Join the Conversation


  1. He’s not the problem. The quasi republican in sheep’s clothing, Miss Rodom, is. And least we forget, she once was a republican. Which brings us back to impoverished women not having access. Same women as babies having babies. DCF taking custody when dysfunction is the norm. And broken, malnourished, near dead babies being rushed to emergencies because at the end, everyone one in the system failed them including the neighborhood preacher man who has no interest restricting the growing population of his congregation.

    So call me a wild-eyed something.

  2. The Hyde Amendment is not a bill. It’s not a permanent law. It’s a rider, a legislative provision attached the annual appropriations process in Congress that is voted on every year. And as such has evolved significantly over the 36 years of its tenure. History

    And while opposition to the Hyde Amendment is generally seen as something Republicans do, it must be said that the provision would not have survived past Clinton 1.0 if not for significant support from Congressional Democrats. Who controlled both houses of Congress at that time. So forgive me if I don’t get excited about the Democratic Party adding a promise of repeal to its platform.

    Political rhetoric does have a way of evolving when careers are at stake. Which is why the Hyde Amendment lives on…year after year after year.

    If folks want it repealed, they should concentrate on down ballot races rather than seeking salvation in the empty rhetoric of opportunistic centrists. Because without Congressional support…especially the House…the Hyde Amendment isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

  3. I think it also needs to be pointed out, when talking about Medicaid, that the Hyde Amendment only affects federal funds used in that program, (and the Indian Health Service, Medicare, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, the military’s TRICARE program, federal prisons, the Peace Corps, and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and…wait for it…ObamaCare®). Alina Salganicoff, Caroline Rosenzweig, and Laurie Sobel at KFF explain:

    Because Medicaid is jointly funded by the federal and state governments, states can choose to pay for abortions under Medicaid in other instances, but must use their own revenues, and not federal funds, to cover the service. Currently, 17 states have a policy directing the use of their own funds to pay for abortions for low-income women insured by Medicaid beyond the Hyde limitations, 11 of which provide coverage as the result of a court order (Figure 1).

    So it appears the best way to counter the limitations proscribed in the Hyde Amendment while waiting for the Democratic Party to get its shit together is to fight locally for Medicaid allowances funded by the States. Worked in Montana. Connecticut, too.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: