SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
hyde amendment
52 Years After Roe, Reproductive Rights Group Launches Abortion Justice Playbook
"There is still an incredible amount of work left to be done in order to achieve abortion justice in this country, and we hope this playbook serves as a guide to realizing that goal," said All* Above All.
Jan 22, 2025
Wednesday marked 52 years since the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed in the Roe v. Wade decision that Americans have the right to obtain abortion care, but as the reproductive justice group All* Above All said as it released its Abortion Justice Playbook, marginalized communities across the U.S. faced barriers to necessary healthcare "even before the fall" of Roe in 2022.
With Republican-controlled states given free rein to pass abortion restrictions and bans, said All* Above All, "those inequities have only deepened, with millions denied the healthcare they need."
The threat to abortion access has only "escalated" as President Donald Trump returns to the White House, said the group, "as his administration continues to push for even more restrictive abortion laws at the state level."
While the U.S. government is now in the hands of a president who has bragged about overturning Roe, mocked the family of one Georgia woman whose death was caused by the state's six-week abortion ban, and whose vice president has backed a nationwide abortion ban, All* Above All emphasized that Trump's views do not represent those of the majority of Americans.
"The American people remain committed to protecting abortion access with Pew Research finding 63% support for abortion rights nationwide," reads the Abortion Justice Playbook. "Since 2022, voters in 13 states have enacted state constitutional protections for abortion care. State legislatures across the country have also sprung into action to protect abortion access in their states and mitigate the effects of restrictions in others."
"There is still an incredible amount of work left to be done in order to achieve abortion justice in this country, and we hope this playbook serves as a guide to realizing that goal," reads the 21-page document.
The organization was established in 2013 with the goal of repealing the Hyde Amendment, the federal restriction passed in 1976 that bars federal funding from being used for abortion care. The policy blocks abortion care for low-income people who are covered by Medicaid, even in states where abortion remains legal.
"This isn't just about policies—it's about people. It's about transforming a broken system to ensure that everyone, no matter who they are or where they live, can access the healthcare they deserve with dignity and without barriers."
All* Above All's playbook calls for the repeal of the Hyde Amendment through the passage of the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance (EACH) Act, which would ensure the "basic right to abortion care is extended to every person who receives care or insurance through the federal government. Additionally, it will prohibit political interference with decisions by private insurance companies to offer coverage for abortion care."
But with Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress for at least the next two years, reads the playbook, "states can step up to serve as a crucial backstop in providing affordable abortion care" as abortion rights advocates continue to push for the repeal of the Hyde Amendment.
The group called on states to repeal all bans on insurance coverage of abortion, which exist in 35 states, and to require all health insurance plans to cover abortion care without cost sharing.
All* Above All said states should also expand access and affordability by:
- Mandating insurance providers to produce consumer-friendly information about covered services;
- Eliminating restrictions on telehealth abortion services to ensure accessible, timely, and equitable care; and
- Working with providers to ensure sustainable and equitable reimbursement rates.
The playbook places an emphasis on other actions states can take while groups push to protect abortion rights at the federal level.
"The Abortion Justice Playbook is a bold and necessary blueprint for building a future where abortion access isn't just restored but reimagined to address the systemic inequities that have long denied care to Black, Brown, LGBTQIA+, and low-income communities," said Lexi White, director of state strategies at All* Above All. "This isn't just about policies—it's about people. It's about transforming a broken system to ensure that everyone, no matter who they are or where they live, can access the healthcare they deserve with dignity and without barriers."
To further protect medication abortion—which accounts for 63% of all abortions in the U.S.—after the Supreme Court ruled last year that the abortion pill mifepristone can maintain its federal approval, the group called on states to repeal any in-person dispensing requirements for medication abortions.
Physician-only dispensing requirements should also be repealed, the group added, and state legislatures should pass shield laws to protect providers from out-of-state criminalization of prescribing and dispensing abortion pills.
In December, Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against a doctor in New York who prescribed abortion pills to a patient in Texas.
All* Above All applauded 14 state governors who have issued 18 executive orders to protect abortion rights since Roe was overturned, and called on governors to take further steps.
Governors should use state budgetary powers to ensure providers can care for patients who need abortions, including by supporting abortion funds; protect medication abortion, especially at universities, through executive action; and direct state health authorities to affirm state and federal requirements to provide emergency abortion care, said All* Above All.
While many of the more than 90,000 local governments in the United States have used their authority in recent years to restrict abortion rights through "arbitrary permit denials, zoning restrictions, reductions in funding, and more," said All* Above All, local leaders can also "fight back against restrictions."
