Recently published reasearch by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute reveals that tens of thousands of women — who are not eligble to have abortions because of the Hyde Amendment’s protections for preborn children — would end up prematurely terminating the lives of the babies if Clinton had her way.

“The number of abortions among Medicaid-eligible women nationwide would be expected to increase by approximately 33,000 [annually],” the Guttmacher Policy Review stated.

Dems targeting Hyde

According to the abortion industry’s think tank, which was formerly a “special research affiliate” of Planned Parenthood, the major reason why Clinton and the Democratic Party are committed to repealing the Hyde Amendment is to remove the law’s restrictions that preclude federal Medicaid funding for abortion — which excludes cases of incest, rape or attempts to save the life of the pregnant mother.

Crunching the numbers, Guttmacher researchers calculated that repealing the Hyde Amendment would not significantly increase the percentage of abortions performed annually in America.

“[A repeal would represent] only a 2.5-percent increase in the number of abortions performed nationwide,” the pro-abortion group divulged.

Yet pro-life advocates contend that the relatively small percentage represents a catastrophic toll on human life, as each innocent baby killed is considered as a mere statistic with a market price to many in the abortion industry, but precious and invaluable to champions of life.

It could be worse

According to the National Right for Life (NRLC), the number of lives in jeopardy could be much higher after taking several factors into account.

NRLC Federal Legislation Director Douglas Johnson stresses that the Guttmacher Institute failed to project the big picture when anticipating the effects of an overturned Hyde Amendment.

“It should be kept in mind that the 33,000 projection applies only to Medicaid,”Douglas pointed out. “But the actual effects of losing the Hyde Amendment would be broader, because some other federal health programs (e.g., Indian Health Service) track the Hyde Amendment policy as well, either by law or as a political matter.”

It is reported that the nonprofit pro-life organization has extensively alerted Americans about Clinton’s ongoing plan to wipe out the Hyde Amendment so she can to forward her radical pro-abortion agenda that aggressively promotes Planned Parenthood and its abortion-on-demand.

“NRL News and NRL News Today have written a dozen or more stories about Hillary Clinton and her party’s steely determination to end a 40-year-old policy that is supported overwhelmingly by a strong majority of the public,” LifeNews.com reports.

Full speed ahead

The former secretary of state made no apologies about wanting to do away with the Hyde Amendment earlier this year, when she became the first presidential primary candidate to be endorsed by Planned Parenthood in its 100-year history.

“Clinton brought it up when she was endorsed last January by Planned Parenthood’s political arm, and a call to repeal Hyde is now in the platform of the Democratic National Committee,” LifeNews.com’s Dave Andrusko stressed.

The Democrats’ push to increase the availiability of abortions through other means was also pointed out.

“The bill to require funding of elective abortions in federal health programs was introduced a little over a year ago and was generally similar to previous bills introduced over the years,” Andrusco continued.

A recent push by progressives in office to pass the bill was reported on last week in an article published by the Associated Press titled “Democrats Seek Reversal of Ban on Federal Abortion Funding.” In the piece, Democrats were said to have 119 sponsors of the reversal in the House of Representatives — all of which are Democrats.

Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), who is a leading abortion rights activist for her party, recently insisted that the Democrats’ recent push to move its abortion agenda forward is about to claim victory.

“I don’t think we’re as far away as people might think,” DeGette declared, according to the Associated Press. “We got tired of tacitly accepting that a ban on Medicaid money was acceptable.”