Chris Sununu’s Week in Review: Sununu Slammed for Signing Most Extreme, Anti-Choice Budget New Hampshire Has Ever Seen
The fallout from Chris Sununu’s anti-choice budget continues. At Wednesday’s Executive Council meeting, it was revealed that some Granite Staters could lose access to basic health care services even sooner than anticipated because of an onerous new regulation on health clinics included in the budget. The latest example of the budget’s attack on women’s health comes as the Boston Globe reports that Sununu’s support for an abortion ban could be a major liability with voters in a future election — and the Governor faced sharp criticism from medical providers and elected leaders on the Seacoast and in the Upper Valley. And one of the budget’s other provisions — a ban on discussing “divisive concepts” that is a clear attack on free speech — drove ten members of the Governor's Diversity Council to resign and made national headlines.
Fallout From Anti-Choice, Extreme Budget Gets Worse for Sununu and for Granite Staters. According to new reports, Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health centers may have to interrupt care they provide to Granite Staters -- including breast cancer screenings, STD testing, and reproductive health care -- due to an onerous requirement in Governor Sununu’s anti-choice budget that says DHHS must conduct an audit that shows reproductive health care centers aren’t using state funds for abortion services before the centers may receive funding from the state. Read more from NH Bulletin, WMUR, Union Leader, and InDepthNH. Seacoast and Upper Valley Leaders Slam Sununu For Signing a Budget With Abortion Ban and Mandatory Ultrasounds. This week, elected leaders, health care experts, and reproductive rights advocates on the Seacoast and in the Upper Valley came together to slam Sununu for signing a budget that does not include exceptions for rape, incest, or fatal fetal anomaly — and includes mandatory ultrasounds and felony penalties for doctors who perform abortions. Read more from the Portsmouth Herald, Seacoast Current, InDepthNH, and WMUR.
“There’s nothing pro-choice about it, and actually, there is nothing pro-health about it,” [State Senator Tom Sherman] added, speaking about the budget’s language. “And there is nothing New Hampshire about it.” [Portsmouth Herald, 7/1/21]
Sununu’s Anti-Choice Budget Will Be a Significant Liability with New Hampshire Voters. The Boston Globe’s James Pindell is just the latest to write that Chris Sununu’s support for mandatory ultrasounds and an abortion ban with no exceptions for rape, incest, or fatal fetal anomaly will be a major liability for him if he runs for governor or for U.S. Senate in 2022. Last week, the Concord Monitor’s Paul Steinhauser also reported on the political backlash against Sununu’s abortion ban. Read more from the Boston Globe here.
“But the big picture takeaway is this: Sununu made himself more vulnerable to Democrats in quietly signing this bill. The fact that there was no budget signing ceremony is the biggest tell that he knew it also. He didn’t want to give Democrats an image for their ads next year.” [Boston Globe, 6/29/21]
Sununu’s Advisory Council on Diversity and Inclusion Falls Apart After Sununu Refused to Heed Their Concerns About the Budget’s Bans on Discussions About Racism and Sexism in Schools. This week, 10 members of Sununu’s Advisory Council on Diversity and Inclusion resigned over the Governor's refusal to listen to their concerns about the budget. The resignations from the Diversity Council — along with the Governor’s embrace of censorship — has drawn national headlines and the condemnation of editorial boards. Read more from The Washington Post, Keene Sentinel Editorial Board, AP, NH Bulletin, InDepthNH, WMUR, Concord Monitor, Union Leader, NHPR, the Keene Sentinel, and HuffPo.
“Here’s more fallout from the push by Republican-led states to limit what teachers can say about race and other forms of oppression: A majority of New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu’s diversity council has quit after he signed new restrictions into law that affect educators as well as public employees.” [The Washington Post, 7/2/21]