…you’ll need to keep an eye on Tim Kaine.
I wrote this for The Hill.
Join the Conversation
Leave a comment
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
A blog companion to the book by Susan Campbell
…you’ll need to keep an eye on Tim Kaine.
I wrote this for The Hill.
Dating Jesus 
I didn’t know this about him. It seems he evolved over time, but why does he continue to cling to the Hyde Ammendment, I wonder? Good point to keep an eye on him.
Interesting that he points to his faith (as a guy), when Catholics make up the largest group of women obtaining abortions.
https://www.guttmacher.org/report/characteristics-us-abortion-patients-2014
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.
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If folks want it repealed, they should concentrate on down ballot races rather than seeking salvation in the empty rhetoric of opportunistic centrists.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.
Well stated.
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:
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.