Colorado lawmakers are poised to permit the use of public funding to cover abortions after voters removed that restriction last fall — and proponents argue it will actually save the state money. That’s because the annual cost of covering abortion through Medicaid and another plan — projected a t nearly $5.9 million — would be slightly more than offset by the reduced costs to cover births, according to a state fiscal analysis. On Tuesday, a House committee is set to consider Senate Bill 183, which already passed the Senate 22-12 earlier this month on a party-line vote. Co-sponsored by state Sens. Robert Rodriguez and Lindsey Daugherty, along with state Rep. Lorena García and House Speaker Julie McCluskie — all Democrats — the bill implements Amendment 79, which established a constitutional right to abortion in Colorado and was approved by 62% of voters in the November election. The amendment also repealed an earlier provision in the state constitution that banned putting public funds toward abortion. The bill would now go a step further by requiring coverage of abortion care for Medicaid patients and Child Health Plan Plus program recipients, using state funding. Public employee insurance plans would also have to cover the services, and the bill would prohibit state and local governments from blocking the right to an abortion. The legislation would take effect at the start of 2026. Before the November election, opponents of Amendment 79 criticized state analysts’ conclusion in the Blue Book voter guide that its passage would have no fiscal impact. But the analysts wrote that any costs would depend on legislators’ future decisions since the amendment, on its own, didn’t authorize coverage of abortion services. What fiscal analysts say Now that SB-183 would require that public funding, the financial impact is coming into view. In the state’s 2026-27 fiscal year, the first full year of public funding, the fiscal impact note for the bill projects that costs for abortion services will reach $5.9 million — and savings from terminated pregnancies are projected at $6.4 million. The cited reasoning: Births covered by Medicaid come with added expenses, while abortion services are typically one-time occurrences. The fiscal note estimates that the bill would ultimately cut costs for the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing, which oversees Medicaid, by around $286,000 in the 2025-26 fiscal year, which begins July 1, and about $573,000 in the next fiscal year. But because abortion services would have to be paid for using state money, the bill would shift more spending to the general fund. In the coming fiscal year, appropriations to the general fund — a fund in the state’s budget used for Colorado programs — would jump by $1.5 million, while cash and federal funding for the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing will decrease by $1.8 million. Since public funding would take effect midway through that fiscal year, in January, both figures would roughly double for the 2026-27 fiscal year. According to the fiscal note, to cover abortion services, costs would rise for both local governments and the state’s employee health insurance across all agencies. For state employees, analysts project that adding abortion coverage will cost $204,700 per year — and they make the assumption that there wouldn’t be savings from “averted births” since, without coverage, employees who want abortions would likely seek them on their own. Debate over public funding To Jack Teter, the regional director of government affairs at Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains, the fiscal impact — and any potential savings — don’t address the bill’s importance. Instead, he emphasizes that certain insurance plans will finally cover abortion services. Right now, that type of care isn’t covered by insurance plans for state and local government workers, and the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing reimburses abortion services only in limited cases, including when a pregnancy is the result of rape or incest or poses a risk of death to the mother. “The premise that insurance coverage for abortion care is a societal good because it saves money on births doesn’t feel right to me,” Teter said. “Access to health care is good always.” The legislation’s fiscal note projects that more than 333,000 women ages 15 to 44 will be enrolled in the Medicaid or Child Health Plan Plus programs in the coming year, and almost 1.7% of program members of childbearing age will seek abortion care annually. It estimates that procedural abortions are reimbursed at about $1,300, and medication abortions at $800. For pregnancies that are carried to term, it puts the average reimbursement for labor and delivery at around $3,850. But Brittany Vessely, the executive director of the Colorado Catholic Conference, disagrees with those estimates. Her group was an outspoken opponent of Amendment 79. “The fiscal note drastically underestimates the cost of abortion, especially late abortion,” she said. Vessely puts the average late-trimester abortion cost at $3,000. “To say that this saves the state money because of a one-time payment — it’s abominable,” Vessely said. “We’re talking about the lives of children.” Related Articles Politics | Major gun control vote, plus hearings for abortion bills this week in the Colorado legislature Politics | OB-GYN launches period pain supplement with $300K raised Politics | Seeking a “Plan B” under President Trump, some Coloradans make plans to move to other countries Politics | Housing bills near the halfway point, key gun measure enters last leg in the Colorado legislature this week Politics | Long-stalled Planned Parenthood mass-shooting case moves forward with forced medication of suspect Teter says the state designates these health care services with set reimbursement rates. “Medicaid has reimbursement rates for every single service that’s covered,” he said. “A provider can’t be reimbursed more than the Medicaid reimbursement rate.” If the measure comes to pass, Vessely said Colorado taxpayers will carry the financial brunt of paying for abortions — “against their conscience, in many cases,” she added. Teter underlines that the state’s residents “have spoken” by passing the amendment with over 1.9 million votes in favor. “Insurance plans are a safety net, and insurance coverage for abortion care is no different,” he said. “There’s never a scenario when any of us who are paying into an insurance pool are able to — or have the right to — pass judgment on what health care someone else might need.” Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot. ...read more read less