If abortion is legal…

hyde-amendment-1976-thumb-250x352-8410…and it is, then it is legal and should be accessible to all. The Hyde Amendment discriminates against women living in poverty, and doesn’t pay for a legal medical procedure. Is there any other procedure so banned? No.

I wrote this for Connecticut Health Investigative Team.

Published by datingjesus

Just another one of God's children.

Join the Conversation


  1. Unfortunately, accessibility to anything in this country is determined by affordability. Without the formal establishment of a constitutional entitlement to healthcare for everyone, women’s choice on reproductive healthcare, especially poor women’s choice, will continue to be determined, by and large, by somebody else.

    I wouldn’t say that Tim Kaine’s position on the Hyde Amendment is unusual among Democrats. Without significant Democratic Party support, the Hyde Amendment would not have survived past 1993. And looking at the the history of Party majorities in Congress, it’s clear that Democratic Party support has played a major role in the evolution of the Hyde Amendment since its inception. President Obama himself, rather than go to the mat for women’s reproductive healthcare choice with anti-abortion forces within his own Party, extended Hyde Amendment segregation into ObamaCare® through executive order. In fact, thanks to ObamaCare®, abortion services are explicitly excluded from the list of “essential health benefits” all health insurance plans are required to offer under the Law of the Land.

    I think expecting progress on this issue from the Democratic Party, on a national level, is a mistake. Unless and until the States…and corporate persons…can be relied upon for support, Congressional politicians will continue to prioritize self-interest over public interest, (especially where poor people…especially poor women…are concerned). Think marriage equality and The Clintons.

  2. I agree with you, DJ! It should be available to all.

    Speaking of accessibility, I found out today that kids under 19 who have commercial insurance can get flu shots at CVS. Kids under 19 who have HUSKY insurance cannot. They, from what I have been told, have to go to a pediatrician’s office – translating to less accessible due to appointment scheduling, wait time, and reduced number of locations. And, I would guess it ends up being more costly for the medical providers, and may clog up already busy HUSKY health clinics, to handle it this way. If it’s ok for those with commercial insurance, then it must not be related to a medical reason. It makes no sense. Meanwhile, kids may miss out on coverage.

Leave a comment

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: