Vanity Fair: Will Biden's Abortion Slipup Hurt His Shot at the White House?

[flpoljunkie]

Weeks ago, Joe Biden seemed like he was fully aligned with progressives on abortion rights, telling an ACLU volunteer in May that he would commit to repealing the Hyde Amendment, a law that prevents federal funds from going toward abortion procedures except in the case of rape, incest, or if the health of the mother is in jeopardy. “It can’t stay,” Biden said, quite firmly. A month later, his campaign is claiming that Biden misheard the volunteer’s question, and affirmed that Biden would, in fact, continue to support the law, raising thorny questions about where the Democratic frontrunner really stands on abortion, whether his position is outside the new Democratic mainstream, and whether it could hurt his chances in the primary.

Biden’s rivals took full advantage of the gaffe, with Elizabeth Warren setting herself apart by blasting the Hyde Amendment as a measure that “[takes] away freedom from the women who are most vulnerable,” and Beto O’Rourke calling Biden’s position “absolutely wrong”. Powerful Democratic groups including EMILY’s List, Planned Parenthood, and NARAL, all denounced him, adding to a growing sense that Biden, while far and away the front-runner in the 2020 race, is out of step with the base. “At a time when reproductive rights are under consistent attack, it’s unacceptable that a major Democratic nominee supports the Hyde Amendment,” said EMILY’s List president Stephanie Schriock. “We hope that Vice President Joe Biden will reconsider this position and what it means to millions of women.”

Biden’s decades-long voting record on abortion was always going to be a contentious topic, given the party’s leftward drift on reproductive rights, but the controversy over the Hyde Amendment has thrown his heterodoxy into stark relief. Though he’s repeatedly affirmed his support of Roe v. Wade and has promised to push legislation allowing abortion to remain legal should the Supreme Court repeal it, Biden, a devout Catholic who personally opposes abortion, repeatedly voted to remove exemptions that allowed Medicaid to fund abortions in the case of rape and incest throughout the ‘70s and ‘80s, and often opposed budget provisions allowing federal employees to use health insurance for abortions. As such, he’s voted for the Hyde Amendment in every federal budget it’s appeared in, whereas several of his fellow candidates have called for its repeal. None of the major candidates back it, and only Biden has been outspoken in his support. Moreover, on Wednesday, the Intercept reported that Biden pushed for an exemption to the Affordable Care Act that would have allowed religious-affiliated employers to choose not to cover birth control. The loophole would reportedly have left north of six million women without contraception coverage.

more...

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/06/joe-biden-abortion-hyde-amendment

[marehare]

1. Biden isn't the ony candidate who supported not funding abortion with federal funds.

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2019/06/06/guess-who-else-voted-against-federal-funding-for-abortion-443667

I wish some people writing for DK would research prior to posting. It's unfair to all.

[uawchild]

2. Biden voted against exceptions for RAPE and INCEST though

" Kos, Daily Kos Staff wrote: He’s always been a staunch supporter of the Hyde Amendment. “As a U.S. senator from Delaware, Biden voted against a 1977 compromise that allowed Medicaid to fund abortions that included exceptions for victims of rape and incest in addition to concerns for the life of the mother,” reports NBC News. “While the rape and incest exceptions passed in that case, Biden voted in 1981 to again remove them, in what was the most far-reaching ban on federal funds ever enacted by Congress.” Holy shit. That’s extreme shit. "

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/6/6/1863085/-Joe-Biden-joins-Republicans-in-still-supporting-Hyde-Amendment-Luckily-we-have-alternatives

THAT is pretty extreme. Voting twice to not allow federal funds so a poor woman who was a victim of rape or incest could control her own reproductive rights?

Sorry, making an incest victim carry a child to term is just too extreme. Even for 1981 THAT was an extreme position to hold for a democrat.

[still_one]

4. That is a flawed way to justify a bad law, based on the past, or because someone else did it.

If Biden wants to end this with the least damage to his campaign then he should come out publicly and say if Congress votes to repeal the Hyde Amendment, then I will sign it if I am President

It would be nice if he added that the Hyde Amendment is a bad law, and discriminates against poor women

Other than something like that, Biden deserves all the push back he is getting from my perspective

[humbled_opinion]

6. Bravo...

Leadership on this issue Is exactly what is needed, no middle ground no wishy washy positions, the stakes are just too high or haven't people been paying attention to what the nuts in the red states are doing ?

