Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo has signed two bills expanding the ability of transgender adults to access gender-affirming health care.
The move is contrary to the positions being taken by most Republican elected officials.
Earlier this week, Lombardo signed a bill requiring health insurance providers, including Medicaid, to cover all gender-affirming surgeries designated as medically necessary by a person’s physician. A nearly identical law was recently signed into effect in Oregon by Democratic Gov. Tina Kotek last month.
Lombardo also signed a second bill requiring the state’s Department of Corrections to adopt evidence-based, up-to-date mental and medical health standards for transgender and gender-nonconforming people inside the state’s prisons. That bill also requires guards at state penitentiaries to undergo LGBTQ cultural competency training.
Both bills were passed on party-line votes in both chambers, with Democrats supporting the measures and Republicans opposed.
Lombardo’s decision to sign the bill into law comes as Democratic-controlled legislatures, like Nevada’s, have passed bills to protect transgender health care and civil rights, while Republican-led legislatures — aided by Republican governors — have sought to curtail those rights.
But Lombardo also occupies a rare status as one of only two Republican governors — the other being Vermont’s Phil Scott — to lead a state where Democrats control both chambers of the legislature. As such, Lombardo has to moderate his stances on “culture war” issues.
“Nevada has for a very long time been a live-and-let-live type of state,” Brooke Maylath, a transgender rights advocate who worked with legislators to craft the pro-transgender health care bills, told the Associated Press. “And I’m glad to see that this governor has not been hijacked by the divisiveness that we’ve see in other states.”
But Maylath criticized Lombardo for vetoing a bill earlier this month that would have protected medical professionals who provide gender-affirming treatments from losing their medical license.
The bill would also have prohibited executive branch agencies from assisting with investigations into medical staff or parents who enable minors to access gender-affirming care in states where the practice has been outlawed.
In his veto message, Lombardo said the bill would hinder his office’s ability to “be certain that all gender-affirming care related to minors comports with State law” and to ensure that providers are abiding by public health and safety standards.
Despite rejecting the bill dealing with bans on gender-affirming care for minors, Lombardo was still criticized by his fellow Republicans for signing the measures applying to transgender adults.
He angered his party members earlier this month when he signed another bill into law to ensure commissions overseeing medical licensing do not discipline or disqualify doctors who provide abortions.
Nevada’s Republican National Committeewoman, Sigal Chattah, criticized Lombardo’s support of gender-affirming care for adults, calling the governor a “laughingstock across the nation” in a tweet.
When asked by a reporter about his decision, Lombardo defended his actions, arguing that the bill simply codifies into law what is already a common policy among insurers with respect to providing coverage for transition-related health care.
“I implore people to read the bill in its entirety,” Lombardo said. “And you will see it’s not as draconian or detrimental or immoral as people are portraying it to be. It’s for the benefit of the whole, versus the few.”
The bill also complies with Nevada’s existing policy prohibiting the denial of medically necessary care based on a patient’s gender identity, as well as the state’s law prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity.
Most importantly, the measure ensures that transgender people can receive the same type of insurance coverage as their cisgender counterparts. For example, without the bill, a mastectomy for a cisgender female cancer patient might be covered, but a transition-related procedure for a transgender man might have been deemed “cosmetic” and thus ineligible for coverage — even if both procedures were deemed “medically necessary” by the respective patients’ doctors.
Democrats in the U.S. Senate blocked a Republican bill attempting to ban transgender athletes from women's and girl's sports at educational institutions.
The bill, S. 9, sought to rewrite Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, a federal law prohibiting sex-based discrimination in educational programs or activities, by explicitly stopping federal funds from going to institutions that allow transgender athletes to compete on female-designated competitive or elite sports teams.
The prohibition would not apply to co-ed or intramural sports leagues, nor does it prevent cisgender females from being allowed to try out for male-designated sports teams if their school does not offer that sport for females.
A proposed bill in Arkansas would criminalize anyone who is believed to have supported the social transition of transgender youth.
The bill's prohibitions are so broad, in fact, that it could lead to the prosecution of hairdressers who give youth haircuts that don't conform to stereotypical gender norms.
Under the Vulnerable Youth Protection Act, any person found to have affirmed the gender identity of a minor that does not match the minor's assigned sex at birth could be sued by that minor or their parents for at least $10,000, plus compensatory damages and attorney's fees, for up to 20 years afterward.
Federal agencies under the Trump administration have flagged hundreds of words to avoid in official government memos, public-facing websites, and informational materials.
Government agencies are seeking to comply with a President Trump executive order seeking to rid the government of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practices, and any programs or initiatives that conservatives decry as "woke," including those that focus on racial and cultural identity, LGBTQ identity, and the idea of "equity" rather than equality.
The list appeared in government memos and agency guidance, ordering the removal of the words from government websites, internal communications, and from written or printed materials.
These are challenging times for news organizations. And yet it’s crucial we stay active and provide vital resources and information to both our local readers and the world. So won’t you please take a moment and consider supporting Metro Weekly with a membership? For as little as $5 a month, you can help ensure Metro Weekly magazine and MetroWeekly.com remain free, viable resources as we provide the best, most diverse, culturally-resonant LGBTQ coverage in both the D.C. region and around the world. Memberships come with exclusive perks and discounts, your own personal digital delivery of each week’s magazine (and an archive), access to our Member's Lounge when it launches this fall, and exclusive members-only items like Metro Weekly Membership Mugs and Tote Bags! Check out all our membership levels here and please join us today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.