Georgia Senate advances pair of bills to ban gender-transitioning treatment for minors, inmates
Lawmakers voted 34-19 on Monday for a bill to ban most gender-transitioning treatments, including puberty blockers, for anyone under the age of 18, even for people already on treatment. In 2023, the state banned most gender-transitioning surgeries and hormone replacement therapies for transgender children unless they were already receiving treatment.
"You're asking [minors] to make changes that will have changes to the rest of their lives," GOP Sen. Ben Watson, the bill's sponsor, said Monday. "It is not a fair decision to them. It is not a fair decision to the parents."
A second bill — sponsored by Senate Majority Whip Randy Robertson — that would ban most gender-transitioning treatment for inmates in state prisons passed 37-15.
Senate Dems Face Backlash After Bill To Prevent Boys From Playing Girls' Sports Fails To Break Filibuster
Opponents of the measures accused Republicans of playing politics by targeting transgender people and argued that lawmakers should focus on more pressing issues. They said both bills infringe on the rights of transgender people and their families to make decisions about gender-transitioning treatment.
Read On The Fox News App
"This body has promulgated bill after bill attacking trans people with the ultimate goal of making trans folks disappear. We've been here before," Senate Minority Whip Kim Jackson, a Democrat who is openly lesbian, said Monday.
At least 26 states have enacted laws restricting gender-transitioning treatment for minors, although most have been slapped with lawsuits.
Texas Lawmaker Proposes Bill To Ban Gender Transition Treatment For Everyone, Including Adults
Jackson and other Democrats proposed an amendment to Watson's bill that would have allowed minors already receiving gender-transitioning treatment to continue to avoid the medical and emotional risks of stopping in the middle of treatment, but the amendment failed.
Democrat Sens. Elena Parent and Sonya Halpern reaffirmed their commitment to protecting the rights of transgender people but bucked party lines to vote for Robertson's bill, saying they do not believe taxpayers should be burdened with the cost of gender-transitioning treatment for inmates. Parents proposed an amendment to make an exception for inmates already undergoing hormone replacement therapy, but that amendment also failed.
"I will not let my party be dragged into an argument that makes us look out of touch with the very people we claim to represent," Halpern said.
Democrat Sen. Sally Harrell, who has two transgender children, said she wanted "to remind people that we are talking about very real people — parents, children, families."
Sen. Freddie Powell Sims was the lone Democrat who voted for both bills, while four Democrats supported the bill banning gender-transitioning treatment for inmates.
Last month, the Senate passed bills to ban biological boys from playing in girls' sports and stripped public funding for gender-transitioning treatment for adults.
The four bills will now head to the House.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.Original article source: Georgia Senate advances pair of bills to ban gender-transitioning treatment for minors, inmates
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
35 minutes ago
- CNN
When key provisions in Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill' take effect
President Donald Trump signed his landmark tax and spending cuts bill into law on July 4, notching the first major legislative achievement of his second term. Congressional Republicans approved the president's sweeping agenda bill on an ambitious timeline over the blanket opposition of Democrats, as well as some consternation within the GOP over its impact to the federal deficit and certain government programs. Among its myriad provisions, the package makes permanent the 2017 tax cuts that were set to expire at year's end and beefs up funding for defense, border control and immigration enforcement. It also enacts a historic reshaping of the nation's safety net, particularly imposing steep cuts to Medicaid and food stamps. Some of the measures take effect this year – for instance, the expiration of the electric vehicles tax credit and the temporary elimination of taxes on tips and overtime work. Other provisions don't kick in for several years, notably, after the 2026 midterm elections. Here's a timeline of when key provisions from the president's 'big, beautiful bill' take effect: Several student loan provisions in the bill will take effect next year. Additionally, one month before the midterm elections, a provision limiting Medicaid eligibility for immigrants will set in. Key parts of the bill — including new work requirements and increased eligibility checks for Medicaid — are set to kick in in the lead up to the 2028 presidential election. Still unclear is when two major changes to the food stamp program will take effect. The US Department of Agriculture said it will issue a memorandum to states about implementing the law, including expanding the work requirement to recipients ages 55 to 64 and to parents of children older than 13, as well as limiting the eligibility of certain legal immigrants. Learn more about the bill provisions in our searchable table:
New York Times
44 minutes ago
- New York Times
Democrats Can Finally Stop Pandering to Farmers
Here's some bad news: The 'big, beautiful bill' that President Trump signed into law on July 4 accelerates the egregious bipartisan tradition of showering taxpayer dollars on well-off farmers. It is projected to pour more than $90 billion into new agricultural subsidies and tax credits for farm-grown fuels like corn ethanol, while making it easier for the biggest farmers to vacuum up cash and the least sustainable biofuels to qualify for credits. It gets worse: The congressional Republicans who passed the bill without Democratic votes also ended the tradition of pairing the lavish handouts known as the 'farm safety net' with an actual food safety net for the poor. The bill slashes nearly $200 billion from the federal food stamp program known as SNAP, making life harder for millions of vulnerable families. But here's a potential silver lining: The G.O.P.'s decision to sever the half-century-old pairing of farm handouts with food assistance offers Democratic