[still_one]

14. I agree

[humbled_opinion]

18. I was glad to see Biden

has come to his senses and he is exactly right with reproductive rights being demolished in many Red Sates it is important to provide clear leadership on this issue.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/06/politics/biden-no-longer-supports-hyde-amendment/index.html

[Butterflylady]

3. Carrying water for DK

Evidently getting desperate.

[True Dough]

5. Yes!

Hurt him? Yes!

Sink his chances entirely? I don't think so.

[Demit]

7. Note that he thought religious-affiliated employers should have the right not to cover birth control

He really doesn't think much of women's health and reproductive rights, does he?

[BannonsLiver]

16. That's interesting

He’s had a long record of supporting Roe and funding Planned Parenthood, which last time I checked provided a number of services to women. He was also responsible for legislation in the senate like the VAWA.

But either you are comically uninformed, or all of that means absolutely nothing to you:

“He really doesn't think much of women's health and reproductive rights, does he?”

Uninformed OTT posts like that are why it’s hard to take the hullabaloo over this too seriously. Too many people either don’t have any idea what they are talking about, are purely playing politics hoping it helps their horse in the race, or are so reflexively unreasonable they only induce eye rolls.

[Demit]

17. Everybody quotes his work on VAWA. But that has nothing to do with reproductive rights, does it?

His work on VAWA was about protecting women from abuse. Laudable, but a completely different issue from abortion and birth control and women having autonomy over their bodies. At best, Biden is paternalistic towards women. If he were a champion of women's FULL rights, he wouldn't have worked against birth control being an automatic part of healthcare.

I'm plenty informed about Joe Biden, thank you. He might've come around to supporting Roe, but he initially felt it went too far. In At the time he was famously quoted as saying "I don't think a woman has the sole right to say what should happen to her body."

in 1983, he voted five times to bar the Federal Employees Health Benefits program from funding abortions for federal employees, a measure that ultimately became law.

In 1995, he voted multiple times in favor of a ban on so-called “partial-birth” abortions. He even voted to override Clinton’s veto of the bill. He continued voting for the “partial-birth” abortion ban over the years, finally succeeding in getting it passed and signed by George W. Bush in 2003. When the Supreme Court upheld the bill in 2007, Biden was the only presidential candidate not to put out a statement against it. In fact, he staunchly defended his vote.

And now, in 2019, he's staunchly defending his position on the Hyde Amendment. He fancies himself as having a "middle of the road" position on abortion. For me, and for a lot of women, that's just not good enough.


Oh jesus. LOL! I just read he's reversing himself on the Hyde Amendment. I guess the principled stance that he's held for 30 years didn't test too well. What a candidate.

[LiberalLovinLug]

8. I don't support nominating Biden, but I absolutely hate these kinds of headlines

Same with lead headlines on network TV.

At least Fox News or RW radio would make no bones. There's would be "Biden slips up, and kills his chances!".

The MSM thinks all they have to do is couch it in "Will...", or "Some are saying...", "There have been reports out that say...." Either way, the Democratic guest is in the same position, trying to defend themselves or the party against some political attack based many times on innuendo concocted by RW media, and the "moderate" news shows wash their hands about sensationalist accusations by hiding behind the "some are saying...." shield. The same one used by Trump a lot of times.

[BannonsLiver]

9. The TV MSM is barely covering it at all

If they thought it would liven up their melodramatic Dems in disarray narrative they’d be on it like stink on shit.

[LiberalLovinLug]

12. I was talking more in general terms.

The way they can get away with "I'm not saying.....I'm just saying..." on any topic. So they can still confront a Democrat with an over-the-top accusation.....as long as they heard it somewhere from someone who knew someone else who overheard it at a Washington cocktail party from someone who heard it on InfoWars. And if the Democrat declines to answer they must be guilty. So they must answer in a cloud of they might just be.

[BannonsLiver]

13. Agreed.

[JI7]

10. only if he loses minority voters

[Otto Lidenbrock]

11. If he's thinking ahead to the GE and gaining pro-life voters in the rustbelt

All I have to say is that it is way too early.

Fact is this is a democratic primary first and foremost and the democratic platform has been since 2016 to repeal it.

[Polly Hennessey]

15. No.