These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: District of Columbia money bill faces last-minute antiabortion challenge.
    Journal: Wash Memo Alan Guttmacher Inst; 1993 Oct 25; (16):1-2. PubMed ID: 12318480.
    Abstract:
    In October 1993, anti-abortion supporters in the US House of Representatives argued during the conference on the annual federal appropriation to the District of Columbia (DC) bill against the deletion of prohibition of local and federal funds for provision of abortion services. The House and the Senate had already passed this bill (June and August, respectively). Their argument resulted in defeat of the conference agreement (224-206). They claimed that they were wielding their power to decide local abortion policy, which they cannot do in their own states. The DC officials are all outspokenly pro-choice, annoying the anti-abortion representatives, so they sought vengeance by seeking and, at least temporarily, achieving reinsertion of the prohibition of local and federal funds for provision of abortion funds. None of the federal payment Congress makes each year to DC government pays for any health services, including abortion. Medicaid and US Public Health Service funds do, however, and they already require DC to abide by the Hyde amendment. The Hyde amendment restricts use of federal funds for abortion to just cases of life endangerment, rape, or incest. The nonvoting DC delegate to Congress was against reinsertion of the federal prohibition in the bill because of home rule and the federal government should not limit DC's autonomy. She had the support of other pro-choice women members of the House. Pro-choice Republicans unintentionally helped the anti-abortion members by voting against the bill because they did not support any appropriation bill, not because of the deletion of the clause on prohibition of funds for abortion services. The House will reconsider the bill on October 27 and likely will pass it by a narrow margin. After House passage, it would return to the senate for approval followed by President Clinton signing it into law.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]