The group called on local governments in states with abortion bans to restrict funding so local funds can't be used in abortion investigations and ensure that criminalization of abortion care is local law enforcement agencies' "lowest priority."
Local governments in all states can work to repeal any abortion travel bans, remove arbitrary restrictions that limit where and how clinics can operate, prohibit local police from taking part in federal or state abortion investigations, and speak out against reproductive injustice by publicly supporting the EACH Act and other legislation.
"The Abortion Justice Playbook," said All* Above All president Nourbese Flint, "is our blueprint for a future where abortion access is equitable, universal, and free from discrimination."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Planned Parenthood Warns House GOP Appropriations Bills Attack Global Health
The "slate of dangerous and unpopular provisions" includes "eliminating the Title X family planning program and reinstating the Trump-era expanded global gag rule."
Jul 01, 2024
As the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives uses the appropriations process to promote the GOP agenda ahead of the November elections, Planned Parenthood Action Fund on Monday highlighted how the spending bills attack health within and beyond the United States.
"Once again, anti-abortion rights politicians in Congress are manipulating the federal appropriations process to push for a recycled slate of dangerous and unpopular provisions to block access to sexual and reproductive healthcare across the country and around the world," states the new Planned Parenthood Action Fund memo.
The document details anti-health policies in spending legislation for fiscal year 2025 that House Republicans have advanced recently, which include provisions "eliminating the Title X family planning program and reinstating the Trump-era expanded global gag rule."
The global gag rule bars U.S. government funding for foreign groups that provide information, referrals, or services for abortion care, or advocate for decriminalization or increasing access. It was initially implemented by former Republican President Ronald Reagan as the Mexico City policy, then reinstated and expanded by former President Donald Trump.
"In all, anti-abortion rights politicians continue to act in defiance of the vast majority of their constituents who believe that the government has no right to control people's personal healthcare decisions with attacks on abortion, birth control, and gender-affirming care."
Despite Trump's ongoing legal battles, he is the presumptive Republican nominee to face Democratic President Joe Biden in November. Biden rescinded his predecessor's gag rule shortly after taking office in 2021. Reproductive freedom has been a key issue in not only that contest but races at all levels of U.S. politics this cycle, as GOP policymakers and candidates have set their sights on abortion care, birth control, and in vitro fertilization.
The gag rule was included in the appropriations bill for the Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs, which the House on Friday passed 212-200. The only Democrat who voted in favor was Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington—who supports reproductive rights and has shared her own abortion story.
That bill would also "cap funding for international family planning and reproductive health programs at $461 million, a nearly 25% cut," and end funding for United Nations entities including the U.N. Population Fund, as the Planned Parenthood memo notes. It would also "restrict information about and access to gender-affirming care," and "maintain the Helms Amendment in addition to restrictions on abortion coverage for Peace Corps volunteers."
Speaking out against the legislation last week, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee, said that "much like last year, the fiscal year 2025 state and foreign operations bill resurrects the doomed isolationism of the early 20th century."
"For the sake of our national security, women's health globally, and our response to the climate crisis, Republicans must abandon this reckless and partisan path and join Democrats at the table to govern," declared DeLauro, who raised the alarm about House GOP appropriations proposals throughout June.
Taking aim at the labor, health and human services, and education legislation last week, she said that "in keeping with the majority's other partisan bills, this bill is chock full of dozens of poison pill riders, including multiple provisions that attack women's freedom and block abortion and reproductive healthcare services."
Specifically, as the new memo points out, it would interfere with postgraduate training in abortion care, impose the Hyde and Weldon amendments, restrict access to gender-affirming care, block Biden administration executive orders intended to boost abortion care access in the wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, and eliminate funding for Title X family planning and teen pregnancy prevention programs while pouring money into abstinence-only-until-marriage initiatives.
It would also "defund" Planned Parenthood, preventing people in communities across the United States—particularly in rural and medically underserved areas—from accessing services including sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment, cancer screenings, and birth control, as the memo outlines.
The recently introduced commerce, justice, and science bill would block most federal prisoners from attaining abortion coverage and prevent the U.S. Department of Justice from suing state or local governments over anti-choice laws, according to the memo. The financial services and general government legislation would reverse a District of Columbia law protecting workers from being fired for their reproductive healthcare choices, bar D.C. from using local funds to cover abortion care, and ban Federal Employee Health Benefits Program coverage of most abortions.
"In all, anti-abortion rights politicians continue to act in defiance of the vast majority of their constituents who believe that the government has no right to control people's personal healthcare decisions with attacks on abortion, birth control, and gender-affirming care," the publication states.
