The Republican-led House of Representatives on Dec. 11 passed a spending bill laced with an anti-trans provision designed to deny health insurance coverage of gender-affirming care for minor children of service members.
Known as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the bill allocates nearly $900 billion for the military — including a raise for troops — but also comes with a provision barring TriCare (the insurance program for active duty service members) from covering “medical treatment for military dependents under the age of 18 who are diagnosed with gender dysphoria.”
In a lengthy statement celebrating the bill’s passage, House Speaker Mike Johnson — a far-right bigot who has been a steadfast opponent of LGBTQ rights — said the House “stopped funds from going to” critical race theory and boasted that lawmakers “banned TRICARE from prescribing treatments that would ultimately sterilize our kids, and we gutted the DEI bureaucracy.”
The bill now heads to the Democratic-controlled Senate. If approved, it would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress since “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the “Defense of Marriage Act” in the 1990s, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.
The divided House approved the legislation 281-140, with 10 members not voting. More than a half-dozen New York Democrats voted against it, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of the Bronx and Queens; Jerrod Nadler and Daniel Goldman of Manhattan; Grace Meng of Queens; Nydia M. Velázquez of Brooklyn and Queens; Yvyette Clark of Brooklyn; Adriano Espaillat of Manhattan and the Bronx; and Jamal Bowman of the Bronx and Westchester.
Another New York-based Democrat, out gay Congressmember Ritchie Torres of the Bronx, joined most other out members of Congress in voting against the legislation. However, out Congressmember Chris Pappas of New Hampshire voted in favor of it alongside 80 other Democrats.
Pappas voted for the legislation despite signing onto a letter last month calling on Congress to “reject any attempts to include anti-LGBTQI+ provisions in any final FY25 funding agreement.”
Pappas’ office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on his vote.
In a House speech ahead of the bill’s passage, Congressmmeber Mary Gay Scanlon of Pennsylvania underscored just how close to home the legislation hits for her family.
“My spouse has proudly served in the Air Force for 22 years, dedicating their life to protecting our country,” Scanlon said. “Over the years, our family has moved across the nation and the world, embracing the challenges and opportunities that military life brings. … Recent legislative efforts to restrict or eliminate access to gender-affirming care threaten not only the well-being of my trans child, but also the very values of dignity and respect that our military stands for. This care has been transformative for our child, giving them confidence, joy, and a sense of self that we had only glimpsed before. To have this vital care stripped away feels cruel and unjust.”
The spending bill’s passage drew criticism from across the LGBTQ community. Advocates for Trans Equality, which emerged earlier this year following a merger between Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund and National Center for Transgender Equality, ripped the anti-trans provisions as an extreme departure from the intended goal of NDAA legislation.
“The purpose of the NDAA is to ensure our military is equipped and prepared to protect our nation,” Advocates for Trans Equality director of federal policy Olivia Hunt said in a written statement. “This legislation is meant to strengthen our forces, making them agile and ready for any challenge. It’s baffling that Speaker Mike Johnson and extremist anti-trans lawmakers are instead using this bill to target healthcare access for servicemembers’ families.”
Equality New York, a statewide grassroots advocacy organization working to support LGBTQI+ New Yorkers and their families, echoed Advocates for Trans Equality’s criticism.
“This defense bill does not aim to keep anyone safe, but instead continues to use innocent transgender youth as political pawns,” the organization told Gay City News on Dec. 13. “Denying gender-affirming treatment to our youth is more than harmful. Research shows ensuring access to such care positively contributes to suicide prevention efforts. This defense bill is unfocused and unjustly attacks some of our most vulnerable community members.”
The organization added: “This provision forewarns the anticipated wide-scale attacks on all transgender youth. Now more than ever, we need our allies in the Senate as we urge them to dismantle this bill and call upon the Biden administration in one final chance to protect our transgender youth.”
Cait Smith, a trans veteran who serves as the director of LGBTQI+ policy at the Center for American Progress, described the bill as “unacceptable.”
While the spending bill was widely blasted as too extreme, its scope could have been even broader. Republicans passed initial legislation in June that would have barred coverage of any gender-affirming care for trans individuals, according to the New York Times, but it was narrowed in subsequent negotiations. While the anti-trans provisions remained in the bill, Democrats managed, to some degree, to stave off Republican attempts to restrict abortion services and roll back the Pentagon’s DEI programs, though the legislation would still implement a one-year hiring freeze on roles related to DEI.
