The Ghost of Henry Hyde
Restrictions on abortion and reproductive care in the Republican Budget Bill
Editor’s note: We continue to be horrified at Donald Trump’s violent escaWe will continue to talk about that as things unfold. We also want to keep our attention on the disastrous Trump budget bill. That is what today’s post is about. And if you are looking to get active, don’t forget Saturday is No Kings Day. Find a protest near you: https://www.nokings.org/
Henry Hyde was an Illinois Republican Congressman who, in 1976, led the first major successful effort to restrict abortion access, just three years after abortion was legalized. An amendment, now commonly referred to as the Hyde Amendment, prevented the use of Medicaid funds to cover abortions. This marked the first of many efforts to restrict the use of federal funds for abortion services.
In the years that followed, these restrictions were expanded to include federal employee health plans, military insurance, the Indian Health Service, federal prisons, and international aid. The Republican budget bill recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives includes two new provisions that build on this effort to eliminate any federal subsidy for abortion.
First, the bill contains a provision that would effectively bar ACA Marketplace plans from covering abortion care. The ACA Marketplace was established to provide affordable health insurance to people who are not eligible for Medicaid and do not have access to employer-sponsored plans. To make these plans affordable, the federal government provides subsidies to offset premiums. Under current law, to prevent those subsidies from being used for abortions, insurers are required to collect a separate premium (at least $1) to cover abortion benefits. The House budget bill goes further: it would prevent any federal support from going to plans that cover abortion at all. An estimated 8.2 million women, most with individual incomes under $38,000 or family incomes under $77,250, would lose access to abortion care through their insurance.
Second, the bill expands efforts to eliminate Medicaid reimbursement to any clinic that provides abortion services. This would mean that Planned Parenthood and other major abortion providers would be banned from receiving Medicaid reimbursement, even for essential health services. Experts estimate that between 1.4 and 1.6 million people—mostly women—would likely lose access to affordable contraception, cancer screenings, STI testing, and prenatal care.
While aiming to restrict low-income women’s access to abortion services, the bill simultaneously cuts off access to broader family planning services by eliminating Title X funding. In 2023, Title X clinics served roughly 2.8 million people—two-thirds of whom had incomes at or below the poverty level, and one-third of whom lacked health insurance.
The bill also eliminates the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program (TPPP), which provides medically accurate and age-appropriate information to teens at high risk for pregnancy. This included education on abstinence, contraception, healthy relationships, and life skills. The program’s annual budget ranged from $98 million to $110 million, and in 2022 alone, it served 87,000 teens.
If passed by the Senate and signed by the President, this House budget bill won’t just change how our government spends money—it will advance the MAGA movement’s coordinated agenda to deny women access to essential care and take away their power to control if and when to have children.
Sources:
Hyde Amendment Origins
Congressional Research Service. “The Hyde Amendment: An Overview.”
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10555Extension of Hyde Restrictions
Kaiser Family Foundation. “Federal and State Bans and Restrictions on Abortion.”
https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/fact-sheet/federal-and-state-bans-and-restrictions-on-abortion/ACA Marketplace Abortion Coverage Estimates
KFF. “Abortion Coverage in Marketplace Plans, 2023.”
https://www.kff.org/interactive/abortion-coverage-in-marketplace-plans-2023/Estimated 8.2 Million Women Affected
Murmur Impact Estimate based on HHS ACA enrollment data (2024) and KFF abortion coverage restrictions.
https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2024/01/24/record-breaking-21-3-million-people-signed-up-health-insurance-aca-marketplace.htmlhttps://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/fact-sheet/abortion-coverage-in-marketplace-plans-2023/
Planned Parenthood and Medicaid Reimbursement
KFF. “Major Federal and State Funding Cuts Facing Planned Parenthood.”
https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/issue-brief/major-federal-and-state-funding-cuts-facing-planned-parenthood/Estimated 1.4–1.6 Million Losing Services
Murmur Impact estimate, based on Planned Parenthood and independent clinic Medicaid service volumes.Title X Funding and Impact
Office of Population Affairs (OPA). “Title X Family Planning Annual Report 2023.”
https://opa.hhs.gov/research-evaluation/title-x-family-planning-annual-reportsTeen Pregnancy Prevention Program (TPPP) Overview
Congressional Research Service. “Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program: Overview and Funding.”
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10877TPPP 2022 Impact
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. “FY2022 TPPP Performance Measures.”
https://opa.hhs.gov/grant-programs/teen-pregnancy-prevention-program/performance-measuresHouse Budget Summary (2025)
House Appropriations Committee, Minority Summary of FY25 Labor-HHS Bill.
https://democrats-appropriations.house.gov/news/press-releases
Thanks for the detailed explanation. It’s horrifying.
Controlling/repressing/ oppressing women is definitely a main plank of the Trump/Republican plan. Women whose lives are endangered if they get pregnant and can't get medical treatment won't have the time and energy to be fighting an authoritarian government.
As Wilhelm Reich said in relation to the Third Reich/ Hitler, it's an essential part of authoritarianism that "The wife must not figure as a sexual being, but solely as a child-bearer. "
"The notion that sexuality is moral only in the service of procreation, that what lies outside the pale of procreation is immoral, is the most important feature of reactionary sexual politics.
In other words, if women are to bear children without any kind of social protection, without social guarantees for the rearing of their offspring; if, moreoever, they are not allowed to determine for themselves how many children they will have and are to accept this function willingly and unquestionably - then motherhood, as opposed to woman’s sexual function, has to be idealized.
If we are to comprehend the fact that Hitler’s party, just as the centre parties, relied chiefly upon women’s votes, we must comprehend irrationalism. The irrational mechanism at work here is the setting up of an antithesis between woman as child-bearer and woman as a sexual being."