California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) finds himself in hot water with Hollywood royalty over a decision that’s sparked a fiery debate about women’s health.
According to Breitbart, the clash centers on Newsom’s veto of the Menopause Care Equity Act, a bill aimed at mandating insurance coverage for essential menopause treatments, which drew sharp criticism from actress Halle Berry, who questioned his suitability for higher office.
Back in October, Newsom put the brakes on the legislation, arguing through his office that it risked driving up healthcare costs for working families already struggling to make ends meet.
Fast forward to Wednesday, when Halle Berry, an Oscar-winning actress, didn’t hold back at the New York Times DealBook Summit, slamming Newsom’s veto as a dismissal of women’s struggles in midlife.
“With the way he’s overlooked women, half the population, by devaluing us in midlife, he probably should not be the next president,” Berry declared, tossing a rhetorical grenade at Newsom’s political ambitions.
Her words sting, but let’s unpack this: while passion for women’s health is commendable, painting a veto as a personal attack on half the population feels like a stretch when fiscal responsibility is on the table.
On Thursday, Newsom’s office fired back with a statement, expressing respect for Berry’s advocacy while defending the veto as a necessary guard against unintended cost hikes.
“He shares her goal of expanding access to menopause care that too many women struggle to get,” a spokesperson noted, adding that the bill, as written, would burden families financially. Sure, it’s a nice sentiment, but if Newsom truly shares the goal, why not craft a narrower bill sooner rather than later instead of just promising to “work together”?
The Menopause Care Equity Act wasn’t just a checkbox policy; it sought to require comprehensive coverage for treatments, mandate doctor education on the topic, and develop a curriculum for medical boards, according to industry reports.
Berry emphasized the ripple effects, pointing out that one in six women exits the workforce due to menopausal symptoms, impacting not just individuals but entire households and the economy at large.
That’s a sobering statistic, and it’s hard to argue against the need for attention here, though conservatives might question if sweeping mandates are the best fix over targeted, cost-effective solutions.
Newsom’s camp insists the veto wasn’t a rejection of women’s health but a stand against poorly crafted policy that could inflate healthcare premiums for millions.
Berry, meanwhile, frames menopause as a crisis deserving urgent action, and while her advocacy raises valid points, the risk of overreaching legislation can’t be ignored when families are already squeezed by inflation and rising costs.
Perhaps there’s a middle ground—supporting women’s health without breaking the bank—but it’ll take more than press releases and summit speeches to find it.