A Kansas ban on gender-affirming care couldn’t overcome a veto last year. Things are different now

Takeaways:

• Kansas lawmakers may have the votes to ban gender-affirming care for transgender youth.
• A bill failed last year when a handful of Republicans voted against their party.
• This year’s bill is different, but it has the same goal.

Conservative Kansas lawmakers couldn’t ban gender-affirming care for transgender children last year after Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed the bill and Republicans fell short on an override vote.

This year, they’ve passed a more restrictive ban and run into another veto from Kelly.

Yet a veto override that would outlaw puberty blockers, hormone treatments and highly rare surgery looks more possible this year.

The difference? The  Republicans’ veto-proof majority in the Legislature appears to be holding fast this time. Some Republican lawmakers broke ranks with their party last year.

But in this election year, those same lawmakers say they’ve had more time to study this year’s bill and that it better addresses some of their past objections.

The GOP’s strong majority in the Statehouse means it can override any veto from the Democratic governor if every Republican votes on party lines. This year, about a dozen votes appear to have flipped back to the party line.

The Beacon called and emailed the lawmakers who flipped their votes when the bill passed in the Legislature last year to see what changed and to gauge the odds for an override. Only three responded.

One vote flipped because the Republican who voted against the bill left office and his replacement supports the ban.

Rep. Adam Smith, a Weskan Republican, said he switched his vote because he was told incorrect information about the 2023 bill. He thought last year’s bill would ban necessary medical procedures unrelated to gender-affirming care. This year’s bill has cleared up that confusion — only surgeries related to gender-affirming care would be banned — to gain his support.

Sen. Brenda Dietrich, a Topeka Republican, cast the decisive vote that killed the bill last year. In 2023, the ban would immediately stop gender transitions for youth. This year’s bill allows patients to slowly ease off hormone and puberty blockers.

“My concern in the past, which was not addressed until now, was the harm that would

be caused from abruptly stopping the hormone therapy piece,” she said.

Last year’s legislation focused on doctors, opening them up to lawsuits and the loss of their licenses if they offered gender-affirming treatment. This year’s bill also does that, but it’s more restrictive. It revokes state funding for this care when it is allowed and also doesn’t let state employees use pronouns that conflict with the gender they were assigned at birth.

Nathaniel Birkhead, an associate professor and department head of political science at Kansas State University, said bills affecting transgender youth are a relatively new issue in the Legislature. Some people hold strong feelings on the issue, he said, but a large chunk of the population sits in the middle.

As voters and politicians learn about the issue, their ideas on the topic can change.

Rep. John Eplee, an Atchison Republican, voted against the bill last year because he didn’t think House lawmakers studied the issue enough. The bill didn’t get a hearing by a House committee, which isn’t the typical lawmaking process.

Last year’s bill passed in the final hours of the legislative session.

“To try to solve this without a hearing, without a process, at 2 o’clock in the morning by this body is not right,” Eplee said during the 2023 floor debate.

Republicans have consistently questioned the science behind gender-affirming care and whether a child understands the impact of the change. They argue someone can just transition after 18.

His vote has flipped, though, and he now supports a ban on gender-affirming care for minors. Eplee, a doctor who has seen transgender patients, said he heard testimony this year “that blew me away.”

“There are youngsters that have transitioned three times before age 18,” he said this year. “That really concerns me.”

Medical professionals said waiting to transition can bring serious negative mental and physical side effects and that the care should not be delayed. Studies show few transgender youth regret transitioning — around 1% — and the affirming care reduces depression and risk of suicide.

The House voted 82-39 for the ban. The Senate approved it 27-13. The House needs two additional votes to override the veto, and two Republican lawmakers missed the first vote. There is no guarantee that anybody flips their vote, and even one vote switching to Democrats’ favor will kill the bill.

Birkhead, the K-State political scientist, said whatever happens will come under more intense scrutiny because it’s an election year. Voters are more likely to remember key votes this session than compared to sessions a few years ago.

He said approving a ban on gender-affirming care could cost some Republicans in the general election. But those same Republicans have to win their primary elections against other conservatives first. That could mean proving to voters they are more conservative than another candidate.

“Not everybody will rue (their vote) come the elections this fall,” Birkhead said, “but there certainly will be people who regret their vote because voters will penalize them for it.”

The post A Kansas ban on gender-affirming care couldn’t overcome a veto last year. Things are different now appeared first on The Beacon .