#hyde amendment

[odinsblog]

One particularly maddening aspect of our current politics is that Democrats feel beholden to rules that Republicans feel entitled to burn. Democrats creatively interpret rules in ways that inevitably frustrate their ability to wield power, while Republicans creatively use their power to get around the rules. Democrats invent constraints on themselves, ostensibly to restrict Republicans, while these same Republicans long ago decided to use maximal power to achieve their goals.

Abortion services should be provided on federal lands; abortion providers should be deputized by the federal government to protect them from state bounty hunters; people seeking abortion services should be granted safe passage to these facilities, or out of state if need be.

But every time I or anybody else makes arguments for strong executive action to protect people from Republicans, somebody, often a liberal or Democrat, says that the Hyde Amendment prevents the federal government from funding abortions. Anybody who lived through the Trump administration should know that the law rarely outright “prevents” things, and “funding” is a matter of interpretation, but Twitter is awash in so many Hyde takes you’d think it was the 28th Amendment to the Constitution.

So let’s talk about the Hyde Amendment and what it says. Because when you really look at it, you’ll see it’s a paper tiger: While it is harrowingly effective at preventing poor and vulnerable people from getting the health care they need, it is easily shredded by a committed executive at the head of a massive administrative state.

The Hyde Amendment was proposed in 1976, three years after the landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, by Illinois Representative Henry Hyde, a white male Republican who didn’t like abortion rights. He proposed a rider to the funding bill for the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (now called the Department of Health and Human Services) that prohibited federal Medicaid funds from being used to pay for women to get abortions.

The amendment passed both houses of Congress, and has been a feature of every budget bill since. The amendment and its modern versions prevent people enrolled in Medicaid or other government-run programs from using those insurance dollars for abortion procedures, except in the cases of rape or incest, or in cases where the life of the mother is at risk. Hyde Amendment–esque language has since been inserted into a number of health care bills, including the Affordable Care Act.

That’s it, that’s the whole thing.

This is not to say the Hyde Amendment isn’t a smoldering hunk of misogynist garbage that restricts access to abortion for millions of mostly poor women (often with the complicity of the Democratic Party, which is ostensibly elected to protect impoverished people). But, this boogey-man that Democrats argue constrains the commander in chief from providing health care to US citizens is not and has never been some insurmountable prohibition on federal government action.

The idea that the Hyde Amendment restricts all federal action for abortion services is a clear misreading of the amendment. The Hyde Amendment does not, for instance, prevent the government from allowing people in federal prisons to seek abortion services. It does not prevent people being held in immigration custody from being allowed to seek abortion services. And the astute reader will notice that exceptions in the case of rape and incest are written right into the regulation. It is simply inaccurate to say that the amendment, in its current form, prevents the federal government from doing anything that could lead to an abortion. The Hyde Amendment is about insurance coverage.

Those are just the facts. What one should do with the knowledge of those facts is open for interpretation. What one should do with knowledge of those facts while in charge of the executive branch of government is still another thing. I will stipulate that everything I am about to say will be disputed by Republicans. If that matters to you, I do not know how to help you. I do not allow my thinking to be cabled within the confines of “what Republicans agree with” because my desire to live in a pluralistic society built on justice and equality outweighs my desire to be liked by The New York Times. But in my opinion, this now-boilerplate budget amendment cannot prevent the might of the executive office from fighting for women’s rights. Here are four obvious workarounds.

The point of all of these suggestions is that Biden and the Democrats should use power maximally while they have it to prevent the atrocity of people being forced to give birth against their will. The argument that executive inaction is not only justified but required by a 1976 budget rider is intellectually dishonest, and literal evidence that one doesn’t perceive forced birth as a fundamentally illegitimate use of state power.

There is no law, yet, that prevents the federal government from helping rape survivors. There is no law, yet, that requires the federal government to throw up its hands every time it hits the borders of Texas.

There will be laws to do both of those things should Republicans take back Congress and the White House, because Republicans use power when they have it. Maybe Democrats should take a page out of the GOP playbook and try out the whole “using power” thing, before it’s too late for women, the LGBTQ community, and democracy.

