The U.S. House of Representatives approved a bill on June 26, 2024, aimed at prohibiting federal Medicaid funding for sex change surgeries and medications for minors. The measure, known as the “Do No Harm In Medicaid Act,” garnered support from four House Democrats, enabling it to pass with a vote of 215-201. The bill was sponsored by Texas Republican Dan Crenshaw and Georgia Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene.
If the legislation receives Senate approval, it would amend the Social Security Act to restrict federal payments to states for “specified gender procedures” performed on individuals under the age of 18. This includes bans on surgical interventions and limitations on prescription medications, such as puberty blockers.
The four Democrats who sided with Republicans on this vote were Texas Representatives Vicente Gonzalez and Henry Cuellar, North Carolina Representative Don Davis, and Washington Representative Marie Gluesenkamp Perez. Interestingly, this bill saw slightly broader support than a similar measure passed just a day earlier, which also targeted child sex change procedures. In the previous vote, five lawmakers switched their votes between the two bills, indicating a complex political landscape on this issue.
During the debate on the House floor, Crenshaw articulated his position against the funding of what he termed ineffective treatments. “Today’s great sin in medicine is perhaps one of the worst that we’ve seen in human history: Sick and twisted ideology paired with a social media fueled social contagion,” he stated. He emphasized the need to protect children from irreversible medical decisions, arguing that many do not fully comprehend the long-term consequences of such changes.
In contrast, Democratic Representative Frank Pallone defended the procedures as “medically necessary health care.” He described the bill as an extreme attack on essential health services for children. “The bill bans Medicaid funding for gender-affirming care for minors and strips states of even more Medicaid funding if they choose to cover this medically necessary care with their own state dollars,” Pallone stated, highlighting the implications for states that wish to provide these services.
The focus on child gender procedures has been a notable issue in American politics, particularly under the administration of former President Donald Trump. Earlier this year, Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Protecting Children From Chemical And Surgical Mutilation,” further intensifying the national debate on this topic.
On the same day as the House vote, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced new regulations aimed at addressing the issues raised by the Executive Order. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of HHS, noted, “Under my leadership, and answering President Trump’s call to action, the federal government will do everything in its power to stop unsafe, irreversible practices that put our children at risk.” His comments underscored the administration’s commitment to protecting vulnerable populations.
As discussions around child healthcare continue to evolve, this legislation has sparked significant debate, reflecting the deeply polarized views on how best to support minors facing gender identity issues. The implications of these legislative moves will likely resonate in both political and medical communities, influencing the direction of healthcare policy for children in the United States.