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
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.
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
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.
Earlier this year, I wrote about the significant pro-life victory when President Trump reinstated Ronald Reagan’s Mexico City Policy to prohibit the use of U.S. taxpayer money in foreign aid to organizations that either fund or promote abortions around the world. President Trump did exactly what...
How could France censor a pro-life video message of people with Down Syndrome talking about how much they love life and love their mothers? Our European affiliate, the European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ), has just filed a legal application with the European Court of Human Rights to challenge...
Over the last several years, many state legislatures around the nation have taken important steps towards upholding their mandates to protect the most vulnerable of their citizenry. Sixteen states have passed laws that ban abortions at the point at which the unborn baby with a heartbeat can feel...
Today the American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ), along with its co-counsel, filed a petition with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals seeking rehearing in the appeal involving the undercover investigation of the abortion industry conducted by the Center for Medical Progress (CMP). In particular,