):
I, I think it is so important to be talking, making
sure that we are connectingthose dots and having those
cross-cutting conversationsbecause we get so focused on
our siloed part of thatconversation, whether that's
abortion or some people arefocused on birth control, or
some people are , are focusedon people with disabilities or
(25:09):
the L-G-B-T-Q community, and weneed to make sure that we are
connecting the dots of how thisis across all of these issues
and has impacts on all of thecommunities.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
Exactly. Exactly.
Because by keeping thatconversation siloed by a
shotgun approach of attacksfrom the conservative legal
movement, the ability toseparate and isolate these ,
uh, these folks and us all frombeing in community is a
(25:39):
political strategy. It's apolitical strategy and it's
working. And the times in whichit has not worked have been
those moments where folksreally did collectively come
together around this. And so,you know, I do if to the extent
that, that we can be lookingfor silver linings in this
(26:00):
particular moment, I do see agalvanizing opportunity in just
the parade of horribles that wehave seen on under , uh, Trump
2.0 so far. And we know thatit's emboldening psych fans in
state legislatures. So this isnot just something that is a,
oh, that's a DC fight , orthat's not gonna hit me here in
(26:24):
Colorado or California.
Medi-Cal serves like 80% ofCalifornians right now, and
that's the state Medicaidprogram. And I think that's
another thing that folks maybedon't understand is that, you
know, they hear Medicaid and,and don't know that that's
actually a program that they'reusing because states name it
(26:46):
their own thing. So they'relike, no, you can cut Medicaid,
but hands off Medi-Cal babe.
That's the same thing. Yep .
Speaker 1 (26:55):
Or I'm even thinking back to the fights over the a
CA of like, oh , get rid of theaca, but I want Medicaid or Yes
.
Speaker 2 (27:05):
Right. Like, or like, you know , um, repeal
Obamacare. Yeah . But, youknow, hands off my insurance
like sweetheart. Yeah. Butagain, I mean, you know, same
playbook, right? Like we canlook back and, and like roll
our eyes and sigh and all ofthat stuff, but it is the same
(27:28):
tactical playbook. And this iswhere I think the conservative
legal movement deserves abouquet of dried flowers
because they have reallywaited, right. They have
pursued this line of attack forthe entirety of my career in
this space since I have been alegal journalist. I have not, I
(27:50):
, there has not been a momentwhere I have not talked about
efforts to defund PlannedParenthood or to unwind , uh,
Medicaid or, you know, somecombination of both. And I have
been doing this now, going ontwo full decades to give
listeners a sense of how longfolks like, you know, the
(28:13):
Alliance or a DF and like, youknow, all of those folks, the
Beckett fund, all of them.
Right? 20 years. 20 years. Imean, I remember when Texas
made a whole new public healthprogram.
Speaker 1 (28:29):
I was just thinking of Texas. I was thinking of
that with also Texas gettingrid of their family planning
funding. Yeah . And then seeinglike, oh , oh. Like our , oops
, our , oops. I guess we doneed to fund that.
Speaker 2 (28:41):
Yeah. You know, so, you know, we can, we can, you
know, make some jokes aboutthat and , and everything, but
really like, you know, have ,as folks are, are listening to
this episode, really thinkabout the various ways in which
we are seeing conservativestarget folks who are not in the
(29:02):
1% not to like use that kind ofcorny class jargon, but truly
this is about taking away fromfolks who are contributing,
right? It's not like the folkswho are Medicaid beneficiaries
aren't contributing into thesystem that doles out Medicaid
(29:22):
dollars. They absolutely are.
Elon Musk just thinks hedeserves that money more.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Okay. So that's all kind of bleak, but as, as you
said, not hopeless. We , we arenot hopeless. So what can the
audience do right now? How canthey get involved in some of
these fights?
Speaker 2 (29:41):
That's an excellent question. Everybody has a lane.
And I think that that's reallyimportant to acknowledge out of
the gates because we are in amoment that is not going to be
solved in one electoral cycle.
It is not, there's not onecourt case that's gonna be
like, whew , okay, back tonormal folks like that, that
(30:02):
ship has sailed. So first andforemost, spend a little time
figure out what your lane is.
Maybe that lane right now iscalling your representatives
and senators and calling thesenators in other places to
remind them that we are allconnected and advocating like
that. Maybe your lane isfinding resources and donating
(30:27):
to local direct , uh, support ,uh, organizations that are
helping folks right now getbasic needs, whether that their
orgs that provide folksassistance in accessing
abortion care, whether they'refood banks and, you know,
community shelters. I mean, oneof the things that we are not
talking enough about is thechaos on the local level for a
(30:50):
lot of social services thatthis administration has
unleashed. Places like, youknow, domestic violence
shelters , um, places thatprovide services to , uh, youth
and young adults. Folks, youknow, services for folks who
have aged out of foster careand are trying to find their
way. These are organizationsand services that are upended
(31:14):
that are in complete likeupheaval right now with all of
this chaos serving some of ourmost vulnerable populations.
And they need help right now.
Um, so that is absolutely oneway and really build community
where and how you can , um,we've talked about it a little
bit, but this is an effort tokeep folks isolated and siloed
(31:37):
and overwhelmed. And a strategyagainst that is to be in
community and when possible todo so joyfully art, music,
literature, all of that is soimportant right now because
fascists hate joy.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
I really love the like, find your lane as
somebody who is like the peoplepleaser and feels like I need
to do all the things. I alwaysfeel like I'm a failure when
I'm not doing all the things.
Um, so I , I am a huge fan oflike, reminding people Yeah.
That you don't need to do allthe things. It's okay if you
can't show up for that protestif it , if you can't call your
(32:17):
person because of 'cause ofwhatever. Like, you'll find
your way that works for you inthis moment.
Speaker 2 (32:23):
Exactly. And it's not possible for one person to
do all the things. And if webuy into that, we burn out,
which is also a politicalstrategy.
Speaker 1 (32:35):
Jess, thank you so much for being here. I'm so
bummed I'm gonna miss you , uh,when you're in DC but I know it
will be a great show and I hopeour, some of our DC audience
can attend in my place. Please
Speaker 2 (32:48):
Do. And if you do show up, say hi. We real ,
like, I love actually meetingpeople in the wild. I know that
I may not like it
Um, and it is just, you know ,um, we are gonna be out , um,
in DC for this case anyway, andwhen the opportunity , uh, with
(33:08):
Liz came up and she said, youknow, it's just really seems
like folks could, could usesome, you know , um, some
targeted good humor right now.
Um , we said, yeah, let's doit. So , uh, hopefully we'll
see you there, folks. Can't
Speaker 1 (33:23):
Wait. Thanks Jess.
Speaker 2 (33:24):
Thank you so much, Jenny .
Speaker 1 (33:25):
Okay, y'all, I hope you enjoyed my conversation
with Jess. Um , hearing aboutthis case was really important.
Like I said, it's been flying abit under the radar, so I'm
glad that we were able to talkabout it and can focus on what
that will mean for people .
Okay. With that, I will seeeverybody next week. If you
have any questions, comments,or topics you would like us to
(33:47):
cover, always feel free toshoot me an email. You can
reach me at jenny jn , nie@reprofightback.com , or you
can find us on social media.
We're at Repro Fight back onFacebook and Twitter or repro
FB on Instagram. If you loveour podcast and wanna make sure
more people find it, take thetime to rate and review us on
(34:08):
your favorite podcast platform.
Or if you wanna make sure tosupport the podcast, you can
also donate on our website atre pros fight back.com . Thanks
all .
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.