fbpx
Connect with us

Kaiser Health News

How National Political Ambition Could Fuel, or Fail, Initiatives to Protect Abortion Rights in States

Published

on

Bram Sable-Smith and Rachana Pradhan
Tue, 19 Mar 2024 09:00:00 +0000

ST. LOUIS — In early February, abortion rights supporters gathered to change Missouri history at the Pageant — a storied club where rock 'n' roll revolutionary Chuck Berry often had played: They launched a signature-gathering campaign to put a constitutional amendment to voters this year to legalize abortion in the state.

“We have fought long for this moment,” the Rev. Love Holt, the emcee, told the crowd. “Just two years after Missouri made abortion illegal in virtually all circumstances, the people of our state are going to forever protect abortion access in Missouri's constitution.”

The ballot measure — which would allow abortions until fetal viability — outlasted 16 other related proposals and months of litigation with Republican state officials. Next, its supporters must gather more than 171,000 valid signatures by May 5.

Advertisement

Missouri is one of 13 states weighing abortion-related ballot measures, most of which would protect abortion rights. Abortion rights supporters hope to build on prior ballot wins in seven politically diverse states — California, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, and Vermont — since the Supreme Court in 2022 overturned federal abortion protections, handing authority back to states.

In a presidential election year, national strategy also steers the money. The success of initiatives could hinge on a state's relevance to broader party ambitions. Democrats are focused on where anger over the abortion rollback could propel voter turnout and spur party victories up and down the ballot, in key races for the Senate and White House. Those wins would help guard against what Democrats see as a bigger threat: a national abortion ban.

Republicans are quieter about their national strategy around abortion. But at the state level, the groups mounting opposition campaigns are putting foot soldiers on the streets to deter people from signing ballot petitions.

Abortion rights supporters have raised millions more for ballot campaigns than have opponents, according to a KFF Health review of campaign finance in multiple states.

Advertisement

Still, they “don't have unlimited resources,” said Craig Burnett, an associate professor of political science at Hofstra University and expert on ballot initiatives. They must consider, “Where am I going to get the best bang for my buck here?”

Think Big America, a nonprofit founded by J.B. Pritzker, the billionaire Democratic governor of Illinois, is giving money to abortion rights initiatives in Arizona and Nevada and plans to do so in Montana, senior adviser Mike Ollen said. All are states where abortion remains legal to varying points in pregnancy, but each could have an outsize impact on the national political balance.

Arizona and Nevada are presidential swing states viewed as crucial for to win reelection. They and Montana all have races that could flip control of the U.S. Senate from Democrats to Republicans in 2025.

Ollen said electoral consequences are “part of the calculus” for Think Big America. “We want to make sure that we protect abortion in the states that we're going into,” Ollen said. “But we're also not naive to the threat of a national abortion ban.”

Advertisement

About a fifth of key voter groups — Democratic women, women who live in states where abortion is banned, women who plan to vote for Biden, and women of reproductive age — identify as abortion voters, according to new polling from KFF.

Anti-abortion groups have pressured Republican candidates to support a national ban. Presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump quietly supports a 16-week ban with some exceptions, The New York Times reported.

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, one of the nation's largest anti-abortion groups, said it plans to spend “$92 million and reach 10 million voters” to back candidates in the political battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin who would “protect life across America.” It will focus on “low turnout and persuadable voters to win the presidency and a majority in .”

Ballot initiatives are one way for voters to assert their power over the political whims of state legislatures or courts. They are often viewed as more stable and harder to undo.

Advertisement

Abortion rights supporters must fend off statehouse maneuvers by Republicans to thwart ballot initiatives, such as proposals to change how ballot measures are approved or to buttress rules on collecting signatures. Politicians are appealing to the courts to beat back abortion rights.

In Montana, abortion is legally protected as a fundamental privacy right by a 1999 court ruling. Still, supporters are seeking to enshrine abortion access in the state constitution with a ballot measure.

Republican Attorney General Austin Knudsen, who has unsuccessfully asked the courts to overturn the 1999 precedent, rejected the draft initiative because it places “multiple distinct political choices into a single initiative.” The initiative's backers, led by Planned Parenthood of Montana's chief medical officer, Samuel Dickman, have asked the state Supreme Court to overturn Knudsen's ruling and allow them to start gathering signatures.