politicians an opportunity to stop supporting environmentally and fiscally ludicrous subsidies for farmers who wouldn't dream of voting for Democrats. Instead, they could start pushing sensible policies focused on eaters instead of growers. It's time someone in Washington did. For decades, U.S. farm policy has been a bipartisan festival of ag-lobby pandering, shoveling enormous piles of cash to farmers through grants, heavily subsidized loans, even more heavily subsidized insurance, disaster aid and an alphabet soup of other thinly disguised welfare programs. Large farms that grow the most common row crops get the largest subsidies, with extra incentives for corn and soybean growers to produce supposedly eco-friendly biofuels that actually threaten forests and the climate. Republican support for this kind of agricultural socialism is philosophically hypocritical but politically understandable, as rural America has trended overwhelmingly Republican. In the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act, the G.O.P. provided more goodies than ever for its loyal base of multimillionaires in John Deere caps, relaxing payment and income limits for the wealthiest farmers, creating new insurance subsidies for big poultry producers and demanding absurdly lenient sustainability analyses of crop-based aviation fuels. In the past, even as their brand became poisonous in rural America, many Democrats pandered to big farmers just as relentlessly as Republicans, supporting most of the same subsidies while echoing the same clichés about 'heartland values.' Urban Democrats who might have otherwise fought farm bills reliably supported them as long as the bills funded food stamps. Would you like to submit a Letter to the Editor? Use the form below to share your thoughts on this or any other piece published in The New York Times in the past seven days. For your letter to be considered for publication, it should be 150 to 300 words and include your first and last names. If it is selected, an editor will contact you to review any necessary edits. Your submission must be exclusive to The New York Times. We do not publish open letters or third-party letters. Click here for more information about the selection process. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
In Trump era of Washington, ignorant are celebrated, not the butt of jokes
It looks like Republicans are going for a trifecta. In past elections, the Republicans won by promising fiscal responsibility and middle class prosperity. They proceed on what I call the trifecta of issues, which not only increase the national debt by larger amounts per election cycle than the Democratic presidents who preceded them, but also increase income disparity. The first idea is tax cuts that go mostly for the wealthy, which is a major driver for increasing the national debt. The second is the aim to cut health care and to make cuts to areas that provide avenues of social mobility, like education. Any program that benefits the poor and lower middle classes becomes a target. The justification is we cannot afford it. If the wealthy actually paid their fair share, what could we afford? And the third issue, which not all Republican presidents have had the opportunity to start, is another never ending war in the Middle East. President Donald Trump is flirting with this, as he bombed Iranian nuclear sites and gives blanket support of Israel, even when they block food aid to Gaza. The Republican's promotion of fiscal responsibility seems to die after elections. The last fiscally responsible president was Bill Clinton. Joseph Geck, Waukesha Letters: Letter writer wrong to equate ICE law enforcement officers with Nazi's Gestapo When our president, a convicted felon, promises tax savings, wow, how encouraging. It is heartening to know that it will be used to investigate such threats to democracy as Bruce Springsteen, who apparently made a comment that hurt his feelings. My childhood was full of TV shows where politics were discussed, from Dick Cavett to "All in the Family." Those shows were places where a criminal like Richard Nixon was treated as the embarrassment that he was as a president. Archie Bunker was a character on "All in the Family" and was the butt of many jokes for supporting Nixon, as he was the ignorant person in the room. Here's to the days when dialogue was appreciated and effective. Shame to the days, such as today, when it has been replaced with disingenuous, feckless, feculent diatribes. Mark Majchrzak, Cudahy Opinion: Johnson voted for the Trump bill he called immoral. His choice will devastate WI. The most pressing needs of low income and working-class people in this state seem to be affordable housing, lower child-care costs and lower family medical costs. Neither version of the federal budget resolution, House nor Senate, addresses any of these core needs. If Wisconsin employers really want to have more workers to replace all the migrants that President Donald Trump is deporting, they should pressure the state's GOP delegation to put real solutions for working parents in a final bill. Knocking more people off Medicaid, when many people rely on it as their primary healthcare, is totally illogical, especially to support more tax cuts for those making over $400,000 a year. Daniel Anderson, Madison Opinion: A Fourth of July list of grievances from overworked, unrepresented America Here are some tips to get your views shared with your friends, family, neighbors and across our state: Please include your name, street address and daytime phone. Generally, we limit letters to 200 words. Cite sources of where you found information or the article that prompted your letter. Be civil and constructive, especially when criticizing. Avoid ad hominem attacks, take issue with a position, not a person. We cannot acknowledge receipt of submissions. We don't publish poetry, anonymous or open letters. Each writer is limited to one published letter every two months. All letters are subject to editing. Write: Letters to the editor, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 330 E. Kilbourn Avenue, Suite 500, Milwaukee, WI, 53202. Fax: (414)-223-5444. E-mail: jsedit@ or submit using the form that can be found on the on the bottom of this page. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Bill Clinton America's last fiscally responsible president | Letters
