PARKER: Hyde Amendment turns 50 during midterm elections

See more Toronto Sun on Google — save as a Preferred Source

As the U.S. federal government entered fiscal year 2027 on Oct. 1, we marked the 50th anniversary of the Hyde Amendment’s application to federal appropriations for Medicaid and other health programs to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not used to fund elective abortions.

Recommended Videos

When the late Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., first proposed his amendment in June 1976, it was supported by more than 100 House Democrats and a large majority of House Republicans.

Despite differing views about legal policy relating to abortion three years after the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, there was a bipartisan consensus in Congress that taxpayer money should not be used to fund a procedure that was morally objectionable to millions of Americans.

Following Hyde’s enactment, abortion advocacy groups immediately sought to overturn it in the federal courts. After several years of litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court held on April 21, 1980, that the Hyde Amendment was a proper exercise of congressional authority and that the government has a “legitimate interest” in “protecting potential human life.”

Scientific advancements over the past 50 years demonstrate that we are not just talking about “potential human life” but developing human life with great potential. Our founders recognized the importance of protecting human life in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

It’s appropriate that the right to life is the first unalienable right recognized in our nation’s founding document. America’s founders understood that if the right to life is not protected, no other rights can be claimed, exercised or pursued.

As we fast forward to 2026, congressional Republicans are supporting life and the Hyde Amendment in greater numbers than before. However, only a small handful of congressional Democrats continue to support the Hyde Amendment, and nearly all of them support federal legislation euphemistically called the “Women’s Health Protection Act.” This act is a ruse that would impose abortion on demand throughout pregnancy on the entire nation, wiping out funding limitations such as the Hyde Amendment and commonsense provisions such as parental notification, while threatening long-standing conscience protections for doctors and nurses who don’t want to be forced to participate in the performance of abortions.

The extreme drift by Democrat leaders on moral principles is also evident in their virtual abandonment of religious liberty protections they were instrumental in enacting into law. As a New York City congressman in 1993, now-Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., was the principal House sponsor of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which passed the House by unanimous consent, passed in the Senate 97-3, and was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton. RFRA was enacted to overrule a 1990 Supreme Court decision that reduced protections for religious liberty under neutral laws. It restored a “compelling interest” test, subjecting laws that burden religion to “strict scrutiny” by the courts.

Despite his leadership in passing this landmark religious freedom legislation and its previous overwhelming support from national Democrats, Schumer and his Democratic colleagues now seek to supersede RFRA through their so-called Women’s Health Protection Act and their so-called Equality Act.

Any claim that these bills don’t override conscience and religious liberty protections rings hollow, given their legislative language explicitly supersedes RFRA.

Yes, elections have consequences and the Hyde Amendment’s 50th anniversary highlights that Democratic Party leaders have drifted far left on core American principles. Republican leaders silent on these issues, who think social conservatives should set aside their conscience when going into the voting booth, should think again. Eternal applause and internal peace far outweigh any political promises of economic comfort.

Perhaps those candidates should look in the mirror and ask themselves: Are we talking potential human life or developing human life with great potential?

Star Parker is founder of the Center for Urban Renewal and Education

1. 

   Sports
2. 

   Toronto Maple Leafs
3. 

   Money
4. 

   Television
5. 

   Editorial Cartoons