>Here’s an interesting fact: of the 17 states that use their own Medicaid funds to cover elective abortions, 14 of them were forced to do so by the courts. (Georgia may be the next one.)
The “Hyde Amendment” has been added to Federal health care funding bills since 1976. Those who support abortion on demand (such as the ACLU, the Center for American Progress, and, of course, the National Abortion Federation and Planned Parenthood) are constantly calling for its “repeal,” although in fact, the language would just be dropped from that year’s appropriations bill.
Reminds me of the comment of one of the judges in a “right to die” case: The founding fathers did not intend for the important matters to be decided by the courts and only the trivial matters determined by the legislators.
LifeEthics 
>I think you're misreading the chart. It's states that pay for "medically necessary" abortions, which you and I know are pretty loosely defined. But she at least has to PRETEND that she has a medical reason to get the funding.We'd need to look more closely to see exactly how each court intreprted it. Some might actually require some problem like severe hyperemesis gravidarum (which is no excuse for sending them to the abortionist instead of providing these women with real care), or it could be, 'Ah, you find it hard to attend sports events when pregnancy sends you to the bathroom so often. Clearly, this abortion is medically necessary" a la Tiller.
Posted by GrannyGrump | September 27, 2007, 2:35 pm>The Hyde Ammendment specifically says there is an exception if there is a danger to 'life' rather than 'health.' This puts the standard quite high. Intentionally narrow – it doesn't apply of pregnency threatens health, it must be potentially fatal.There are also exceptions in the cases of rape and incest.South Dakota goes further, and forbids both state and federal funding for any abortion unless it is nesessary to save the life of a woman. Note that this is a higher standard than even Hyde. While Hyde allows funding if continuing pregnency will endanger the life of a women, SD allows funding only if continued pregnency is guaranteed to result in death.
Posted by Suricou Raven | September 27, 2007, 4:29 pm