Your
editorial on the value of the Hyde Amendment misses the mark in several
respects. You criticize Hillary Clinton for her position in opposing
this law, because it might cost her votes. What this means is that you
are advocating that her campaign decisions be made on cold and cynical
political calculation, rather than on principle and integrity. Has it
even occurred to you that perhaps Clinton is simply trying to do the
right thing, rather than the most politically useful thing?
Another
problem with your editorial position is that in arguing against any
publicly-funded abortions, what you are doing is advocating for a public
policy that allows rich people to obtain abortions, but denies that
same right to poor people. Don't poor people also have the right to
medical care?
While
it is true that many European countries place a 12-week limit on
abortions, it is not fair to compare this to the U.S. The reason is
that European countries generally have free medical care available to
all, in stark contrast to the U.S. What this means is that poor women in
Europe are much more likely to see a doctor early in their pregnancies
and then get good advice about their options going forward.
Finally,
you throw in the loaded and misleading word "elective" near the end of
your editorial. This is a blatant mischaracterization of the very
painful and gut-wrenching decisions women are called upon to make
concerning their reproductive options. It implies that the decision to
have an abortion is something made lightly, similar to the decision of
what to eat for supper. The use of the term "elective" is highly unfair
to the women of this country.
10-3-16 update. The first issue after I sent this letter did not publish it, but instead had one from a representative of the group Catholics for Choice, which zeroed in quite well on the issue of the discrimination against poor people that occurs under the Hyde Amendment. The second issue, dated October 7, 2016, did publish my letter, and the magazine had the class to send me a complimentary copy of the issue by first class mail, at a cost of $1.57. Kudos to Commonweal for that!
10-3-16 update. The first issue after I sent this letter did not publish it, but instead had one from a representative of the group Catholics for Choice, which zeroed in quite well on the issue of the discrimination against poor people that occurs under the Hyde Amendment. The second issue, dated October 7, 2016, did publish my letter, and the magazine had the class to send me a complimentary copy of the issue by first class mail, at a cost of $1.57. Kudos to Commonweal for that!
