50th Anniversary of the Hyde Amendment

This September marks the 50-year anniversary of the House’s initial approval of the Hyde Amendment, which annually prevents federal funding for elective abortions.

It’s quite expected that Democrats would use this occasion to push for extended Affordable Care Act subsidies, which can indirectly fund abortions in certain states. However, President Trump’s recent remarks caught pro-lifers off guard. He mentioned a need for “flexibility” regarding the Hyde Amendment, which was surprising coming from Republicans.

Human life is not negotiable. The same goes for the Hyde Amendment.

During a speech on January 6 in Washington, President Trump urged House Republicans to “work something out” about healthcare. This hinted that they might consider the Hyde Amendment as a bargaining point.

For many Republican voters, such a stance isn’t acceptable.

Just a year ago, Trump was aligned with their views. He swiftly signed an executive order on his fourth day in office affirming the United States’ policy to “end the coercive use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund or facilitate elective abortion,” in line with the Hyde Amendment.

He also played a role in the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, reinstating policies that cut off federal funding for overseas abortions and branding himself as the most pro-life president ever.

If his views are shifting now, the public deserves clarity.

According to some estimates, the Hyde Amendment has saved over 2.6 million lives in its five decades. It prohibits federal funds from being used for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or when the mother’s life is at risk.

Yet, the abortion advocacy community has discovered ways around it. In fact, twenty state Medicaid programs utilize state funds to cover elective abortions, and many recipients of these plans benefit from federal subsidies to lower their premiums.

In simpler terms, federal taxes indirectly support abortion in blue states, irrespective of the Hyde Amendment’s existence. This mirrors the ethical and financial dilemma that led to Congress defunding Planned Parenthood in Trump’s legislative package last July. Why eliminate one funding source while allowing another to remain?

The planned expiration of the Biden administration’s enhanced Obamacare subsidies on January 1 could give Republicans a chance to close this loophole.

To their credit, House Republicans made an effort. In December, they passed a bill that aimed to stop federal funds from assisting with Medicaid plans that cover elective abortions. The Congressional Budget Office projected this legislation could lower Obamacare premiums by an average of 11% until 2035, nearly double that expected under the Democratic proposal, and reduce the national deficit by $35.6 billion.

However, seventeen Republicans diverged from the party line.

On January 8, they aligned with Democrats to pass a “clean” three-year extension of Obamacare subsidies without any provision to prevent taxpayer money from subsidizing abortions.

The bill is now headed to the Senate, where reports indicate bipartisan negotiations are ongoing. Thankfully, House Minority Leader John Thune has stated firmly that the Hyde Amendment is non-negotiable in any discussions, despite Trump’s suggestion for “flexibility.”

“If we do something, we want to ensure that funds are not used against the values upheld in this region for the last 50 years regarding taxpayer contributions towards abortions,” Thune expressed to reporters on January 6.

Those in the Republican Party advocating for the loosening of Hyde’s protections should take a cue from Thune. Trump might excel at the “art of the deal,” but the foundational beliefs of the Republican coalition shouldn’t be up for negotiation.

The Republican Party has historically presented itself as the party of abolitionists, freedom advocates, and protectors of the vulnerable. Selling out these principles for short-term political gain would not only be unjust but also contradictory to their identity.

With all due respect, Mr. President, human lives cannot be treated as bargaining chips. The same applies to the Hyde Amendment.