Democrats busily selling trans folks down the river. They are supposed to be the good guys right?

Rep Terri Sewell. is the latest Democrat to vote for an anti-trans provision. // Source: Rep. Sewell FB

Erin In The Morning is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a subscriber.

If you’re transgender, you can die for our country—but you cannot receive life-saving health care, access it for your transgender family members, or expect your family to be treated equally in schools run by the armed forces, should a new provision in the House NDAA become law.

This appears to be the politic of Democratic Representatives Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez, of Texas; Donald G. Davis, of North Carolina; Shomari Figures and Terri A. Sewell, of Alabama. These lawmakers voted in favor of two proposals by South Carolina’s Nancy Mace, to amend the pending National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). If passed in the Senate, Amendment 255 would gut gender-affirming care for uniformed service members, retirees, and their family members around the world. Amendment 256 would in turn ban transgender girls from women’s sports in K-12 schools run by the military.

That same night, however, the very same Democrats that sided with Mace voted against the proposed codification of Trump’s anti-trans military ban. In other words—they think transgender people should be able to enlist, but not enjoy the very freedoms they are supposedly fighting for.

The so-called trans military ban is already in place through federal policymaking and Trump’s Executive Order 14138. But it’s not as permanent as a formal law on the books would make it. That amendment, brought by Colorado’s notoriously anti-trans Representative Lauren Boebert, failed.

“We’re never going to give up the fight to protect our nation’s transgender servicemembers,” the Congressional Equality Caucus proudly declared after the ban was defeated, unequivocally calling it “good news.”

And it’s true that staving off a discriminatory policy targeting trans people on the basis of their gender identity is a victory. The amendment claimed trans people are fundamentally at odds with the “readiness and discipline” needed from a member of the armed forces. Four Republicans—Reps. Brian K. Fitzpatrick (PA-1) and Michael Lawler (NY-17), plus legislators from U.S. territories such as Kimberlyn King-Hinds (Northern Mariana Islands) and James C. Moylan (Guam)—even crossed party lines to quash the amendment.

But all of them, plus that small cadre of Democrats, turned their backs on trans people when it came time to protect their right to be free from discrimination in health care and in schools. This may be in lockstep with the Republican Party Line, but Democrats who defected drew ire over their vote.

“It’s not just an attack on transgender kids,” said Kara Corcoran, the executive director of SPARTA Pride, an advocacy group for transgender military communities. “It’s an attack on evidence-based care across military treatment facilities, and throughout the Department of Defense, not only here in America, but overseas.”

The first Mace amendment would prohibit TRICARE from covering “gender affirming medical treatment” for transgender people, including servicemembers, retirees, and dependents like children or a spouse. The second Mace amendment would require all on-base K-12 schools operated by the military to ban trans girls from girls’ sports teams.

Last year, many of these same Democratic defectors—such as Cuellar, Davis, Figures, and Gonzalez—voted in favor of athletics bans or gender-affirming health care restrictions for trans servicemembers, veterans, and their families. Cuellar and Davis even lent their support to what amounted to a Pride flag ban at military facilities, as Erin in the Morning has previously reported. Sewell marks the addition of a new name to this list. And while some of the defectors live in highly contested districts, Sewell’s district is safely blue.

Still, Corcoran and others are hopeful that these amendments will face the same fate as their many, many predecessors of anti-trans NDAA amendments or riders passed in the House. Anti-trans provisions snuck into spending, budget, and authorization bills have also been shot down. In a worst case scenario, Senate Democrats can also opt to filibuster.

“I’m hopeful that the Senate will kill it,” Corcoran told Erin in the Morning. “They know there are far more important things to focus on, and they are seeing through the scapegoat tactics that certain politicians are using to gain power and influence through the use of fear.”

Erin In The Morning is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a subscriber.

From Erin In The Morning via This RSS Feed.