SB 30 Eliminating Abortion Facility Reporting Clears House After Single Hearing — Now to Governor

AFNM: “You Cannot Eliminate Reporting and Tell the Public to Trust the System”

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, New Mexico — Senate Bill 30 has cleared the New Mexico House after receiving only one House committee hearing and now heads to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s desk.

Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) says both the substance of the bill and the speed of its advancement reveal a troubling pattern:

When scrutiny increases, transparency decreases.

SB 30 eliminates longstanding uniform statewide abortion reporting requirements, which required providers to report each induced abortion to the state registrar.

🔎 Provider Estimates Exist — Public Verification Lags​

(Five Years. No Accountability.)

The Guttmacher Institute’s 2023 abortion provider survey estimated that approximately ~21,000 abortions were provided in New Mexico clinics in 2023, including significant out-of-state travel.

Those totals are derived from direct abortion facility surveys and provider reporting.

Yet without timely public updates through a consistent abortion facility reporting framework, independent verification of current statewide totals becomes difficult.​

New Mexico lawmakers labeled abortion facility reporting “too burdensome.” But facilities are already collecting and submitting detailed data for national survey estimates. The issue is not paperwork — it is public visibility.

AFNM maintains that the core issue is not whether the data exists — it does — but whether the public is allowed to see it.

“The public should not have to rely on outside estimates to understand what is happening inside our own state,” said Tara Shaver, spokesperson for Abortion Free New Mexico.

Rather than strengthening transparency, SB 30 eliminates the reporting requirement entirely.

“You cannot eliminate the facility reporting requirement and simultaneously tell the public to trust the system,” she added.

🗣 ‘Too Burdensome’ — Or Too Visible?

Supporters of SB 30 repeatedly described abortion facility reporting requirements as “too burdensome.”

AFNM argues the claim collapses under scrutiny.

If facilities already track and submit detailed data for national surveys, then the administrative burden argument is difficult to sustain.

“Reporting is not a burden — it is accountability. Abortion providers already collect extensive data voluntarily. What they object to is not record-keeping, but public accountability,” Shaver testified.

The data exists. The question is who gets to see it.

“SB 30 does not reduce bureaucracy; it reduces transparency.”

One Committee. Suppressed Testimony. Party-Line Vote.

SB 30 advanced out of the House Judiciary Committee after receiving only one committee hearing, presided over by Rep. Christine Chandler (D), Chair of the House Judiciary Committee.

According to AFNM’s documented reporting on the hearing, opposition testimony was tightly restricted:

• Only five opposition speakers were permitted to testify
• Each speaker was limited to 90 seconds
• Witnesses were cut off mid-sentence
• A woman attempting to share testimony related to sexual abuse and trafficking was interrupted before completing her remarks
• Tara Shaver was not permitted to testify despite registering and preparing formal remarks

AFNM says the hearing did not reflect open deliberation but procedural control over dissenting voices.

“One-party control becomes dangerous when it turns into one-party suppression,” Shaver said following the hearing.
​
“I followed the rules. I registered to testify. I prepared remarks. I was blocked from speaking. That is not open government.”

The bill was subsequently advanced on a party-line vote.​

“When legitimate questions about statutory compliance are met with procedural acceleration instead of clarification, people begin to lose faith in the integrity of the process,” Shaver said.

Under current one-party control in Santa Fe, AFNM argues major policy outcomes increasingly appear settled before meaningful public deliberation occurs.

🚑Injuries Documented — Emergency Record Access Restricted Under Current Democrat Leadership

AFNM says its transparency concerns are grounded in documented emergency incidents connected to abortion facilities.​

Over the past several years, AFNM has documented:

• Multiple abortion-related emergency transports
• 911 dispatch confirmations
• One reported death following an abortion procedure

These incidents were identified using publicly accessible emergency dispatch records and formal public records requests.

However, AFNM says that under current Democrat leadership in New Mexico, public access to previously obtainable emergency dispatch records has been restricted.

AFNM argues that the convergence should concern the public:

• Public abortion statistics lack timely updates
• Emergency dispatch record access has been restricted
• Abortion clinics are not classified as ambulatory surgical centers subject to comparable inspection frameworks

As official access has narrowed, AFNM says it now exclusively relies on firsthand eyewitness documentation from our team of trained sidewalk outreach volunteers who observe ambulance transports from abortion facilities.

“When women are injured, when a death is reported, when federal investigators uncover information the state denied — and the legislative response is to erase reporting requirements — that should alarm every New Mexican,” said Tara Shaver, spokesperson for Abortion Free New Mexico.

“If everything is safe, lawful, and properly regulated, transparency should not be threatening,” she added

AFNM maintains that when public reporting systems go dormant, emergency access narrows, and statutory reporting requirements are repealed — all under unified Democrat control — the cumulative effect is reduced public oversight.

“Transparency should expand when scrutiny increases. Instead, we are watching it contract.”

🧬 A Pattern of Secrecy

AFNM also cites prior federal investigation findings involving UNM fetal tissue procurement records, which were initially denied before being confirmed through congressional inquiry.

AFNM argues this reflects a broader pattern:

• Public records delayed or denied
• Reporting systems left dormant
• Emergency record access narrowed
• Reporting requirements eliminated​

“Each time transparency exposes something uncomfortable, the guardrails move,” Shaver said.

📉 From Enforcement to Elimination

AFNM argues that under current one-party control in New Mexico, oversight concerns are increasingly addressed not through compliance enforcement — but through statutory revision.

“When scrutiny increases, transparency should expand. Instead, we are watching it contract.”
— Tara Shaver

🖊 Governor’s Signature Expected

Governor Lujan Grisham has consistently supported expansive abortion policy. AFNM expects SB 30 will be signed into law.

If enacted, the bill will remove uniform statewide abortion reporting requirements beginning in 2026.

​“Transparency is not the enemy of healthcare. It is the foundation of it," Shaver said.

📣  Contact Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and ask her to veto SB 30

AFNM is encouraging citizens, medical professionals, and faith leaders to respectfully contact the Governor’s office and request that SB 30 be rejected.

About Abortion Free New Mexico

Abortion Free New Mexico documents abortion policy, oversight, and public accountability issues across the state.

In addition to research and policy work, AFNM provides compassionate support to abortion-vulnerable women through its Life Fund, offering financial assistance, material aid, and long-term care throughout pregnancy and beyond.

AFNM says its mission is rooted in both accountability and compassion — advocating for transparency while walking alongside women facing difficult circumstances.​

🔗 AbortionFreeNM.com