The document also targets provisions in multiple recently passed spending bills focused on homeland security, the Pentagon, and veterans—including attacks on abortion and gender-affirming care for current and former service members and their families as well as anyone in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody.
"Anti-abortion rights lawmakers recently included similar measures in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)—an annual must-pass bill," the memo highlights.
"Everyone deserves access to abortion and gender-affirming care, including service members and their families. But these lawmakers would rather play games with our fundamental rights in their attempt to control our bodies, lives, and futures."
After the mid-June NDAA vote, Planned Parenthood Action Fund president Alexis McGill Johnson said that "it's like Groundhog Day. Anti-abortion rights House members use must-pass bills as a vehicle to force through their deeply unpopular and dangerous agenda—again and again and again. Everyone deserves access to abortion and gender-affirming care, including service members and their families. But these lawmakers would rather play games with our fundamental rights in their attempt to control our bodies, lives, and futures."
The NDAA and spending bills aren't expected to pass the Senate—which is narrowly controlled by Democrats—in their current forms, but they send a message about what Republicans would prioritize if they fully reclaimed Congress and the White House.
"The majority's policy riders do not belong in appropriations bills, and like last year, we will defeat them," DeLauro said last month. "But it is disappointing that we are going through this charade again, just months after Republicans and Democrats voted for the 2024 appropriations bills."
This post has been updated to clarify that the memo was exclusively from Planned Parenthood Action Fund, not Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
Keep ReadingShow Less
"We're Not Going Back--Never": Warren Has Plan to Defend Rights Enshrined in Roe
"The Supreme Court does not get the last word," the Massachusetts progressive asserted. "The American people—through their leaders in Congress—can and must take action."
May 09, 2022
In the wake of last week's leaked Supreme Court draft opinion reversing Roe v. Wade, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Monday laid out a roadmap for ensuring reproductive freedom, vowing "to do everything I can" to prevent right-wing ideologues from rolling back hard-fought human rights.
"The Republicans have planned long and hard for this day, and we can't wait a second longer to fight back. We need action."
"Let me be crystal clear: Republicans in Congress are planning to restrict abortion access and reproductive healthcare everywhere, endangering all Americans, whether they live in red, blue, or purple states," Warren (D-Mass.) wrote in a Marie Claire op-ed. "And it is equally clear that the Supreme Court is opening the door to banning birth control, outlawing marriage equality, and even making interracial marriage illegal."
"American freedoms and the Constitution itself are under attack," she added. "The Republicans have planned long and hard for this day, and we can't wait a second longer to fight back. We need action."
That, said Warren, means codifying abortion rights at the federal level, abolishing the filibuster in the Senate, and getting out the vote and electing pro-choice Democrats in this November's congressional midterms.
Warren noted that "Congress has the power to make Roe the law of the entire nation" by passing the Women's Health Protection Act (WHPA). First introduced by Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.) in 2013, the measure would prohibit "governmental restrictions on the provision of, and access to, abortion services."
After a Texas law empowering anti-choice vigilantes to sue and collect bounties on anyone who "aids or abets" an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy took effect last year, every Democratic member of the House except Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) voted last September to pass the WHPA.
However, right-wing Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia joined Republicans in the upper chamber in filibustering the bill, sparking renewed calls to abolish the arcane procedure that has repeatedly been used to block progressive proposals. On Monday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the upper chamber will vote on a modified--critics say stripped-down--WHPA on Wednesday.
Related Content
As Schumer Tees Up Vote to Codify Roe, Progressives Urge Elimination of Filibuster
Last week, Warren said that it is "long past time" to pass the WHPA, "and we can't let the filibuster stand in our way."
In her Marie Claire op-ed, she stressed that senators "should debate that bill on the floor and then vote on it--because every American should know exactly where we stand and hold us accountable. But to get that vote and protect Roe, we must end the filibuster."
Warren also stressed the need for reproductive rights defenders to vote in the upcoming congressional midterm elections.
"This November, Americans will decide the future of Roe, and voters everywhere must bring their fury to the voting booth," she said. "Yes, I'm angry that a group of unelected ideologues on the Supreme Court think they can turn current law upside down and dictate to tens of millions of people across this country the terms of their pregnancies and their lives."
Related Content
'I Am Angry!': Warren Unleashes in Fiery Speech Against 'Extremist' Court
"I will use my anger to do everything I can to keep an extremist Supreme Court from having the last word on the right to a safe and legal abortion," the senator added. "In a democracy, that power is in the hands of the people. We need to use our anger to make real change. We're not going back--never."
Efforts to codify reproductive rights at the federal level began even before the Roe v. Wade ruling was announced. Applauding the "historic and giant step toward the recognition of the rights of women to control their own bodies," then-Rep. Bella Abzug (D-N.Y.) asserted the day after the 1973 Roe decision that the "next step" must be passage of her Abortion Rights Act, which would "eliminate any state laws of any nature concerning the regulation of abortion."
Abzug foresaw the sustained Republican-led attacks on reproductive rights that followed the landmark ruling. At the federal level, the Hyde Amendment has blocked Medicaid funding of abortion services since 1976, a policy disproportionately affecting women of color. Meanwhile, a majority of U.S. states have passed laws banning or limiting abortions, or triggering bans in the event Roe is overturned.
"The minute Roe is officially gone, more than half the states in this country are poised to outlaw abortion or severely limit abortion access," wrote Warren. "If abortion is outlawed, the impact won't fall equally on everyone. Wealthy women will still get safe, legal abortions by flying to another state or even traveling to another country."
"But the world will be very different for those who have the least power: low-income women, young women, women of color, victims of incest and abuse, moms already working two jobs to support their children," she added.
Related Content
'Terrifying': GOP Preparing 6-Week Federal Abortion Ban If They Win Back Congress
Other previous attempts to codify reproductive rights include the Freedom of Choice Act--first introduced in 1989--which affirmed that "every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child, terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability, or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health."
"For me, this isn't about politics, this is personal."
Then-U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) co-sponsored the legislation. While campaigning for president in 2007, he vowed that "the first thing" he would do if elected is sign the bill into law. However, despite Democrats controlling both houses of Congress at the time, the Freedom of Choice Act failed to become law, and in 2009 Obama said that the bill was "not highest legislative priority."
Warren says that "for me, this isn't about politics, this is personal."
"I have lived in a world where abortion was illegal," she wrote. "I learned early on that when the law bans all abortions, only safe and legal abortions will be banned. I lived in a world in which women bled to death from back-alley abortions. A world in which infections and other complications destroyed women's futures. A world in which some women took their own lives rather than continuing with a pregnancy they could not bear."
"The Supreme Court does not get the last word," Warren emphasized. "The American people--through their leaders in Congress--can and must take action."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden Hailed for 'Historic' Exclusion of Anti-Choice Hyde Amendment From Proposed Budget
"At a time when reproductive freedom is under unprecedented attack, and the legal right to abortion is hanging on by a tenuous thread, this critical step from the Biden administration is more important than ever."
May 28, 2021
Reproductive rights advocates on Friday hailed President Joe Biden's omission of funding for the Hyde Amendment--which prohibits most federal abortion spending--in his $6 trillion 2022 budget proposal.
"Budgets are a statement of values. President Biden's budget proposes to end the harmful Hyde Amendment--making clear that federal law should support everyone's ability to access healthcare, including safe, legal abortion, in this country."
--Planned Parenthood Action
While campaigning for president, Biden promised he would try to end the Hyde Amendment, which has been in effect since 1977 and bars Medicare and the Indian Health Service from covering abortions except in cases of incest, rape, or when the life of the pregnant person is endangered.
"If I believe healthcare is a right, as I do, I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone's ZIP code," candidate Biden said in June 2019 in an about-face following intense criticism from reproductive rights advocates over his erstwhile support for the amendment.
"I can't justify leaving millions of women without the access to care they need, and the ability to exercise their constitutionally protected right," he added.
Reproductive rights campaigners cheered the news that, for the first time in decades, a president did not include the Hyde Amendment in a proposed budget.
"Today's presidential budget is the latest example of the Biden-Harris administration fulfilling its commitments and campaign promises to advance reproductive freedom," NARAL Pro-Choice America chief campaigns and advocacy officer Christian LoBue said in a statement.
"Discriminatory abortion coverage bans disproportionately harm people working to make ends meet, especially women of color, young people, and transgender and nonbinary people," LoBue added. "At a time when reproductive freedom is under unprecedented attack, and the legal right to abortion is hanging on by a tenuous thread, this critical step from the Biden administration is more important than ever."
In Congress, progressive lawmakers led praise for the president's move, with Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) calling it "great news."
Georgeanne Usova, senior legislative counsel at the ACLU, also hailed Biden's move.
"Today's budget marks a historic step toward finally ending the coverage bans that have pushed abortion care out of reach and perpetuated inequality for decades," Usova said in a statement.
"With abortion access under unprecedented attack around the country, lifting discriminatory barriers to care is a matter of racial and economic justice that cannot wait," she added. "No one should be denied abortion care because of where they live, how much money they have, or how they get insurance."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'All In for the EACH Act': Rights Advocates Applaud Bill to End Hyde Amendment
"Congress has the opportunity to bring us one step closer to a world where access to abortion care doesn't depend on where you live, how you are insured, or how much money you have."
Mar 25, 2021
Reproductive rights advocates cheered news that Sen. Tammy Duckworth and Rep. Barbara Lee planned to re-introduce the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance--or EACH--Act in Congress on Thursday in the latest bid to reverse what Lee called the "anti-choice" and "blatantly racist" Hyde Amendment.
"The Hyde Amendment has been used by anti-choice politicians to keep abortion care out of the reach for people already marginalized by our healthcare system."
--Rep. Barbara Lee
"This isn't about what side you're on in the abortion debate, it's about equality and opportunity plain and simple," Duckworth (D-Ill.) said on a call with reporters Wednesday, according to HuffPost. "Whatever you think about the procedure, we should all agree that what's legal for wealthy Americans should not be so inaccessible for Americans of color and low-income Americans."
Lee (D-Calif.), who was also on the Wednesday call, said: "Let's call this amendment what it is: It's anti-choice and it's blatantly racist. We know it disproportionately impacts low-income people and women of color. It should never have been signed into law and it's way past time that it was repealed."
"The Hyde Amendment has been used by anti-choice politicians to keep abortion care out of the reach for people already marginalized by our healthcare system," she added.
Although the landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court ruling Roe v. Wade legalized abortion throughout the nation, the 44-year-old Hyde Amendment prohibits federal Medicaid funding for most abortion services. Three extremely narrow exceptions were added in 1994 permitting Medicaid funding for abortions in cases of incest, rape, and if a continued pregnancy endangers patient life.
Reproductive rights groups long have pushed lawmakers to repeal the amendment, with Planned Parenthood Action Fund arguing that it "is particularly harmful to people with low incomes, people of color, young people, and immigrants--who all disproportionately rely on Medicaid for their healthcare coverage."
In 1980, Thurgood Marshall, the first Black justice to serve on the Supreme Court, asserted that "the Hyde Amendment is designed to deprive poor and minority women of the constitutional right to choose abortion."
Advocates hailed the imminent re-introduction--versions of the bill have been introduced several times since 2015--of the EACH Act. More than 130 reproductive rights groups in the All* Above All coalition have endorsed the proposed legislation.
Planned Parenthood Action Fund president and CEO Alexis McGill Johnson tweeted that "Hyde disproportionately harms Black people, Latinos, and members of the LGBTQ+ community, who because of systemic racism and oppression are more likely to get their health insurance through Medicaid and other public health programs. We need the EACH Act now."
Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said in a statement that "thanks to the reproductive justice movement's dedication and leadership, Congress has the opportunity to bring us one step closer to a world where access to abortion care doesn't depend on where you live, how you are insured, or how much money you have."
"Reproductive freedom is not a reality unless we all have the freedom to make decisions about our health and futures with dignity and without interference from politicians," added Hogue.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden Is Being Biden. That's a Risk.
Biden’s longevity in Washington is both his Thor’s hammer and his Achilles’ heel
Jun 21, 2019
I get what Joe Biden was trying to say, but I'll never understand how he tried--and utterly failed--to say it.
Yes, there was a time when the Senate was a chummy men's club whose members, on some issues, put collegiality ahead of ideology. Yes, I see how the Democratic front-runner might want to hold out the hope, however slim, of a return to the days of "civility" when political foes could find common ground. Yes, I know that Biden is still Biden, which means you never know what might come out of his mouth.
But no, no, a thousand times no, you don't name former senators James Eastland of Mississippi and Herman Talmadge of Georgia in your fond reminiscences of the good old days. There are plenty of conservative Republicans whom Biden might have cited. He didn't have to dredge up two vicious Dixiecrat racists who devoted their long careers to denying African Americans basic civil and human rights.
That's what Biden did, however, at a fundraiser Tuesday in New York City. After recalling that he had served in the Senate with segregationists Eastland and Talmadge, Biden went on: "Guess what? At least there was some civility. We got things done. We didn't agree on much of anything. We got things done. We got it finished. But today, you look at the other side and you're the enemy. Not the opposition, the enemy. We don't talk to each other anymore."
When a passel of his opponents for the Democratic nomination pounced on the remarks and called for an apology, Biden was initially defiant. "Apologize for what?" he said to reporters Wednesday. "There's not a racist bone in my body; I've been involved in civil rights my whole career. Period. Period. Period."
I don't doubt the integrity of Biden's bones. But conjuring the ghost of Eastland, who considered African Americans "an inferior race," and the specter of Talmadge, who fought civil rights legislation every inch of the way, was either a bad strategic choice or a worrisome gaffe.
Is Biden trying to emulate Bill Clinton and create a "Sister Souljah moment," in which he reassures whites by offending African Americans? I doubt it. Such a move would be self-defeating even in a general-election campaign against President Trump, in my view, but it would be positively insane in the Democratic primaries. Biden's early lead is strongest among black Democrats. If they were to look elsewhere, he could easily fall back into the pack.
More likely, it was just Biden being Biden -- and a reminder that choosing him as the Democratic nominee is not a risk-free proposition.
Biden's longevity in Washington is both his Thor's hammer and his Achilles' heel. Voters are familiar with him from his decades as a senator and his eight years as Barack Obama's vice president. They think of him as a mainstream Democrat and associate him with a time when Congress and the presidency were competent and functional.
Voters also recall specifics of his past, such as his role in the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, but he can neutralize such episodes if he confronts them directly. The unanswered question is how well he understands the Democratic Party of today and how both it and the nation have changed.
As he launched his campaign, Biden had to make clear he understood that his tactile style of personal interaction was inappropriate in the #MeToo era. Then, to be viable in a party that sees abortion rights under siege, he had to abruptly abandon his longtime position in favor of the Hyde Amendment, which sharply limits the use of federal funds for abortion. Now, he gives his supporters indigestion by stirring memories of the Jim Crow South.
The danger for Biden isn't that Democrats will think he is racist or wants to take away women's reproductive rights or intends anything untoward with all his hugging. The danger is that primary voters will come to question his ability to give Trump the electoral drubbing he deserves.
That is why next week's debates in Miami are as important for Biden as they are for any of the other contenders. He has provided fodder for the attacks that will surely come his way. Will he respond like a veteran campaigner in sync with his party and equipped for battle? Or will he come across as a man of yesteryear?
Don't even think about counting Biden out; he's still the clear front-runner. But this is a race, not an investiture. The crown has to be earned.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ocasio-Cortez: "We're Going to Fight to Repeal the Hyde Amendment"
"Access to safe and legal abortion care in the United States ought to be non-negotiable."
Jun 15, 2019
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) started a petition Saturday seeking to repeal the Hyde Amendment, which bars the use of federal funds for abortions, arguing the restriction overwhelmingly harms low-income Americans and women of color. AOC emailed her supporters:
"Since 1976, our government has banned federal funding for abortion care -- specifically, for Medicaid recipients. Countless studies have shown that due to this amendment, millions of women have been forced to go through with pregnancies that, given the funding, they would have otherwise terminated. "
"It's not the 70s anymore. This is 2019, and none of our leaders should be willing to stand by a policy that disproportionately harms low-income Americans and people of color just to suit the interests of anti-choice zealots. "
"Abortion care is health care. It's estimated that over 60,000 women are forced to go through with unwanted pregnancies every year just due to a lack of access to care. In a modern, moral, and wealthy nation such as the United States, that is unacceptable."
"That ends now. We're going to fight to repeal the Hyde Amendment, and let people access the care that they need. Sign your name if you stand for repealing the Hyde Amendment."
"Access to safe and legal abortion care in the United States ought to be non-negotiable. But thanks to partisan sabotage and zealotry, women across the country are losing access to this constitutionally protected right."
"Together, we're going to fight back."
Hyde, passed in 1976, bars federal funds from being used for abortion care except in the cases of rape or incest, or if the woman's life is in danger.
Last week, Ocasio-Cortez blasted former vice president Joe Biden's Hyde Amendment position: "That's not a progressive position. And you know what? If your pride is being a moderate, centrist candidate, then go out and say that."
Biden's campaign for president confirmed on June 5th that the Delaware Democrat still supported the controversial, anti-choice Hyde Amendment, a revelation that generated intense criticism from rights groups. One day later, Biden did a flip-flop and announced a reversal course on his longstanding position on Hyde.
Ocasio-Cortez , speaking with The Young Turks show "Rebel HQ" in an interview posted June 6th, said that "record is important because it shows a consistency in values in beliefs."
She was responding to interviewer Emma Vigeland mentioning Biden's previous declaration that he's the "most progressive candidate" and Ocasio-Cortez choosing to not endorse any of the Democratic hopefuls yet.
"I think we need a progressive president," Ocasio-Cortez told Vigeland.
Don't "say you're a progressive candidate," Ocasio-Cortez added, "but at the same time not support repealing something as basic as the Hyde Amendment."
Watch the segment below:
Keep ReadingShow Less
Why an "Apology Tour" Is Needed: An Open Letter to Joe Biden
Pretending that you don't have much to apologize for is not viable.
Jun 10, 2019
Dear Mr. Biden:
News outlets are reporting that you're determined to prevent your campaign from turning into an "apology tour" this summer. But your only other option is a campaign of denial--sinking deeper into a quagmire of unsustainable pretense.
After your flip-flop late last week that finally renounced your 40 years of support for the Hyde Amendment's discriminatory limits on reproductive rights for low-income women, the New York Times reported that your campaign's "larger concern" has been "the implications of Mr. Biden spending too much time reversing or expressing remorse for his past policy stances."
Those implications are easy to understand. Your "past policy stances" have done so much harm--to so many people for so long--that if you start "expressing remorse," there might be no end in sight.
"Before entering the race," the Times reported, "Mr. Biden and his inner circle resolved that while he would have to take steps to assuage liberal reservations about his record, he could not afford to make the first few months of the campaign an extended apology tour."
But an extended apology tour would be entirely appropriate. Pretending that you don't have much to apologize for is not viable.
That's because the Democratic Party of your political glory days is gone. At the grassroots, millions of attentive voters--the ones most likely to volunteer, to repeatedly donate money (albeit not in the large bundles you're relying on), and to vote in all kinds of weather--are more informed and better networked than during the last decades of the 20th century.
The days are past when vast numbers of Democrats won't notice that you're uttering platitudes about the middle class and being touted as "Lunch Bucket Joe" after serving the interests of corporate giants as Wall Street Joe. And a whole lot of people will really care as they learn about your political backstory of not-so-subtle appeals to racism on such matters as busing for school desegregation and the draconian 1994 crime bill that fueled mass incarceration.
"The more you deny the need to apologize, the more your denials seem off-kilter."
In the current campaign, your above-the-fray strategy probably won't work. As the Iowa Poll released over the weekend reflects, support for you has started to recede: "About six weeks after he announced he would run, Biden's support has fallen by a third," The Hill reports. "Biden's declining support came even before this week's controversy over his flip-flop on the Hyde Amendment."
While I'm an active Bernie Sanders supporter, I have to say that I don't believe any of your Democratic opponents have nearly as much to apologize for as you do.
The more you deny the need to apologize, the more your denials seem off-kilter. Even while you were executing that Hyde flip-flop with a speech in Atlanta days ago, the Times pointed out "Mr. Biden took pains to state explicitly that he was not repudiating his previous stance on abortion funding and would make 'no apologies' for it."
For decades, you helped block federal funding for low-income women to have access to abortions. Then you affirmed the same position on Wednesday last week, only to do a 180 the next day after putting your finger to the political wind--and you make "no apologies"?
What might an apology tour look like? Here are five recommendations for acknowledging key realities and expressing remorse:
- Teaming up with segregationist senators to oppose busing for school desegregation: "I'm sorry I joined forces with bigots."
- Treatment of Anita Hill in the Clarence Thomas hearings: "I deeply regret that I ended up showing more concern for the sensibilities of Republican colleagues than respecting Ms. Hill's rights."
- Leading role--while pandering to racism on the Senate floor--in passage of the 1994 crime bill: "I was wrong, and I wince while watching video of my Senate floor speech."
- Career-long services to corporate elites with avid mutual support that continued during the launch of this campaign: "I apologize for catering to credit card companies and other huge corporations."
- Powerfully supporting the 2003 invasion of Iraq: "I hate to think of how many people have suffered and died because of the Iraq war that I helped bring about as the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."
For such aspects of your political record, apologies are long overdue. They won't bring back the dead, undo suffering, retroactively nourish those who've gone hungry or repay the debts that millions of Americans continue to face. But unless you clear the air hovering over your campaign, its messages will be enveloped in an unforgettable stench of evasion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Quarter-Measure at Best': Despite New Stance on Hyde, Say Critics, Biden No Progressive on Reproductive Rights
Biden announced he no longer supports anti-choice amendment, but failed to address its harms over more than four decades
Jun 07, 2019
When it comes to supporting abortion rights, Joe Biden is no progressive.
