Officially known as the Mexico City Policy, the Global Gag Rule is a policy of the United States government that bars any foreign organization that receives U.S. foreign assistance from using its own funds or funds from other donors to perform abortions; advocate for the liberalization or decriminalization of abortion in laws and policies; or provide information, make referrals, or counsel women on the procedure—even in countries where abortion is legal.

• Background
• Consequences for Women’s Health and Democracy
• Legislative Actions to Repeal and Restrict the Global Gag Rule
• The Global Democracy Promotion Act
• Foreign Operations Appropriations Bills
• Take Action
• The Global Gag Rule in the News
• Resources

Background

The Mexico City Policy was created in 1984 by the Reagan Administration. The Administration announced the new restriction on U.S.foreign aid at the International Conference on Population and Development in Mexico City, Mexico. The policy was in place until 1993, when, as his first act in office, President Bill Clinton overturned it. On January 22, 2001, President George W. Bush issued a Presidential Memorandum reinstating the Mexico City Policy; it was his first act as President.

Consequences for Women’s Health and Democracy

Approximately 500,000 women die from pregnancy related causes each year. Of these deaths, at least 70,000 are due to unsafe abortion.

In addition, an estimated 200 million women have an unmet need for family planning. The highest unmet need is in Sub-Saharan Africa where one in four married women wants to limit or space her births, but does not have access to the services to do so.  This lack of access to family planning results in 80 million unintended pregnancies each year.

For many decades, the U.S. has played an important and leading role in providing aid to developing countries to assist them with sexual and reproductive health (through family planning assistance) and population issues. The U.S. government has been a major donor to non-governmental organizations that provide vital family planning services to millions of individuals and couples in developing countries so that they have a full range of information and services to decide the number, spacing and timing of their children, free from coercion or violence.

The Global Gag Rule, however, undermines these goals. The policy is not simply about restricting abortion overseas. The Global Gag Rule also prohibits organizations that provide information and services related to abortion from receiving U.S. contraceptive supplies, such as female and male condoms, birth control pills, intra-uterine devices, and other medically effective methods of contraception. As a result, service providers must either comply with the policy or forgo much-needed family planning supplies.

Of the 80 million unintended pregnancies each year, sixty percent end in abortion. The Global Gag Rule ties the hands of trained reproductive health care providers because family planning organizations receiving U.S. funds can neither perform abortions for their clients nor advise women on where to seek the procedure. As a result, women often cannot turn to trained doctors and nurses for safe medical care. They are therefore left to find their own care, which often means an unsafe, illicit abortion. Globally, eight woman per hour die from unsafe abortion.

Restrictive government laws on abortion often force the practice underground, contributing to the morbidity and mortality rates associated with unsafe abortion. Instead of fostering civil society’s participation in government and promoting democratic values, the Global Gag Rule undermines rights such as freedom of speech and assembly—rights Americans enjoy—by prohibiting international organizations from working with their governments to create less restrictive abortion laws and ensure safer medical practices.

Furthermore, the Global Gag Rule infringes on patients’ right to make informed decisions about their health by barring doctors and health care workers from telling women about all pregnancy options available to them.

Learn more about the Consequences of the Global Gag Rule at the Country Level

Read "The Global Gag Rule harms democracy, women and U.S. interests abroad," Ipas, Center for Health and Gender Equity, Population Action International, Center for Reproductive Rights, Pathfinder International, Catholics for Free Choice, International Planned Parenthood Federation WHR, and NARAL.

Visit Access Denied a project of Ipas, Population Action International, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, International Planned Parenthood Federation, EngenderHealth, and Pathfinder.

Read “Exporting Despair: The Human Rights Implications of U.S. Restrictions on Foreign Health Care Funding in Kenya,” Hoodbhoy, Mehlika et al. Fordham International Law Journal. Vol 29:1. Jan. 2006.

Read “Breaking the Silence: The Global Gag Rule’s Impact on Unsafe Abortion,”Center for Reproductive Rights, 2003.

Legislative Action to Repeal and Restrict the Global Gag Rule

Since President Bush issued an executive memorandum reinstating the Global Gag Rule in 2001, the policy has faced opposition from members of Congress. In the 110^th Congress, there have been several attempts to repeal all or parts of the policy.

The Global Democracy Promotion Act

The Global Democracy Promotion Act has been introduced in the House as H.R.619 and in the Senate as S. 1774. Though the Global Democracy Promotion Act does not mention the Global Gag Rule or Mexico City Policy by name, the bill’s intent and effect would be to repeal the policy.

• Bill Text and Information (House)
• Bill Text and Information (Senate)
• House Legislative Overview (H.R. 619)
• Senate Legislative Overview (S. 1744)
• One-pager for Advocacy

Foreign Operations Appropriations Bills

The U.S. Senate passed an amendment to fully repeal the Global Gag Rule during debate on the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill, H.R. 2467, on September 6, 2007. In the version of H.R. 2467 that the House of Representatives passed in June 2007, legislators included a provision exempting U.S. contraceptive supplies from the Global Gag Rule. The House bill would not repeal the Global Gag Rule entirely but would allow organizations barred from foreign aid under the Global Gag Rule to receive contraceptive supplies. The differences between the Senate-passed version of H.R. 2467 and the House-passed version of H.R. 2467 must be worked out in conference before the final bill can be sent to President Bush. The President has vowed to veto any appropriations bill that weakens U.S. Federal anti-abortion policy.

• More information on H.R. 2467 including how elected officials voted on the Global Gag Rule provisions
• Bush Administration Position 
• Press Coverage of Senate Vote  

Take Action

Write, e-mail, or call your Representative and Senators today and urge them to cosponsor the Global Democracy Promotion Act, H.R. 619 or S. 1744. Want to do more? Call your member’s district office and ask to set up a meeting with him or her next time s/he is in town.

If you do not know your elected officials’ phone numbers,
Call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121.

If you do not know your elected officials’ names,
Search by zip-code or address at www.congress.org.This site also provides the bios and contact information, including e-mail addresses, of elected officials.

Sign-up for updates on the Global Gag Rule and other international sexual and reproductive health policy concerns from the Center for Health and Gender Equity.

The Global Gag Rule in the News

Resources

• “Women, HIV and the Global Gag Rule: The Dis-Integration of U.S. Global AIDS Funding,” by Jodi Jacobson, Center for Health and Gender Equity, February 2003
• U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) family planning policy restrictions
• USAID Mexico City Policy Clarification for Country Missions
• Mexico City Policy Contract Requirements
• Population Action International Global Gag Rule Resource Library
• “Global Gag Rule: Exporting Antiabortion Ideology at the Expense of American Values,” Susan A. Cohen, Guttmacher Institute, June 2001