👉🏿 https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/hyde-amendment-abortion-biden/tnamp/

#politics #abortion #roe v wade #hyde amendment #healthcare #reproductive rights #reproductive justice #war on women #womens rights #womens health #bidenism

[janersm]

#abortion #roe v wade #twitter #reproductive rights #indian reservations #racism #indigenous #pro choice #reproductive justice #history #hyde amendment #indian health service #ihs

[alanshemper]

Reminder that conservative states had all but outlawed abortion already and that given the Hyde Amendment—which Joe Biden supported until 2020—it was never available to poor people.

#roe #roe v wade #hyde amendment

[plitnick]

Wrong Man for the Job" Biden and the Sukkot War, Part I

In the first of a two-part article for the European outlet, The Battleground, I examine the absence of any serious strategy behind Joe Biden’s approach to Israel’s massive attack on Gaza after Hamas’ October 7 attack.

View On WordPress

#1994 Crime Bill #Antony Blinken #Benjamin Netanyahu #China #Egypt #Gaza #Gaza ceasefire #Genocide #Hamas #Hezbollah #Hyde Amendment #international law #Iran #Iraq War #Israel #Jabaliya #Joe Biden #Jordan #Mahmoud Abbas #October 7 #Saudi Arabia #Two-state solution #US Arms to Israel #West Bank

[revawake]

When it comes to abortion rights, the Democrats need to lean into the politics of fear.

They face a base that feels betrayed and a set of wealthy, moderate voters in purple states who may not realize that their own rights are also on the line. Democrats need both of these groups to stave off defeat in the fall, and fear can drive them to the polls. What should the Democrats tell them to be afraid of? A national abortion ban.

America after the fall of Roe v. Wade might feel like we’re living in the worst-case scenario, but anyone who values reproductive freedom has reason to panic about what could happen if Republicans take back power in Washington. G.O.P. Congress members have already introduced bills that would criminalize abortion in various ways. They are only more emboldened now.

To meet the urgency of the moment and save their razor-thin and often nonexistent hold on the Senate, Democrats must talk about that future, giving voters across the country, in every state, a reason to vote. Lives are on the line. At the same time, Democratic leaders have to understand that the politics of fear can run both ways.

The party needs to scare voters and show that they, too, are scared: scared of the voters themselves. Democratic politicians watched Republicans roll back abortion rights for decades — and when Roe fell, they had no plan. Now, they need to demonstrate that they are willing to put themselves at the mercy of those they failed — making specific promises and letting the voters know that if they fail again, it will be more than a fund-raising opportunity. It will be a reckoning.

I am honestly unsure if it matters what those action items are; I do know Democrats will have to throw out any concern for the appearance of moderation. Right now, all the ideas about bridging the gap to abortion access sound extreme. But so did the tax pledge at one point. So did overturning Roe v. Wade.

Take allowing abortions on federal land. Biden could declare the policy so. Candidates would only have to pledge to support it. Yes, the policy would invoke an avalanche of untested legal theories and complicated jurisdictional questions. But Democrats who want to save the lives of those in need of an abortion can’t fall back on “it’s complicated” as an excuse to not even try.

If you want something less complicated — something that would also help roll out abortions on federal lands — make a pledge not to vote for any appropriation bill that carries the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funding for most abortions. On its own, abolishing the Hyde Amendment would not greatly expand access outside states where abortion is legal. But combined with abortion access on federal property, the government could act even more directly to help those seeking abortion care. Stonewalling Hyde-burdened budgets could lead to a government shutdown, but if you think that ruins a party’s reputation forever, well, you are probably a current Democratic office holder.

Embracing a politics of fear on reproductive rights unites two of the constituencies the Democrats need to edge out the G.O.P. in key narrow races (Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia). First, hammering home the danger of a national ban may sufficiently alarm moderate voters in the suburbs, convincing them to abandon Republicans. Second, addressing the widespread sense of betrayal among progressive voters will help keep them activated. The threat of a national abortion ban is also a national message. Democrats can make it clear that the party can’t risk a single loss, no matter how lopsided the polls are. And then there is the simple truth underpinning this entire strategy: Protecting abortion rights is popular.

#abortion rights #reproductive rights #scotus #midterms #democrats #hyde amendment #progressives #moderates #full piece should be available thru gift link #what do we think of the suggested approach? vital? unrealistic? urgently necessary? not far enough? #not sure anyone will even see this but if you do: #concurring and dissenting views are welcome! please keep it civil and explanatory

[mantra4ia]

Is it a POTUS or is it a PINA?

