03.25.10
Fact & Fallacy – The Hyde Amendment
Recent developments make it clear that the public at large and many members of Congress and their staff members do not have a clear understanding of what the Hyde Amendment is and what it has the power to enforce. Even doing research to support my comments was challenging, because much of what is written and available online is done from the perspective of the author or the author’s political leanings and not strictly accurate.
DEFINITION: The Hyde Amendment is a rider to the annual Labor/Health and Human Services (HHS)/Education appropriations bill which prevents Medicaid and any other programs under these departments from funding abortions, except in limited cases. It is named after Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-IL) who, as a freshman legislator, first offered the amendment.
The Hyde Amendment was first enacted in 1976 and has been reauthorized each year since, the latest being in the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009.
FALLACY:
- Hyde is settled law.
- Hyde would be in force regardless of any other bill enacted by the Congress such as the health care legislation.
There are also a lot of political and emotional statements that fall under the heading of fallacy, but let’s leave them out of it and stick to truth.
FACT:
- The Hyde Amendment is a rider to an appropriations bill.
- The Hyde Amendment is not a stand alone law.
- Since statements 1 and 2 are correct, the Hyde Amendment does not govern other laws passed by Congress unless it is specifically referenced in such laws.
- Since statements 1 and 2 are correct, the legislation passed by the House of Representatives (H.R.3962) was amended by H.AMDT.509, the Stupak Amendment to codify the Hyde Amendment as part of the bill.
- This language was rejected by the Senate and not included in H.R. 3590, the bill approved by the Senate on December 24, 2009, by the House on March 21, 2010 and signed by the President on March 23, 2010.
Some sources to check:
Memorandum from National Right to Life – While this was written with reference to H.R. 3200, the bill originally introduced in the House of Representatives in July 2009, it still offers an accurate analysis of the scope of the Hyde Amendment.
National Committee for a Human Life Amendment – an excellent overview of the Hyde Amendment … its history, changes, challenges and Supreme Court ruling.
One of the claims most often heard is that the Hyde Amendment denies needed treatment to the poor and is therefore discriminatory. Surprisingly a 1992 poll of people making $15,000 or less found that they opposed abortion by a ratio of 2 to 1. Given recent surveys that a majority now believe that abortion destroys life, I suspect this ratio would be higher if a survey were taken today.
Planned Parenthood, through their research arm have long promoted the concept that there is a cost benefit to providing abortion services in that it costs less than providing maternity benefits and subsequent child welfare services. How grotesque is that?
Another argument often heard is that women who are denied abortion services through Medicaid will go to illegal abortion providers; however, I found no statistical evidence to support that.
Has the Hyde Amendment been beneficial? I suppose that depends on your point of view. Prior to Hyde, the federal Medicaid program paid for about 300,000 abortions annually. In fiscal year 2004, that number was 159.