Democrats hope the ballot question will drive voter turnout and boost reelection chances for incumbent U.S. Sen. Jon Tester against the likely Republican candidate, Tim Sheehy.

Advertisement

Tides Foundation, a social-justice-focused charity based in California, is monitoring ballot campaigns in Montana, Arizona, and Missouri, said Beth Huang, its program officer for civic engagement and democracy. It has granted funds in Florida and is in the of approving funds for Colorado and Nevada, she said.

As a public charity, the group “legally cannot consider the partisan implications on any set of candidate elections” in funding decisions, she said. It will fund only ballot measures that would allow abortions at least until fetal viability — generally about 24 weeks — the standard under Roe v. Wade. A proposed initiative in Arkansas is off the table because access would go to 20 weeks.

“We are not interested in policies that do less than reestablish Roe,” Huang said.

In South Dakota, Dakotans for Health wants to reinstate abortion rights in the state. But an anti-abortion campaign says out-of-state money pays for signature drives that pressure people to sign the petitions without providing sufficient information on the measure. The Republican-dominated passed a bill to let people remove their signatures from such ballot petitions. An emergency clause would put the bill into effect immediately if the governor signs it — ahead of the deadline to place the abortion question on the November ballot.

Advertisement

Critics of other states' measures see other avenues for defeat.

Gregg Keller, a St. Louis-based Republican political strategist, said Missouri's proposed amendment goes further than the measure passed last year in Ohio. For example, abortions could be allowed after fetal viability to protect the mental health of a pregnant person.

If opponents can get out the word that this goes further than what was done in Ohio and other states, “we have a chance of actually beating this thing,” Keller said. “If they are able to raise money. That's a big if.”

Ballot supporters here raised $4.2 million as of March 12, according to campaign finance records. Money has come from national groups including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Fairness Project, which has supported ballot efforts on various progressive causes. Kansas -based Health Forward Foundation has also donated.

Advertisement

So far opponents of the Missouri measure have raised $55,000, nearly half of which from the Catholic Church, according to campaign finance records.

“We went into this knowing that we were going to be outspent,” said Missouri Catholic Conference Executive Director Jamie Morris, who said he didn't know whether the church would spend more. “We're still going to be out trying to educate the faithful as best as we can, with the resources we have.”

Abortion Action Missouri Executive Director Mallory Schwarz said the coalition backing the state's abortion measure is confident it will hit the signature goal by the May deadline.

If that happens, it will be up to outgoing Republican Gov. Mike Parson, who supports Missouri's near-total abortion ban, to decide whether to put the measure before voters in the state's August primary or the November general election.

Advertisement

Keller, the GOP strategist, said the governor will face tremendous pressure to put it on the August ballot. Five of six statewide offices are on the November ballot, as is Republican Josh Hawley's U.S. Senate seat. An abortion ballot measure could overshadow those campaigns — just based on the war chests in play: Hawley's 2018 campaign spent about $11.5 million, for example, while the three political action committees backing Ohio's abortion amendment last year spent over $50 million.

“I am telling anyone who is running as a Republican this year that if you want to be able to make your case about how and why you deserve to be elected, and you want to be able to get your story out,” Keller said, “then clearly you would not want to have a $50 million ballot initiative on in November.”

KFF Health News rural health care correspondent Arielle Zionts and Mountain States editor Matt Volz contributed to this .

——————————
By: Bram Sable-Smith and Rachana Pradhan
Title: How National Political Ambition Could Fuel, or Fail, Initiatives to Protect Abortion Rights in States
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/article/state-abortion-ballot-measures-national-political-strategy/
Published Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Advertisement

Kaiser Health News

Millions Were Booted From Medicaid. The Insurers That Run It Gained Medicaid Revenue Anyway.

Published

on

Phil Galewitz, KFF Health
Fri, 26 Apr 2024 13:55:00 +0000

Private health plans lost millions of members in the past year as pandemic protections that prohibited states from dropping anyone from the government program expired.

But despite Medicaid's unwinding, as it's known, at least two of the five largest publicly traded companies selling plans have continued to increase revenue from the program, according to their latest earnings reports.

“It's a very interesting paradox,” said Andy Schneider, a research professor at Georgetown 's McCourt School of Public Policy, of plans' Medicaid revenue increasing despite enrollment drops.

Advertisement

Medicaid, the -federal health program for low-income and disabled people, is administered by states. But most people enrolled in the program get their health care through insurers contracted by states, including UnitedHealthcare, Centene, and Molina.

The companies persuaded states to pay them more money per Medicaid enrollee under the assumption that younger and healthier people were dropping out — presumably for Obamacare coverage or employer-based health insurance, or because they didn't see the need to get coverage — leaving behind an older and sicker population to cover, their executives have told investors.

Several of the companies reported that states have made midyear and retrospective changes in their payments to plans to account for the worsening health status of members.

In an earnings call with analysts on April 25, Molina Healthcare Joe Zubretsky said 19 states increased their payment rates this year to adjust for sicker Medicaid enrollees. “States have been very responsive,” Zubretsky said. “We couldn't be more pleased with the way our state customers have responded to rates be commensurate with normal cost trends and trends that have been influenced by the acuity shift.”

Advertisement

Health plans have much uncertainty during the Medicaid unwinding, as states began reassessing enrollees' eligibility and dropping those deemed no longer qualified or who lost coverage because of procedural errors. Before the unwinding, plans said they expected the overall risk profile of their members to go up because those remaining in the program would be sicker.

UnitedHealthcare, Centene, and Molina had Medicaid revenue increases ranging from 3% to 18% in 2023, according to KFF. The two other large Medicaid insurers, Elevance and CVS Health, do not break out Medicaid-specific revenue.

The Medicaid enrollment of the five companies collectively declined by about 10% from the end of March 2023 through the end of December 2023, from 44.2 million people to 39.9 million, KFF data shows.

In the first quarter of 2024, UnitedHealth's Medicaid revenue rose to $20.5 billion, up from $18.8 billion in the same quarter of 2023.

Advertisement

Molina on April 24 reported nearly $7.5 billion in Medicaid revenue in the first quarter of 2024, up from $6.3 billion in the same quarter a year earlier.

On April 26, Centene reported that its Medicaid enrollment fell 18.5% to 13.3 million in the first quarter of 2024 with the same period a year ago. The company's Medicaid revenue dipped 3% to $22.2 billion.

Unlike UnitedHealthcare, whose Medicaid enrollment fell to 7.7 million in March 2024 from 8.4 million a year prior, Molina's Medicaid enrollment rose in the first quarter of 2024 to 5.1 million from 4.8 million in March 2023. Molina's enrollment jump last year was partly a result of its having bought a Medicaid plan in Wisconsin and gained a new Medicaid contract in Iowa, the company said in its earnings news release.

Molina added 1 million members because states were prohibited from terminating Medicaid coverage during the pandemic. The company has lost 550,000 of those people during the unwinding and expects to lose an additional 50,000 by June.

Advertisement

About 90% of Molina Medicaid members have gone through the redetermination , Zubretsky said.

The corporate giants also offset the enrollment losses by getting more Medicaid money from states, which they use to pass on higher payments to certain facilities or providers, Schneider said. By holding the money temporarily, the companies can count these “directed payments” as revenue.

Medicaid health plans were big winners during the pandemic after the federal government prohibited states from dropping people from the program, leading to a surge in enrollment to about 93 million Americans.

States made efforts to limit health plans' profits by clawing back some payments above certain thresholds, said Elizabeth Hinton, an associate director at KFF.

Advertisement

But once the prohibition on dropping Medicaid enrollees was lifted last spring, the plans faced uncertainty. It was unclear how many people would lose coverage or when it would happen. Since the unwinding began, more than 20 million people have been dropped from the rolls.

Medicaid enrollees' health care costs were lower during the pandemic, and some states decided to exclude pandemic-era cost data as they considered how to set payment rates for 2024. That provided yet another win for the Medicaid health plans.

Most states are expected to complete their Medicaid unwinding processes this year.