And I don't mean piña colada.

#electable #joe biden #political commentary #hyde amendment #roe v wade #is it satire or is it politics? #TYT #the young turks #the damage report #women's healthcare #but yeah Joe Biden is #no

[reportwire]

The GOP’s Strange Turn Against Rape Exceptions to Abortion Bans

The GOP’s Strange Turn Against Rape Exceptions to Abortion Bans

Twenty-two states have abortion bans that would become law almost immediately if a leaked Supreme Court decision on abortion rights goes into effect. Many of these state bans contain no exceptions for rape or incest survivors. Not so long ago, such exceptions were regularly included in proposed abortion bans, in part because they’re popular: For decades, about 75 percent of Americans have…

View On WordPress

#abortion #abortion ban #abortion bans #abortion rights #abortion-rights proponents #Alabama legislators #anti-abortion movement #anti-abortion views #Arizona Governor Doug Ducey #birth certificates #Caitlin Flanagan #cases of rape #Donald Trump #early-abortion ban #exceptions #Federal funds #federal law #George H.W. Bush #Hyde Amendment #incest exceptions #incest exemptions.Michele Goodwin #incest survivors #Jeanne Mancini #law #leaked Supreme Court decision #Life Committee #March #MSNBC’s Chris Matthews #national right #police report

[rgr-pop]

(snarky post) the hyde amendment is antistatist

#just kidding they don’t know about the hyde amendment and think that the state is distributing abortions which is why they oppose them

[thebreakfastgenie]

I want universal healthcare and I want a universal healthcare system specifically crafted to ensure it covers abortion, birth control, gender-affirming care, and whatever basic healthcare Republicans decide to target with a culture war next and I don't know if that's possible.

#I actually do worry about this #I mean considering the precedent of medicaid and the hyde amendent.....

[orthopoogle]

“Why do conservatives want a theocracy?!”

Ignoring the fact that a true “theocracy” isn’t what 95% of conservatives are actually hoping for, it’s almost as if people gravitate towards policies that preserve their principles after several years of the opposing side trying to aggressively remove those principles from polite society and pass legislation that forces everyone to conform to a specific worldview.

#you can only brag about things like forcing religious businesses to support gay weddings #and removing the Hyde Amendment and forcing pro-lifers to pay for abortions #and having ‘’LGBT history’’ taught in schools #for so long before people start getting pissed off and want to retaliate

[odinsblog]

Yeah yeah yeah, I understand we gotta stop Republicans in the midterms, but please let’s not pretend that half the shit Biden is “fixing” isn’t the same shit he literally helped Republicans brake in the first place. (source) (source)

I won’t ever stop being mad at how insulin started out free by person who discovered it, and now thanks to corporate greed, it’s completely unaffordable to so many people who need it to live.

And Idgaf if most of Bernie’s social justice successes came by way of amendments. At least Sanders—unlike some people—wasn’t defending things like the Hyde Amendment until as recently as June of 2019.

#politics #bidenism #joe biden #hyde amendment #insulin #gilead sciences #neoliberalism #inflation reduction act #clintonism #reaganism

[rodgermalcolmmitchell]

If ignorance contained calories, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) would weigh 10 tons.

If ignorance contained calories, Senator Marco Rubio would weigh 10 tons. Here are excerpts from a letter he sent to me. I recently received response to a letter I sent him asking why a Monetarily Sovereign government was so hesitant to spend U.S. dollars on programs that help Americans. Thank you for taking the time to express your thoughts regarding spending and the federal…

View On WordPress

#balanced budget amendment #Cindy Hyde-Smith #marco rubio #monetary sovereignty

[whiskeysorrows]

Babes the context clues are literally screaming at you, listen…just listen

#pls read the context behind literary novels before jumping in #bc ppl are so mad at dazai for being a shit person when he literally began the book with ‘mine has been a life of shame’ #or Jekyll and Hyde is literally jabbing at the labouchere amendment and heavily censored #rambles

[probablyasocialecologist]

