Just hours after the presidential election was called for Donald J. Trump — and as Hillary Clinton was delivering her emotional Wednesday morning concession speech — officials with the Texas Department of State Health Services were for the second time this year hearing public comments on a proposed new rule that would require women who seek abortions, or who miscarry their pregnancies, to cremate or bury their fetal tissue.

The rule is necessary, anti-abortion activists have variously claimed, because it provides dignity to fetuses, which have historically been disposed of in accordance with regulations for medical waste. At least one prominent Texas anti-abortion advocate, Carol Everett, said the rule was necessary to prevent AIDS from spreading through the state’s water system.

Women’s health and other advocates have sternly disagreed. The Texas Medical Association and the Texas Hospital Association (both reflexively hesitant to enter into the state’s politically charged abortion wars) wrote a joint letter to the health agency questioning the logic of the rule. Meanwhile, the Funeral Consumers Alliance of Texas penned a far sterner letter in July, lambasting the state for determining that there would be no fiscal impact (a basic burial costs $2,000, meaning the rule could cost upwards of $96 million per year) and for failing to consider Texas women as stakeholders before proposing the measure. “This new rule appears to force [a] woman to reveal to family, friends and the community her very personal choice of abortion because it requires the woman to contract with a funeral establishment, or ask for family and friends’ support with fetal disposition,” reads the letter. “This is a forced invasion of privacy with no apparent regard for the woman.”

Sadly, the proposed rule is just the latest in a long string of attacks on women’s reproductive health rights in Texas, which for nearly two decades has been a one-party state run by conservative Republicans hostile to women and their reproductive rights – a reality that last week’s election portends the federal government will soon reflect.

In short, it appears the country, and particularly its women, are poised to experience exactly what it’s like to live in Texas.

Since Gov. Rick Perry assumed his position in the wake of George W. Bush’s elevation to the White House in 2000, conservative lawmakers have done their best to ban Planned Parenthood from participating in any government-funded programs that provide basic wellness exams and birth control for legions of poor and uninsured Texas women; they have tried to block access to emergency contraception; and they have sought, at nearly every turn, to place onerous, medically unnecessary restrictions on access to safe and legal abortion, which, despite protestations that they’re meant to promote women’s health, are plainly and nakedly political.

That was certainly the case back in 2013, when members of the Texas legislature fought tooth and nail to pass restrictions that would ban abortion at 20 weeks (four weeks before the generally accepted date for viability outside the womb), severely restrict access to pharmaceutical abortion (traditionally carried out in the privacy of a woman’s home, this form of abortion takes place in the earliest weeks of pregnancy), and require not only that doctors who provide abortions have admitting privileges at hospitals close to each clinic where they practice, but also that abortion clinics transform themselves into costly hospital-like surgical centers.

After a first go at passing the controversial package of regulations was thwarted with an epic filibuster by Democratic state Sen. Wendy Davis, Gov. Perry intervened, almost immediately calling for a special legislative session designed solely to pass the omnibus abortion bill, which ultimately happened.

In the wake of the passage of House Bill 2, dozens of the state’s abortion clinics shuttered operations, leaving large swaths of the state — particularly in the Rio Grande Valley, where some of the state’s poorest women live — without any meaningful access to care.

Still, the efforts of conservative lawmakers to essentially end abortion access in Texas went unfulfilled, thanks to the June ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court striking down two of the provisions challenged by the Center for Reproductive Rights. The five-justice majority, which importantly included Justice Anthony Kennedy, found the provisions requiring hospital admitting privileges and the transformation of clinics into surgical centers unconstitutional. Supreme Court precedent allows for some restriction to abortion, but only where the restriction furthers some legitimate state interest and does not place an undue burden on a woman seeking care. Neither of the challenged Texas provisions passed that test.