"Codifying" Hyde: How Pro-Choice is Our Government?

by Abigail Eve · 2009-12-16 07:25:00 UTC

In a victory for women's health, the House of Representatives voted to remove a ban on abortion funding in the District of Columbia, allowing the nation's capital to direct local taxes toward helping low-income women with the cost of abortion. It's miraculous that this bill passed at a time when anti-choice Congressmen are falling over one another in their eagerness to ensure that no tax dollars are used to fund abortions in the health care reform bill.

I suppose we would call them demonic trailblazers if the Hyde  Amendment didn't already exist. Passed by Congress in 1976, the Hyde Amendment excludes abortion from the comprehensive health care services provided to low-income women by the federal government through Medicaid. Anti-choice Congressmen are now trying to create further barriers by making it nearly impossible for private insurance companies that participate in the new health care system to offer abortion coverage, essentially denying women the right to purchase a plan with abortion coverage.

Anti-choice opponents are spinning the tighter abortion restrictions for the health care reform bill as simply "codifying" the Hyde Amendment. You say codifying, I say politicians continuing their back door efforts to undermine Roe v. Wade and disrupt major health care legislation. Of course, these tactics of politicizing abortions are what we’ve come to expect from anti-choice opponents.  What’s unsettling is our government’s continued willingness to appease them.

Between Roe v. Wade and the Hyde Amendment, our government is sending more mixed signals than a commitment-phobic ex-boyfriend. For instance, if a woman chooses to carry her pregnancy to term, Medicaid will assist her with the appropriate medical care. However, if she chooses to exercise her legal right to end her pregnancy, Medicaid will not help cover an abortion -- even if the continued pregnancy could harm her health. The only cases where Medicaid would provide abortion coverage is if a woman is the victim of rape or incest, or if her life is in danger.

Abortion is either a legal part of our basic reproductive health care or it isn't. As long as our government continues creating dangerous loopholes, like the Hyde Amendment, based or religious or "moral" grounds, the door will be open to these ongoing attacks on women's reproductive health and the right to choose. Former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said that "taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society." I say allowing people to exercise their right to make deeply personal decisions about their own bodies is the price we pay for living in a democracy.

Photo courtesy of Big Stock Photo

PREVIOUS STORY:
James Chartrand, Woman Blogger: So What?
NEXT STORY:
Fox News' Trotta Still Doesn't Get It: I Want Her Rape Apologism Off the Air

COMMENTS (2)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.