That's the message from women's healthcare advocates after the Democratic presidential candidate announced Thursday that he no longer supports the Hyde Amendment while stressing that he makes "no apologies" for his previous backing of the measure that particularly impacts low-income women and women of color.
Hyde, passed in 1976, bars federal funds from being used for abortion care except in the cases of rape or incest, or if the woman's life is in danger.
Speaking at a Democratic fundraiser in Atlanta Thursday evening, Biden said, "If I believe healthcare is a right, as I do, I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone's ZIP code."
"I've been struggling with the problems that Hyde now presents," he said, adding that "circumstances have changed" recently. Biden pointed to the wave of "extreme laws in clear violation of constitutional rights" enacted recently by Republican lawmakers.
"I want to be clear," said Biden. "I make no apologies for my last position."
The former vice president's reversal of position--which came the same week as he drew outrage by affirming his support for the anti-choice amendment--drew praise from Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who called it "Proof that the power of women can change things."
But simply withdrawing support for Hyde is "a quarter-measure at best," said Jodi Jacobson, president and editor in chief of Rewire.News.
In fact, wrote Jacobson, Biden's new comments suggest that he doesn't grasp the real harm that amendment has caused over its 43-year life, and reveal "a brazen abrogation of his and his party's responsibility for the damage."
While recent GOP-led bans in states like Alabama and Missouri do restrict access to abortion, "Hyde has been as great a barrier to access to abortion care for low-income people as any restriction dreamed up by the fanatical anti-choice movement," she wrote.
Placing blame on the Democratic Party, Jabobson explained that the Hyde-imposed barrier has been "one Democrats helped sustain year after year, revealing that when it came to low-income people and people of color in need of abortion care, politics has always been prioritized over health and human rights."
Such archives of actions are noteworthy.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), speaking with the The Young Turks show "Rebel HQ" in an interview posted Thursday, said that "record is important because it shows a consistency in values in beliefs."
She was responding to interviewer Emma Vigeland mentioning Biden's previous declaration that he's the "most progressive candidate" and Ocasio-Cortez choosing to not endorse any of the Democratic hopefuls yet.
"I think we need a progressive president," Ocasio-Cortez told Vigeland.
Don't "say you're a progressive candidate," Ocasio-Cortez added, "but at the same time not support repealing something as basic as the Hyde Amendment."
Watch the segment below:
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Bravo... Now Do the Iraq War': After Hyde Reversal, 2020 Candidate Seth Moulton Reminds Biden of Other Position He May Want to Retract
Biden is the only 2020 presidential candidate who voted for the invasion of Iraq
Jun 07, 2019
After 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden bowed to pressure and announced he no longer supports the anti-choice Hyde Amendment, Rep. Seth Moulton on Friday applauded Biden for reversing his position and said he should do the same for the Iraq invasion he voted for as a senator in 2002.
"Bravo to Joe Biden for doing the right thing and reversing his longstanding support for the Hyde Amendment," tweeted Moulton, who is also a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate. "It takes courage to admit when you're wrong, especially when those decisions affect millions of people."
"Now do the Iraq War," added Moulton, an Iraq War veteran.
Moulton's tweet on Friday was not the first time he has criticized Biden for supporting the invasion of Iraq.
"It was a mistake," Moulton said of Biden's vote in an interview on CNN earlier this month. "Because we should've been a lot more careful about going into Iraq. We should have questioned the intelligence. We should have made sure that we exhausted every opportunity before we put young American lives in danger."
Biden's vote in favor of the invasion of Iraq is one of his many past positions that, according to critics, show he is out of touch with the current direction of the Democratic Party.
"Joe Biden stands in near complete opposition to where the center of energy is in the Democratic Party today," progressive advocacy group Justice Democrats said after Biden announced his candidacy in April. "We don't need someone who voted for the Iraq War, for mass incarceration, and for the Bankruptcy Reform Act while voting against gay marriage, reproductive rights, and school desegregation."
Biden is the only 2020 Democratic presidential candidate who voted for the Iraq invasion. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)--the only other presidential contender who was in Congress during the build-up to the invasion--voted no as a member of the House.
"Joe voted for the war in Iraq," Sanders told ABC last month, highlighting the contrasts between himself and the former vice president. "I led the effort against it."
As Norman Solomon wrote for Common Dreams in March, the problem "wasn't just that Biden voted for the Iraq war on the Senate floor five months before it began."
"During the lead-up to that vote, in August 2002, as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee," Solomon wrote, "he presided over sham hearings--refusing to allow experts who opposed an invasion to get any words in edgewise--while a cavalcade of war hawks testified in the national spotlight."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy