Implications and Concerns
Civil liberties groups had predicted that the Tuesday vote would be close and urged House Democrats to vote against moving the current version of the bill forward. Advocates are deeply concerned about the potential deadly consequences this bill could have for trans youth on military insurance. It is seen as a serious rollback in rights for LGBTQ+ people in the United States. Ian Thompson, senior legislative advocate at the American Civil Liberties Union, emphasized the significance of this vote. He stated that not only would it be devastating for the lives, health, and well-being of these children and military families, but it would also be the first time in nearly three decades that explicit anti-LGBTQ+ policy has been adopted into federal statute. The Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which prohibited same-sex marriages, serves as a recent example. Thompson stressed the need to highlight the gravity of this attack on human rights and the freedom of transgender people.While the exact number of transgender youth receiving health care through the military's insurer, TRICARE, is unclear, a 2022 analysis published in the American Journal of Public Health found that approximately 2,500 minors sought care for experiencing gender dysphoria through the insurance program that year. This highlights the importance of providing appropriate and inclusive health care for this vulnerable population.
Reactions from Congress
Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., criticized her Republican colleagues for "targeting trans people" instead of focusing on legislative work. She emphasized that this is not only an unprecedented discriminatory rider but will cause real and irreversible harm. Young trans people deserve the care they need to thrive, and all members of society deserve the opportunity to debate and shape significant legislation that impacts their communities.Ranking Member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., called on Republicans to remove the anti-trans provision on Sunday. He firmly stated that blanketly denying health care to those who clearly need it due to a biased notion against transgender people is wrong. Smith pointed out that Speaker Johnson is pandering to the most extreme elements of his party to maintain his speakership, which has upended the bipartisan process. After the vote, in a written statement, Smith said he would vote against the final version of the bill when it comes to the floor. He emphasized that the inclusion of this harmful provision puts the lives of children at risk and may force thousands of service members to make difficult choices.
Opposition and Hopes
Groups opposed to the provision are hopeful that the Biden administration will take a stand and support trans youth. The Human Rights Campaign pointed out that President Joe Biden has repeatedly promised to veto any legislation that enshrines discrimination against transgender people into law.Thompson of the ACLU noted that although the White House generally releases a statement of administrative policy on important legislation like the NDAA, which is considered a "must pass" bill, it has not yet done so. The White House faced criticism from trans rights groups after initially stating that it opposed gender-affirming surgeries for transgender youth but later changed its position to oppose limits on health care for transgender individuals.
Ahead of the vote, Thompson expressed hope that the rule would fail and that only a version of the legislation without the health care ban would move forward. However, if the rule is adopted and a vote on the underlying bill takes place, pro-equality members of Congress are expected to oppose the defense bill due to the inclusion of this health care ban.
Update: December 10, 2024, 4:09 p.m. ETThis article was updated to include the results of the vote and a statement from Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash.