From the Broadsheet. June 26, 2017, on the issue of how a bill crafted by 13 white Republican men under top secrecy if enacted would affect women

Where are 'women'? The big news from the Hill last week was the reveal of the Senate version of the Republican health care bill intended to replace Obamacare. A brief but important reminder about this particular piece of legislation: It was drafted by 13 men. This Quartz analysis provides one telling example of how that type of gender imbalance plays out in the legislation itself: the document, which is 142 pages long, does not include the word "women," and mentions the words "mother" and "woman" only in relation to abortion.

The bill, which is more similar to the House version than generally anticipated, has many of its same stipulations when it comes to women's health. It would drastically reduce Medicaid funding (the majority of recipients are women), defund Planned Parenthood (the U.S.'s largest provider of family planning services), and give states discretion on whether to pay for maternity care and contraception. To get some sense of the potential implications, consider this stat: The average pregnancy costs $30,000 in health care expenses, while the average family makes $50,000 a year.

Interestingly, the fate of the bill could lie with three female Republican lawmakers, writes Fortune's Alana Abramson. Because all Senate Democrats are expected to vote against it, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell can only lose a maximum of two Republican votes. Consequently, the three female Senators who have expressed reservations about policies included in the bill—West Virginia's Shelley Moore Capito, Maine's Susan Collins, and Alaska's Lisa Murkowski—could make or break the plan. None of the women have said outright that they would oppose the legislation, but have issued lukewarm statements about it.