A bill will be introduced on the floor of the Idaho House of Representatives that would prohibit public funds from paying for sex reassignment drugs and surgeries for adults and children in the state.
House Bill 668 Prohibit public funds from paying for gender-affirming drugs and surgeries. The bill references the definition of care under which Idaho banned the provision of gender reassignment drugs and surgeries to children in 2023.
Prohibited matter The use of public funds for gender-affirming care would be explicitly applied to Idaho Medicaid, which primarily covers low-income and disabled people and covers approximately 300,000 Idahoans. is insured.
However, it is unclear how the bill would affect health insurance provided to Idaho employees and their families.Approximately 62,000 Idahoans Insurance coverage is provided through these insurance policies. I’m trying to switch to a new insurance company This summer.
“This bill doesn’t specifically address the question of national insurance. It speaks about the use of public funds. So there are some questions that remain unanswered,” said House of Representatives Julian Young. Rep. (R-Blackfoot) told the committee.
Young and Rep. Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, co-sponsored the bill. The Idaho House Judiciary Rules Committee voted Thursday to send the bill to the House floor. Only three Democrats on the committee opposed it.
“We recognize that there is a burden on service providers to determine what is medically necessary and what is not. Because we believe these procedures are controversial at best,” Young said.
The bill reads:
- Idaho Medicaid cannot cover or compensate for gender reassignment drugs or surgeries prohibited under. Existing Idaho Law. That law prohibited such treatment for children in Idaho. Although it is not care that affirms all genders, The Idaho Capital Sun previously reported. However, enforcement of the law has been temporarily blocked as a lawsuit challenging the law is being heard in court.
- Under previous law, state property, facilities, or buildings could not be used “to provide surgical or medical intervention.”
- Physicians and health care professionals employed by a state, county, or local government may not provide these services “within the course and scope of their (public) employment.”
The bill would ban gender-affirming medications and surgeries that are “designed to alter an individual’s physical appearance in order to affirm an individual’s gender identity that is inconsistent with the individual’s biological sex.”
the study published Last month, researchers found that gender nonconforming people are at higher risk of lower socio-economic status.Approximately 7,000 adults in Idaho and 1,000 Idahoans over the age of 13 are transgender, according to Estimate Graduated from University of California, Los Angeles.
Get the morning headlines delivered to your inbox
Most witnesses opposed the bill, including three medical experts from Idaho.
Major medical organizations say Gender-affirming care is medically necessary and safe.
gender reassignment surgery not performed on minors The Idaho Capital Sun previously reported that the move was made in Idaho before the child support ban was passed last year.
About a dozen people testified against the bill, including three medical professionals in Idaho and several people receiving gender-affirming care. Five people testified in support of the bill, some of whom opposed state tax funding to support gender-affirming care on religious grounds. Some argued that gender-affirming care was harmful or questioned its effectiveness.
“What evidence allows a clinician to make such a recommendation? To be honest, it’s shockingly weak,” said Dr. Julius Teague, a South Carolina urologist called as an expert witness. told lawmakers.
Dr. Marvin Alviso, a Boise physician, said that of the more than 400 patients he has provided gender-affirming treatment to over seven years, not a single one has regretted the hormone treatment.
After testifying, Rep. Barbara Ehart (R-Idaho Falls) said: who Backs ban on transgender athletes in Idaho schools, She said she was “distraught” to hear one of Arviso’s patients say he did not regret the treatment.
“Something is wrong. Either we’re not asking the questions, or we’re not actually helping the patient, or we’re not. Statistically, I think that’s almost impossible.” said Ehardt.
Alexalyn Phil, who is transgender, told the committee that Idaho has become her home since moving there in 2004.
“I firmly oppose this bill and its hateful intentions. This bill aims to further discriminate against transgender people…” she said. Skaug quickly interjected.
“We’re talking about the bill, we’re not talking about incentives,” he said.
she apologized.
“This bill aims to further discriminate against our transgender and non-binary brothers and harm our health and well-being. Further vilification and marginalization of vulnerable people is a cruel and vicious act. This is nothing short of an attack. Let’s stop the hate, let’s get better, and let’s serve all Idahoans,” Phil said.
Merrick Collins, a transgender man, says that taking hormones has not only helped him deepen his voice and grow a beard more easily, but also made him “physically healthier than I’ve ever been.” Ta. ”
He used to suffer from severe asthma. But it went away so much that he said he didn’t even need an inhaler.
“The elimination of Medicare and Medicaid coverage of (hormone replacement therapy) will limit access to the medications we need to function properly in society and reduce our quality of life while living here in Idaho. I did,” Collins said.
Public servants and officials who intentionally violate this bill could be charged with misappropriation of public funds.
The bill would continue to allow public funding for surgeries and drugs used in gender reassignment care in certain cases, such as when necessary for health reasons. But the bill says it would exclude it for the purpose of “affirming an individual’s perception” of his or her gender.
“Surgical or medical intervention, when intended to alter an individual’s physical appearance in order to affirm the individual’s perception of his or her gender, is never necessary for the health of the minor or adult in whom it is performed. does not correspond to biological sex,” the bill says.
Seven states ban Medicaid coverage of gender-affirming care, according to 2022 report University of California Los Angeles.
House Bill 668 relies on gender-affirming definitions of medication and surgery established in Idaho law by last year. House Bill 71. Enforcement of the law has been blocked during a lawsuit that was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Exceptions outlined in the law
The bill allows for the following exceptions to the prohibition:
- The surgical or medical intervention is “necessary for the health of the person on whom it is performed.”
- To treat infections, injuries, or disabilities that are “caused or exacerbated by … gender reassignment procedures.”
- and “if made pursuant to the good faith medical determination of the parent or guardian of a child or adult born with a medically verifiable genetic disorder of sexual development.”
If passed, this bill would go into effect on July 1, 2024.
Idaho Governor Brad Little, May 2023 instructed The Idaho Department of Health and Human Services aims to create a policy that prohibits gender-affirming care treatment for both adults and children.
Department of Health spokesperson AJ McWhirter told the Idaho Capital Sun in early January that a policy was being developed. The agency said, “It does not cover any gender dysphoria surgery for adults or young people.” The agency “will not implement any new coverage changes until we have legal guidance to ensure compliance with Governor Little’s directive that any policy changes comply with state and federal law,” McWhorter said. Stated.
A federal district judge in June blocked Florida’s Medicaid ban on gender-affirming care treatments, saying policymakers adopted the ban for “political reasons,” The Washington Post The paper reported. report.
