Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Share
r
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 02/17/2025
SHORT TITLE Safety Requirements for Abortions
BILL
NUMBER Senate Bill 371
ANALYST Chilton
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
HCA staff
No fiscal impact
$48.7
$48.7
$97.3
Recurring General Fund
HCA Staff No fiscal impact $48.6 $48.6 $97.3 Recurring
Federal
Matching funds
Courts,
prosecutors and
defendants
No fiscal impact
Uncertain,
probably
minimal
Uncertain,
probably
minimal
Uncertain,
probably
minimal
Recurring General Fund
Total No fiscal impact $97.3 $97.3 $184.6
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Relates to House Bills 234 and 236 and Senate Bills 57, 347 and 404.
Sources of Information
LFC Files
Agency Analysis Received From
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)
Health Care authority (HCA)
Agency Analysis was Solicited but Not Received From
Department of Health (DOH) New Mexico Attorney General (NMAG)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Senate Bill 371
Senate Bill 371 limits the performance of operative abortion and the prescription of medication
to induce abortion only to licensed physicians. Medications to induce abortions could only be
filled by a pharmacy licensed through [New Mexico’s] Pharmacy Act. Those violating these
provisions would be subject to a fine of up to $5 thousand.
Section 2 of the bill adds to language in Section 24-34-3, “Public Body Prohibited Action, part of
the Section 34, “Reproductive and Gender-Affirming Care Freedom.” that prohibits denying, Senate Bill 371 – Page 2
restricting or interfering with access to or provision of reproductive care or gender-affirming care
“within the medical standard of care.”. The added sentence states that abortion would be outside
the medical standard of care if performed outside a health facility licensed by the Health Care
Authority.
This bill does not contain an effective date and, as a result, would go into effect 90 days after the
Legislature adjourns if enacted, or June 20, 2025.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
There is no appropriation in Senate Bill 371. HCA indicates a need for one FTE to implement,
monitor and enforce the provisions of this bill, at a cost of $97.3 thousand, equally divided
between the state general fund and federal matching funds.
According to NMAG, “There will be a minimal administrative cost for statewide update,
distribution and documentation of statutory changes. Any additional fiscal impact on the
judiciary would be proportional to the enforcement of this law and commenced actions seeking
imposition of a civil penalty and appeals from such imposition, as well as challenges to the law.
New laws, amendments to existing laws and new hearings have the potential to increase
caseloads in the courts, thus requiring additional resources to handle the increase.”
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
Senate Bill 371 would restrict provision of prescriptions for medications that result in abortion
and the performance of procedural abortion solely to licensed physicians, leaving out nurse
practitioners and others who are an important part of the medical work force, especially in rural
areas. Currently slightly more than half of New Mexico abortions are carried out using
medications, primarily mifepristone, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. The bill’s
requirement that a pharmacy filling such a prescription must be licensed under New Mexico’s
Pharmacy Act, thereby probably eliminating the use of mail-order pharmacies and clinic-
dispensed medications.
According to HCA, “If SB371 is enacted, access to medically necessary abortions would be
reduced by reducing the number of qualified practitioners by healthcare providers mitigating risk
of civil penalties described in the bill. Addressing statewide provider shortages continues to be a
significant challenge while developing and maintaining provider networks that meet the needs of
the Medicaid population. This challenge is particularly acute in rural areas and “OB deserts,”
where access to obstetric care and other essential health services is severely limited. According
to the most recent New Mexico Health Care Workforce Committee Report, the state is short 59
OB-GYN physicians, and 344 Primary Care physicians with the biggest disparities in rural
counties. Limiting the provider types capable of ordering an abortion will likely limit access
especially in the rural setting.”
NMAG makes the following points:
The majority of states require that a licensed physician be the provider performing an
abortion procedure. In 15 states, statutory restrictions on medication abortion tend to
focus on limiting who can prescribe medication abortion pills or how pills can be
provided. All 15 states require medication abortion to be provided by a physician. Senate Bill 371 – Page 3
It can be anticipated that there may be challenges to the law, as a violation of a woman’s
right to privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, and based on a
claim that the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), 21 U.S.C. 301 et. seq,
preempts state restrictions on medication abortion.
CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP
Relates to House Bills 234, which requires resuscitation of any infant with any sign of life after
an abortion procedure; House Bill 236, which requires 24 hours’ notice of reversibility of
medication-induced abortion; Senate Bills 57, which protects the identity of abortion providers;
Senate Bill 347, which protects the beliefs of those working in an abortion-providing facility
who oppose abortion; and Senate Bill 404, which provides privacy for those seeking
reproductive or gender-affirming care.
TECHNICAL ISSUES
Section 2 of the bill introduces the word “abortion,” in the sentence added to a statute that
includes “reproductive health care” and “gender-affirming care.” It is not clear if there is any
implication of the added sentence to any other aspect of reproductive health care or to gender-
affirming care.
HCA indicates that “SB 371 includes a civil penalty not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000
for a person found to have knowingly and willfully violated the provisions. The bill does not
identify which agency(s) would be responsible for oversight.”
LAC/rl