Maternal Health Policy: Steps in the Right Direction
Last week, we spoke with American Solidarity Member and family medicine doctor Elisa Kolk on maternal mortality rates in the United States and some information behind the data that goes into calculating those rates, as well as potential reasons for why women in the United States are at risk. As I mentioned there, several pieces of legislation have been introduced or at least discussed by both Democrats and Republicans to attempt to address this crisis. The average voter might be confused, however, whether these pieces of legislation contradict one another as they are being supported in different circles–the Momnibus Act by progressives and the Care for Her Act by conservatives, mainly. There’s also quite a bit of political jargon to wade through. I invited American Solidarity Party policy guru and National Committee member Eric Anton to break down some legislation for us. Eric is an army veteran, husband, and father of four who lives in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Lauren: Can you share some highlights of the Momnibus Act and the Care for Her Act? Any cons or questionable content, in your opinion?
Eric: The Momnibus Act (H.R.959 – Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2021) is a fairly short and succinct bill which “directs multi-agency efforts to improve maternal health, particularly among racial and ethnic minority groups, veterans, and other vulnerable populations. [And address] maternal health issues related to COVID-19.” It proposes to do this by directing the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to address “the social determinants of maternal health, which include child care, housing, food security, transportation, and environmental conditions.”
The most concrete and specific clauses of this act are to extend postpartum eligibility for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program (SNAP) to 24 months, as well as to direct the Bureau of Prisons and Department of Justice to improve maternal care for incarcerated women and to limit the use of restraints on pregnant prisoners.
While the goal of the bill is desirable, it leaves many of the clauses undefined and open-ended. What does it mean for the HHS to address these social determinants? Grow and diversify the maternal health workforce by how much and with whom? What are the activities called for that mitigate maternal health outcomes associated with climate change, for example? Open-ended questions will be answered in unique and often undesirable ways by unelected administrators and bureaucrats.
In summary, this bill has a goal that is desirable and the concrete suggestions in it are good and should be supported. The open-ended nature of some of its clauses, however, need proper answers.
Lauren: Care for incarcerated pregnant women, which this act addresses, is one of those issues that gets so little media attention. Most people don’t know, for example, that there are states that still allow chaining an inmate to the bed during labor and many others that don’t offer adequate prenatal care and nutrition, especially for high-risk pregnancies. It’s a pro-life and pro-healthcare issue, as well as a criminal justice reform issue.
What about the Care for Her Act?
Eric: The Care for Her Act (H.R.5163) allows eligible taxpayers to claim the Child Tax Credit for the tax year preceding the year a child is born. Presumably this is a retroactive claim, but it is still a good and concrete improvement. This act also establishes a “Pregnancy Support Collaborative” (PSC) under the auspices of HHS and “states that elect to participate.” The PSC will act as an information clearing house to connect expectant parents with supports, services, and other information. The PSC will also award grants to local programs that demonstrate improvement to maternal and infant health outcomes and if a community can reduce Medicaid costs they will retain a portion of these savings.
This bill is fairly concrete and positive. The potential failure point of this, is in the voluntary nature of state enrollment and participation. Information clearinghouses are only as good as the information they have and the partners that join in.
Lauren: Should American Solidarity members support these pieces of legislation?
Eric: Both of these bills are positive and do seem to improve on the current status quo. I would prefer taking the concrete clauses in the Momnibus Act and incorporating them into the Care for Her Act until the Momnibus is clarified, but I would likely vote for them both, regardless, if I were in Congress.
Lauren: Thanks so much, Eric, for your input.
These two pieces of legislation are each championed by one of the two main parties. The question at this point is whether the partisan gridlock can be broken to pass either of them. As a mother, maternal health is something I care deeply about, and I firmly believe that Peter and I can make real headway with the American electorate by being advocates for mothers. It’s clear that American mothers need a lot more support than they’re currently getting. I’m grateful that Congress has set out to give moms the support they require, and I pray that the men and women on Capitol Hill can overcome the challenges that are sure to come up in the process of putting one of these bills on the desk in the Oval Office. In the meantime, the ASP must continue insisting that maternal health be part of the pro-life conversation.
