Everyone knows that it's expensive to raise children. The annual cost of day care alone exceeds public college tuition in most states. For many women, particularly in the growing number of female-headed households, financial stability is dependent on their ability to determine whether and when to have a child.
I was one of those women. My comfortable middle-class life was shattered when my husband abruptly left me and my three daughters. Just a few weeks later, I discovered I was pregnant. My family was at risk. Without financial support — or even a car — I had few options. Forced onto welfare and reliant on food stamps, I made the difficult decision to have an abortion.
But Pennsylvania state law sought to deny me access to the medical care I desperately needed. In the years before Roe v. Wade, the procedure of abortion was radically restricted.
That experience inspired a lifelong determination to fight for a woman's right to make decisions that affect all aspects of her life, well beyond her uterus. It made real an understanding of the relationship between reproductive freedom and financial stability.
For many women, reproductive rights are, at their most basic level, an economic issue. Without control over when and whether they can have children, women can't fully compete in the workforce or plan for a financially stable future. Fortunately, a woman's right to abortion was affirmed by the Supreme Court four years after I faced such extreme hurdles in access to care. And it's a right consistently supported by more than two-thirds of Americans today.
In New York, support for access to reproductive health care – particularly abortion – even surpasses the national average. New York voters overwhelmingly support a woman's right to choose, and a significant majority want to see passage now of the Women's Equality Act, which recognizes that issues like reproductive rights, equal pay, workplace fairness, and discrimination are inseparable in achieving equality.
Other states, including my home state of Pennsylvania, are considering similar agendas that tie together issues affecting financial stability and reproductive health, including abortion, because we know that's what women need.
But politicians remain maddeningly out of touch. The New York state GOP is fielding one of its most anti-choice tickets in recent memory. Republican gubernatorial candidate Rob Astorino has called protecting a woman's health throughout the course of her pregnancy – which New York law currently fails to do – "ghastly," and Attorney General candidate John Cahill has called the Women's Equality Act "unnecessary."
They couldn't be more wrong. Changes in the political power structure – most notably, the redistricting that led to sweeping changes in statehouses coast to coast in 2010 — have emboldened anti-choice forces, leading to an unrelenting onslaught of state laws that are fast making Roe v. Wade a hollow shell of itself – jeopardizing the health and lives of countless women, especially those most vulnerable.
New York has the power to ensure that history moves forward, rather than repeating itself. By passing the Women's Equality Act, New York will have a demonstrable impact on the entire nation, giving states like Pennsylvania a model of success upon which to build.
Momentum toward women's equality is building in states across the country; we can't let it be slowed by out-of-touch politicians who can't grasp the connections that so clearly play out in women's lives and are so obvious to the voters.
We've come so far since those dark days before the promise of women's equality. It's our responsibility to ensure that our society continues to value women and recognize the inextricable link between our reproductive rights and our basic economic survival.
Kate Michelman is a former president of NARAL Pro-Choice America and is currently working in Pennsylvania to advance the Women's Health Agenda, a package of legislation inspired by New York's Women's Equality Agenda.