Turn on a TV, and you’re sure to be instantaneously hit with a campaign ad. And chances are, it’s about abortion.

But this election cycle, the conversation — and attack ads as well — has pivoted. It’s not just abortion that candidates are being asked to address, but reproductive health care more broadly, particularly access to fertility treatments.

Related links

Orange County Register’s November 5, 2024 General Election Voter Guide
In the race for Rep. Michelle Steel’s seat, how abortion is shaping up to be a key issue
Republicans are trying a new approach to abortion in the race for Congress
Southern California responds to Supreme Court dismantling Roe v. Wade

“We’ve certainly been wanting candidates to talk about their positions on sexual and reproductive health care and the full scope of what that means,” said Jennifer Wonnacott, with Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California.

Across the six congressional races in Orange County, nearly every candidate said they would work to protect access to in vitro fertilization and other fertility treatments if elected, when asked in a questionnaire by the Register.

And for some, it’s a deeply personal issue.

Rep. Michelle Steel is the Republican incumbent in California’s 45th congressional district, one of the most closely watched races in the nation this cycle — and she’s also a mother of two. She turned to IVF, she said in a campaign ad, when she and her husband struggled to start a family.

“For us, it was a miracle,” Steel said in the 30-second spot. “And today, we are blessed with two wonderful daughters.”

For Joe Kerr, it was IVF that brought him his son, Joey.

“Without access to fertility treatments and conception alternatives like IVF, I would not have my son,” Kerr, a Democrat vying for California’s 40th congressional district, said. “I would not have a family.”

“I am a grandma because of IVF,” said Rep. Young Kim, the incumbent in CA-40.

There are myriad reasons why access to fertility treatments — as opposed to just abortion — has become somewhat of a flashpoint this election cycle: the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that allowed states to ban abortion; the Alabama Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that caused hospitals to halt IVF treatments until a new law could be passed; both presidential candidates weighing in on access to fertility treatments, particularly IVF.

“No issue exists on an island,” said Dan Schnur, a former campaign consultant who teaches about political messaging at UC Berkeley and USC. “Once a discussion starts about how to handle a particular policy matter, it naturally grows to encompass other related policy areas, too.”

“If a candidate is talking about the economy, it’s difficult for them to limit the conversation to just jobs or taxes or inflation because they’re all moving pieces of a broader whole,” he added. “The same thing exists in this issue area.”

For women younger than 30, abortion has emerged as a top issue, according to a recent survey by KFF, a health policy organization that surveyed voters across the country last month.

It was an important topic for voters, too, in the 2022 midterm elections, but this is the first presidential race since the Supreme Court issued its ruling changing the landscape for abortion access. And in those two years, just how that ruling has impacted other health care decisions, like fertility treatments, has been on full display.

“Two years ago, congressional candidates in both parties were talking about these issues, but they weren’t being asked to out-shout (former President Donald) Trump or (Vice President Kamala) Harris,” said Schnur. “A candidate running in a competitive House district is going to be trying to appeal to much different voters than Harris or Trump at the national level. Sometimes their messages are the same, but often they’re not, especially on issues like these.”

Trump has said he supports access to fertility treatments and has vowed that the government would either pay for treatments like IVF or mandate that insurance companies cover them.

Orange County’s Republican congressional candidates, too, particularly in tight races, have promised to support access to treatments.

“I support access to IVF and believe this should be an issue left to each state to determine appropriate guidelines for health and safety,” said Scott Baugh, a candidate in California’s 47th congressional district, one of the most closely watched races in the nation.

Matt Gunderson, in the 49th congressional district, has campaigned as a pro-choice Republican. He said he believes abortion should be “safe, legal and rare” and women should be able to make their own health care choices.

“I am strongly opposed to any federal ban on IVF or abortion, as I believe that these decisions should remain in the hands of individuals, not the government,” Gunderson said. “It is essential to safeguard the rights and freedoms of women in making deeply personal choices about their own bodies and futures.”

And Steel, who has been in Congress since 2020, noted that she has co-sponsored legislation that would require private insurance plans to cover IVF and lead a resolution expressing support for the fertility treatment.

But her critics note that she had signed on to co-sponsor a bill that “declares that the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human being” and defines that as “including the moment of fertilization, cloning or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being.” She faced backlash for adding her name to the bill, that could threaten access to IVF, and she ultimately withdrew her name from it.

Derek Tran, the Democratic contender in the race for CA-45, said he believes Congress should ensure “necessary medical services are accessible and protected, allowing every woman to make decisions about her body and her family’s future without facing prohibitive barriers or inequities.”

“Right now, there are extremists in Congress who want politicians to make these kinds of personal medical decisions for women,” he said.

Rep. Mike Levin, the incumbent in the CA-49 race, noted that he brought an IVF doctor to the State of the Union earlier this year.

“I’m doing everything I can to draw attention to the anti-choice threat to IVF and fight that threat,” Levin said.

“Women deserve every right to determine what’s best for themselves, their bodies and their families, not the government,” said Rep. Lou Correa, D-Santa Ana. “Fundamentally, these decisions, and a woman’s right to choose, are best left to a woman, her doctor and her God.”

Parmis Khatibi, a conservative voter and president of the California Women’s Leadership Association, said she’s looking for candidates to advocate for both women and children — throughout pregnancy and after birth. For her, that includes things like childcare assistance, mental health support fertility treatments.

“Financial concerns should not be the reason a woman decides to end the life of their unborn child,” Khatibi said. “I think we want (to see) a plan to restore hope in America’s promise of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all.”

Find all 12 candidates’ answers to our question about protections for fertility treatment — and how they weighed in on other issues like immigration, cost of living and artificial intelligence – on our Voter Guide.

Related Articles