In the two years since Roe v. Wade’s overturn, states have increased public funding for anti-abortion centers — the non-medical facilities meant to dissuade people from terminating their pregnancies — by close to $500 million, according to a new analysis published today.
The analysis was compiled by Equity Forward, a research organization that supports abortion rights and specifically tracks anti-abortion centers, which are also known as crisis pregnancy centers. Researchers used state budget documents and legislation to track how much money has been invested in these centers since 1995, the first year they could verify public funding for them.
These facilities have become a flashpoint in the two years since Roe’s demise brought the end of federal abortion rights. They typically offer free pregnancy tests and sonograms, and some also provide parenting classes or diapers. But they are not regulated under the same standards as medical facilities and do not always employ staff health professionals.
That means those ultrasounds can be inaccurate and they can come with counseling meant to dissuade people from terminating their pregnancies. Still, in some states with abortions bans, pregnant patients — including those seeking terminations — have said such centers offer the only affordable option in their region for getting an ultrasound.
Even before the fall of Roe, these centers outnumbered abortion clinics three-to-one, according to research from the University of Georgia. Now, with abortion almost totally outlawed in 14 states and significantly restricted in several more, abortion opponents have pushed for boosting state funding for these centers. Some have tried to open new facilities in states seeing an uptick in abortion patients.
Conservative lawmakers, skittish about the political backlash associated with pushing for unpopular new bans, have heeded abortion opponents’ call to promote these centers instead. Measures expanding funding for these centers were the most common form of anti-abortion legislation promoted in state governments this year, with nine states boosting financial support, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks reproductive health policy.
The new report shines light on how successful those efforts have been, painting a picture of dramatic growth in just a few years.
From 1995 to 2024, researchers found, states collectively put more than $1 billion into backing these centers. Some solely used state funds while others also repurposed federal funds allocated through the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. Specifically since Roe’s fall in 2022, state funding has risen: $489 million was allocated in the last two years, as 19 states poured funding into anti-abortion centers.
The largest increases are clustered in the southern states of Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas, all of which have tight abortion restrictions. The procedure is almost entirely outlawed in Missouri, Tennessee and Texas; illegal past six weeks of pregnancy in Florida; and outlawed for people beyond 12 weeks of pregnancy in North Carolina.
According to the report, Tennessee’s publicly-funded anti-abortion program, which launched in 2021, has increased funding by more than $23 million in the past two years. North Carolina has spent about $49 million since 2013 to support anti-abortion centers; more than $33 million of that was allocated after the summer of 2022. And Texas, the largest state to ban abortion, has spent about $438 million on supporting anti-abortion centers since 2005, with close to half of that money allocated in the past two years, researchers found.
“It’s really alarming. States have chosen to take millions of dollars from comprehensive maternal health, and instead funnel money into anti-abortion centers without much oversight or accountability,” said Ashley Underwood, Equity Forward’s director.
The impact is visible, said Kathy Kleinfeld, who runs a reproductive health clinic in Houston. While her staff can no longer provide abortions, they still counsel patients about the option, including sharing which clinics in nearby states could terminate their pregnancies. For one thing, Kleinfeld said, online advertisements from anti-abortion clinics are far more common than they were a few years ago.
“They are actively, aggressively coming up on the first page, always after doing the first search for ‘abortion pill,’ or ‘abortion clinic’ — anything,” she said. “Anytime you’re searching any of those major keywords, there’s at least three to four anti-abortion centers.”
Increasingly, she has to direct her employees to warn patients who are calling around for appointments to make sure they do not go to one of those centers instead. Even if the centers can offer a visit sooner, she said, the information they provide may not be accurate.
Kleinfeld said that even prior to Roe’s overturn, she often saw patients come to her clinic with inaccurate ultrasound readings they got from one of those centers. In one case, before Texas outlawed abortion, a young woman believed she was 8 weeks pregnant — but when Kleinfeld and her staff viewed the ultrasound, they learned she was actually 20 weeks along. At the time, the state had banned abortions for anyone 20 weeks or more pregnant.
“We have this loose $438 million being funneled into these centers who are supposedly — yes they’re not providing abortion, but they’re providing education and counseling and medical services,” she said, referring to Texas’ spending. “What kind of training do these people have? And who’s overseeing them?”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.