——————————
By: Phil Galewitz, KFF Health News
Title: Millions Were Booted From Medicaid. The Insurers That It Gained Medicaid Revenue Anyway.
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/article/medicaid-unwinding-insurer-revenue/
Published Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 13:55:00 +0000

Advertisement

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/california-is-investing-500m-in-therapy-apps-for-youth-advocates-fear-it-wont-pay-off/

Continue Reading

Kaiser Health News

California Is Investing $500M in Therapy Apps for Youth. Advocates Fear It Won’t Pay Off.

Published

on

Molly Castle Work
Fri, 26 Apr 2024 09:00:00 +0000

With little pomp, California launched two apps at the start of the year offering free behavioral services to youths to help them cope with everything from living with anxiety to body acceptance.

Through their phones, young people and some caregivers can meet BrightLife Kids and Soluna coaches, some who specialize in peer support or substance use disorders, for roughly 30-minute virtual counseling sessions that are best suited to those with more mild needs, typically those without a clinical diagnosis. The apps also feature self-directed activities, such as white noise sessions, guided breathing, and of ocean waves to help users relax.

“We believe they're going to have not just great impact, but wide impact across California, especially in places where maybe it's not so easy to find an in-person behavioral health visit or the kind of coaching and supports that parents and young people need,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom's health secretary, Mark Ghaly, during the Jan. 16 announcement.

Advertisement

The apps represent one of the Democratic governor's major forays into health technology and come with four-year contracts valued at $498 million. California is believed to be the first state to offer a mental health app with free coaching to all young residents, according to the Department of Services, which operates the program.

However, the rollout has been slow. So slow that one of the companies has missed a deadline to make its app available on Android phones. Only about 15,000 of the state's 12.6 million children and young adults have signed up for the apps, and school counselors say they've never heard of them.

Advocates for youth question the wisdom of investing taxpayer dollars in two private companies. Social workers are concerned the companies' coaches won't properly identify youths who need referrals for clinical care. And the spending is drawing lawmaker scrutiny amid a state deficit pegged at as much as $73 billion.

An App for That

Advertisement

Newsom's administration says the apps fill a need for young Californians and their families to access professional telehealth for free, in multiple languages, and outside of standard 9-to-5 hours. It's part of Newsom's sweeping $4.7 master plan for kids' mental health, which was introduced in 2022 to increase access to mental health and substance use support services. In addition to launching virtual tools such as the teletherapy apps, the initiative is working to expand workforce capacity, especially in underserved areas.

“The reality is that we are rarely 6 feet away from our devices,” said Sohil Sud, director of Newsom's Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. “The question is how we can leverage technology as a resource for all California youth and families, not in place of, but in addition to, other behavioral health services that are being developed and expanded.”

The virtual platforms come amid rising depression and suicide rates among youth and a shortage of mental health providers. Nearly half of California youths from the ages of 12 to 17 report recently struggled with mental health issues, with nearly a third experiencing serious psychological distress, according to a 2021 study by the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. These rates are even higher for multiracial youths and those from low-income families.

But those supporting youth mental health at the local level question whether the apps will move the needle on climbing depression and suicide rates.

Advertisement

“It's fair to applaud the state of California for aggressively seeking new tools,” said Alex Briscoe of California Children's Trust, a statewide initiative that, along with more than 100 local partners, works to improve the social and emotional health of children. “We just don't see it as fundamental. And we don't believe the youth mental health crisis will be solved by technology projects built by a professional class who don't share the lived experience of marginalized communities.”

The apps, BrightLife Kids and Soluna, are operated by two companies: Brightline, a 5-year-old venture capital-backed startup; and Kooth, a London-based publicly traded company that has experience in the U.K. and has also signed on some schools in Kentucky and Pennsylvania and a health plan in Illinois. In the first five months of Kooth's Pennsylvania pilot, 6% of who had access to the app signed up.

Brightline and Kooth represent a growing number of health tech firms seeking to profit in this space. They beat out dozens of other bidders international consulting companies and other youth telehealth platforms that had already snapped up contracts in California.