To pseudo-socialist antis, abortion access is a tool of capitalists to trick women into abandoning their true calling as mothers in order to make them more effective wage slaves—ignoring that actual Marxist feminists, including Engels himself, consistently argued that women’s liberation from the unwaged drudgery and violence of the home is an essential part of the communist horizon. They erase the work of Black reproductive rights organizations like SisterSong, who have long argued that abortion rights must exist alongside the right to have children in safe and sustainable communities. And they ignore the fact that liberals have never done much to make abortion accessible to the poor. In fact, Democrat Jimmy Carter supported the Hyde Amendment, which banned using federal Medicaid to cover almost all abortion services, claiming “there are many things in life that are not fair, that wealthy people can afford and poor people can’t.” And it takes a jaw-dropping revision of history to ignore that the anti-abortion, trickle-down Reaganomics Right has been at the forefront of destroying anything approaching a social safety net, railing against handouts specifically on the basis that they allow women to rely on the state for survival rather than a husband, like God intended.

Emily Janakiram, The Right’s Fight for Women

#trad wife #conservatism #feminism #abortion #pro life

[molsno]

The 1977 Hyde Amendment has added yet another dimension to coercive sterilization practices. As a result of this law passed by Congress, federal funds for abortions were eliminated in all cases but those involving rape and the risk of death or severe illness. According to Sandra Salazar of the California Department of Public Health, the first victim of the Hyde Amendment was a twenty-seven-year-old Chicana woman from Texas. She died as a result of an illegal abortion in Mexico shortly after Texas discontinued government-funded abortions. There have been many more victims—women for whom sterilization has become the only alternative to the abortions, which are currently beyond their reach. Sterilizations continue to be federally funded and free, to poor women, on demand. Over the last decade the struggle against sterilization abuse has been waged primarily by Puerto Rican, Black, Chicana and Native American women. Their cause has not yet been embraced by the women's movement as a whole. Within organizations representing the interests of middle-class white women, there has been a certain reluctance to support the demands of the campaign against sterilization abuse, for these women are often denied their individual rights to be sterilized when they desire to take this step. While women of color are urged, at every turn, to become permanently infertile, white women enjoying prosperous economic conditions are urged, by the same forces, to reproduce themselves. They therefore sometimes consider the "waiting period" and other details of the demand for "informed consent" to sterilization as further inconveniences for women like themselves. Yet whatever the inconveniences for white middle-class women, a fundamental reproductive right of racially oppressed and poor women is at stake. Sterilization abuse must be ended.

—Angela Davis, Women, Race & Class (1981), p 220-221

#a white ethnostate has always been the goal of this evil empire #angela davis #misogyny #racism #antiblackness #misogynoir

[spider-xan]

One reading of what Mr. Utterson suspects the possible relationship between Jekyll and Hyde, and the 'ghost of some old sin', might be is that Hyde is his illegitimate son, but between Hyde entering through Jekyll's back door (literally and metaphorically), Utterson having a nightmare of Hyde breaking into Jekyll's bedroom while he's sleeping and forcing him to do his bidding in the middle of the night, and thinking of shenanigans around Jekyll's bed a second time, another theory he might have is that Hyde is Jekyll's secret lover, either estranged or ongoing, and between those two possibilities, the latter would be far more dangerous to Jekyll in social and legal terms if it were to be discovered or used to blackmail him.

For historical context, the novella was published in 1886, though as we will later find out, the only information we are given about the temporal setting is that the story is set in the 19th century, though it can't be any earlier than 1850, if you do the math based on Jekyll's age. Homosexuality between men in the UK in the form of sodomy was punishable by death until 1861, during which the Offences Against the Person Act was passed to amend the penalty for sodomy from death to a minimum of ten years in prison; later, and just prior to the novella's publication, the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 criminalized any and all acts of homosexuality between men (not just sodomy), including those done in private with no witnesses — even a mere affectionate letter would suffice as evidence for prosecution — to the point where it became known as the Blackmailer's Charter (source); this would later be the act under which Oscar Wilde would be found guilty of 'gross indecency' in 1895 and sentenced to prison.

Meanwhile, it wasn't uncommon for upper-class men to have illegitimate children, and while potentially scandalous, it would not necessarily be life-ruining — though of course, the concern in that case could be that Hyde has other information he is holding over Jekyll's head as blackmail, including possible relationships with other men that would be both scandalous and illegal during this time period.

#jekyll and hyde #jekyll and hyde weekly #henry jekyll #edward hyde #gabriel utterson