Asa Hutchinson: “as chairman of the Personnel Subcommittee on Armed Services, I rise in strong opposition to the Murray amendment which…”

“as chairman of the Personnel Subcommittee on Armed Services, I rise in strong opposition to the Murray amendment which allows abortion on demand in military facilities overseas. I oppose the pending amendment because, No. 1, it is unnecessary. It is a solution in search of a problem. No. 2, it violates the letter and spirit of existing Federal law; that is, the Hyde amendment which prohibits Federal funding of abortion. In fact, that is the issue involved in this amendment. It is a subsidizing of the abortion procedure. Third, if it were adopted, it would likely accomplish very little while providing a Federal endorsement of the practice that is opposed by tens of millions of Americans. My colleagues contend that the Murray amendment is a banner of constitutional rights. I think that argument is disingenuous. The current statute does not preclude servicewomen, serving overseas, from obtaining abortions. Women serving overseas already have the opportunity to terminate their pregnancy because the Department of Defense will provide them transportation either to the United States or to another country where abortion is legal for only $10. That is the cost of the food on the flight. To say there is a constitutional right that is abrogated is incorrect. In 1979, the Congress adopted what has come to be known as the Hyde amendment. The Hyde amendment has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court as constitutional.”