Although the service is intended to be free with no insurance requirement, Brightline's app, BrightLife Kids, is folded into and only accessible through the company's main app, which asks for insurance information and directs users to paid licensed counseling options alongside the free coaching. After KFF Health News questioned why the free coaching was advertised below paid options, Brightline reordered the page so that, even if a child has high-acuity needs, free coaching shows up first.

Advertisement

The apps take an expansive view of behavioral health, making the tools available to all California youth under age 26 as well as caregivers of babies, toddlers, and children 12 and under. When KFF Health News asked to speak with an app user, Brightline connected a reporter with a mother whose 3-year-old daughter was learning to sleep on her own.

‘It's Like Crickets'

Despite being months into the launch and having millions in marketing funds, the companies don't have a definitive rollout timeline. Brightline said it hopes to have deployed teams across the state to present the tools in person by midyear. Kooth said developing a strategy to hit every school would be “the main focus for this calendar year.”

“It's a big state — 58 counties,” Bob McCullough of Kooth said. “It'll take us a while to get to all of them.”

Advertisement

Brightline's contract states that the company was required to launch downloadable apps for iOS and Android phones by January, but so far BrightLife Kids is available only on Apple phones. Brightline said it's aiming to launch the Android version over the summer.

“Nobody's really done anything like this at this magnitude, I think, in the U.S. before,” said Naomi Allen, a co-founder and the of Brightline. “We're very much in the early innings. We're already learning a lot.”

The contracts, obtained by KFF Health News through a records request, show the companies operating the two apps could earn as much as $498 million through the contract term, which ends in June 2027, months after Newsom is set to leave office. And the state is spending hundreds of millions more on Newsom's virtual behavioral health strategy. The state said it aims to make the apps available long-term, depending on usage.

The state said 15,000 people signed up in the first three months. When KFF Health News asked how many of those users actively engaged with the app, it declined to say, noting that data would be released this summer.

Advertisement

KFF Health News reached out to nearly a dozen California mental health professionals and youths. None of them were aware of the apps.

“I'm not hearing anything,” said Loretta Whitson, executive director of the California Association of School Counselors. “It's like crickets.”

Whitson said she doesn't think the apps are on “anyone's” radar in schools, and she doesn't know of any schools that are actively advertising them. Brightline will be presenting its tool to the counselor association in May, but Whitson said the company didn't reach out to plan the meeting; she did.

Concern Over Referrals

Advertisement

Whitson isn't comfortable promoting the apps just yet. Although both companies said they have a clinical team on staff to assist, Whitson said she's concerned that the coaches, who aren't all licensed therapists, won't have the to detect when users need more help and refer them to clinical care.

This sentiment was echoed by other school-based social workers, who also noted the apps' duplicative nature — in some counties, like Los Angeles, youths can access free virtual counseling sessions through Hazel Health, a for-profit company. Nonprofits, too, have entered this space. For example, Teen Line, a peer-to-peer hotline operated by Southern California-based Didi Hirsch Mental Health Services, is free nationwide.

While the state is also funneling money to the schools as part of Newsom's master plan, students and school-based mental health professionals voiced confusion at the large app investment when, in many school districts, few in-person counseling roles exist, and in some cases are dwindling.

Kelly Merchant, a student at College of the Desert in Palm Desert, noted that it can be hard to access in-person therapy at her school. She believes the community college, which has about 15,000 students, has only one full-time counselor and one part-time bilingual counselor. She and several students interviewed by KFF Health News said they appreciated having engaging content on their phone and the ability to speak to a coach, but all said they'd prefer in-person therapy.

Advertisement

“There are a lot of people who are seeking therapy, and people close to me that I know. But their insurances are taking forever, and they're on the waitlist,” Merchant said. “And, like, you're seeing all these people struggle.”

Fiscal conservatives question whether the money could be spent more effectively, like to bolster county efforts and existing youth behavioral health programs.

Republican state Sen. Roger Niello, vice chair of the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, noted that California is forecasted to face deficits for the next three years, and taxpayer watchdogs worry the apps might cost even more in the long .

“What starts as a small financial commitment can become uncontrollable expenses down the road,” said Susan Shelley of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

Advertisement

This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation. 

——————————
By: Molly Castle Work
Title: California Is Investing $500M in Therapy Apps for Youth. Advocates Fear It Won't Pay Off.
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/article/california-youth-teletherapy-apps-rollout-slow/
Published Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Continue Reading

Kaiser Health News

KFF Health News’ ‘What the Health?’: Abortion — Again — At the Supreme Court

Published

on

Wed, 24 Apr 2024 20:30:00 +0000

The Host

Julie Rovner
KFF Health


@jrovner


Read Julie's stories.

Advertisement

Julie Rovner is chief Washington correspondent and host of KFF Health News' weekly health policy news podcast, “What the Health?” A noted expert on health policy issues, Julie is the author of the critically praised reference book “Health Care and Policy A to Z,” now in its third edition.

Some justices suggested the Supreme Court had said its piece on abortion law when it overturned in 2022. This term, however, the court has agreed to review another abortion case. At issue is whether a federal law requiring emergency care in hospitals overrides Idaho's near-total abortion ban. A is expected by summer.

Meanwhile, the Centers for Medicare & finalized the first-ever minimum staffing requirements for nursing homes participating in the programs. But the industry argues that there are not enough workers to hire to meet the standards.

This week's panelists are Julie Rovner of KFF Health News, Joanne Kenen of the Johns Hopkins University's nursing and public health schools and Politico Magazine, Tami Luhby of CNN, and Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico.

Advertisement

Panelists

Joanne Kenen
Johns Hopkins University and Politico


@JoanneKenen


Read Joanne's articles.

Tami Luhby
CNN

Advertisement


@Luhby


Read Tami's stories.

Alice Miranda Ollstein
Politico


@AliceOllstein

Advertisement


Read Alice's stories.

Among the takeaways from this week's episode:

  • This week's Supreme Court hearing on emergency abortion care in Idaho was the first to a 's abortion ban since the overturn of the constitutional right to an abortion. Unlike previous abortion cases, this one focused on the everyday impacts of bans on abortion care — cases in which pregnant patients experienced medical emergencies.
  • Establishment medical groups and doctors themselves are getting more vocal and active as states set laws on abortion access. In a departure from earlier political moments, some major medical groups are campaigning on state ballot measures.
  • Medicaid this week finalized new rules intended to more closely regulate managed-care plans that enroll Medicaid patients. The rules are intended to ensure, among other things, that patients have prompt access to needed primary care doctors and specialists.
  • Also this week, the Federal Trade Commission voted to ban most “noncompete” clauses in employment contracts. Such language has become common in health care and prevents not just doctors but other health workers from changing jobs — often forcing those workers to move or commute to leave a position. Business interests are already suing to block the new rules, they would be too expensive and risk the loss of proprietary information to competitors.
  • The fallout from the cyberattack of Change Healthcare continues, as yet another group is demanding ransom from UnitedHealth Group, Change's owner. UnitedHealth said in a statement this week that the of “a substantial portion of America” may be involved in the breach.

Plus for “extra credit” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too:

Julie Rovner: NBC News' “Women Are Less Likely To Die When Treated by Female Doctors, Study Suggests,” by Liz Szabo.  

Alice Miranda Ollstein: States Newsroom's “Loss of Federal Protection in Idaho Spurs Pregnant Patients To Plan for Emergency Air Transport,” by Kelcie Moseley-Morris.  

Advertisement

Tami Luhby: The Associated Press' “Mississippi Lawmakers Haggle Over Possible Medicaid Expansion as Their Legislative Session Nears End,” by Emily Wagster Pettus.  

Joanne Kenen: States Newsroom's “Missouri Prison Agency To Pay $60K for Sunshine Law Violations Over Inmate Death Records,” by Rudi Keller.  

Also mentioned on this week's podcast:

Credits

Francis Ying
Audio producer

Emmarie Huetteman
Editor

Advertisement

To hear all our podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to KFF Health News' “What the Health?” on SpotifyApple PodcastsPocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

——————————
Title: KFF Health News' ‘What the Health?': Abortion — Again — At the Supreme Court
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/podcast/what-the-health-344-abortion-supreme-court-april-25-2024/
Published Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 20:30:00 +0000

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/mandatory-reporting-laws-meant-to-protect-children-get-another-look/

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News from the South

Trending