Search  |  Login  |  Register

By Jay Sekulow1308957953000

Each year, the United States Congress must approve a series of appropriations bills in order to fund the government and all of the programs that draw federal funds.  This process determines how billions of our taxpayer dollars are spent.  During this process, the rules for how this money can be spent are outlined.

 

For many years, the pro-life majority in Congress has worked hard to make reasonable assurances that our tax dollars are not used for the unconscionable act of abortion.  While the appropriations process cannot be used to change law, it certainly dictates the activities in which the U.S. government makes a financial contribution.  It also speaks volumes about the priorities of Congress, as countless entities and programs are asking for the purse strings of the taxpayers to be opened to them.

 

Unfortunately, the November elections resulted in a new pro-abortion majority in both chambers of Congress.  Therefore, the appropriations process is now being used to expand the abortion agenda, and to fund those who perform abortions.  While it is not entirely clear which pro-life provisions will be targeted, I am providing a brief description of several provisions that the new majority may look to change.

 

         Dickey-Wicker Amendment:  This language has been federal policy since 1996 and prohibits federal funding of research that harms human embryos.

 

         Hyde Amendment:  Approved each year since 1976, this language prohibits federal funding of domestic abortions, except in cases of rape, incest or life of the mother.

 

         Hyde-Weldon Amendment:  This language provides health care entities with conscience protection by allowing them to opt against providing abortions without jeopardizing their eligibility for federal funds.  The Hyde-Weldon provision has been federal policy since 2005.

 

         Title X Funding:  This account, already funded at $283 million annually, is intended to be used for family planning.  Tragically, in reality, it is used almost exclusively for abortion-related services, most often by Planned Parenthood.  This year, Congressman Joseph Crowley (D-NY) and Planned Parenthood are asking for an additional $100 million in Title X funding.  While the Hyde Amendment (if renewed) would prohibit these funds from directly funding abortions, the additional funding would certainly free up other funds to be used for abortions.

 

         Rape Reporting:  Requires groups who receive Title X funding to comply with State laws relating to the reporting of child abuse, molestation, sexual abuse, rape or incest.  This has been federal policy since 1999.

 

         Mexico City Policy:  This provision requires organizations that receive federal funds to verify that they do not use abortion as a method of family planning.  This language was removed President Clinton, but reinstated by President Bush in 2001.

 

         Kemp-Kasten Amendment:  Federal policy since 1985, this language allows the President to discontinue funding for organizations that support or participate in coercive abortion.  On several occasions, this language has been used to eliminate U.S. funding for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) due to its participation in Chinas one-child policy.

 

I have directed our Office of Government Affairs to closely monitor the progress of these provisions, and the appropriations bills in general.  We will vigorously fight any attempt to use your tax dollars and mine for abortions, and I will keep you updated on our progress.

 

 

 

Latest in
Pro Life

Challenging Abortion Marketing Ploys

By Walter M. Weber1415651188626

The ACLJ today filed, jointly with the Houston Coalition for Life, an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in the abortion regulation case of Whole Women’s Health v. Lakey . The state of Texas is appealing from a federal district court ruling that struck down (1)

read more

Hold Abortion Industry Accountable

By Francis J. Manion1415303937096

The scandalously lax regulation of the abortion industry is a well-documented fact. From Dr. Gosnell’s “ House of Horrors ” to Steven Brigham’s decades long trail of quackery , the unique status of abortion as a politically protected procedure has resulted in countless tales of grotesque medical...

read more

Abortion Industry Has Gone All In

By Matthew Clark1415086320000

The abortion industry has gone all in this election. Big abortion knows that its bottom line is directly connected to the politics of abortion. Elect pro-abortion candidates who will deregulate dangerous abortion practices and their bottom line goes up. Elect pro-life candidates who will place even...

read more

Life Prevails Despite Supreme Court

By Matthew Clark1415052199390

Today, the Supreme Court declined to weigh into a case that had the potential to cripple or even shut down pro-life pregnancy centers in New York City. Thankfully, the ruling of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Evergreen Association v. City of New York , which now stands as the final arbiter...

read more