After a heated hour-long debate and intermittent rule maneuvering, the Montana Senate successfully passed an initial vote on a bill that aims to prohibit gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors. This significant clash between lawmakers marks the most prominent confrontation of the session regarding this contentious issue, which has sparked widespread national discourse in recent years.
Twenty-eight Republicans ultimately supported Senate Bill 99, overcoming the mix of 21 Democrats and Republicans who voted against the measure. The bill will need to clear another vote before the Senate this week in order to be transmitted to the House.
Medical providers who offer puberty blockers, hormone therapies, or surgeries like mastectomies to assist young individuals in aligning their appearance and presentation with their gender identity may face penalties if SB 99 is enacted into law.
In addition, the bill would forbid the utilization of public funds, facilities, and resources to provide gender-affirming care. It would also prevent state property or buildings from being utilized to encourage social transitioning, including the use of a minor’s preferred name and pronouns or endorsing the use of gender-affirming clothing.
In comments that echoed his advocacy for similar measures in 2021, Sen. John Fuller, R-Kalispell, described his bill on Tuesday as an effort to protect children from medical procedures he said can have long-term consequences and lead to regret. The bill’s sponsor also generally cast doubt on the legitimacy of transgender people, setting the tone for Tuesday’s heated debate.
Fuller stated that transgender ideology lacks scientific basis as the concept of a child being born in the wrong body is more of a metaphysical or spiritual belief rather than a scientific fact. He emphasized that there is no scientific evidence supporting this notion.
Nearly every Democratic senator, and one Republican, spoke in opposition to the bill, highlighting points made by close to a hundred opponents during January’s hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, including many transgender young people and parents of trans children.
“Sen. Andrea Olsen, D-Missoula, a member of the committee, emphasized that individuals shared how access to care truly transformed their lives, enabling them to experience joy, confidence, and enthusiasm. She questioned whether it was our place to deny our constituents their right to self-determination and limit their ability to pursue happiness by taking away their access to a fulfilling life.”
The bill received support from additional Republican members on the Judiciary Committee, who expressed their belief that medical providers should not endorse a young person’s gender identity, as it may lead to detachment from reality. They suggested that transgender patients and their families should delay seeking these services until they reach legal adulthood for their own benefit.
“The sponsor of the bill talked about underage prohibitions such as alcohol, marijuana, gun sales and tobacco. Wait till you’re 18. There should be an underage prohibition on transitioning as well,” said Sen. Keith Regier, R-Kalispell.
Opponents sought to puncture those arguments, referencing research studies that show access to gender-affirming care helps decrease the risks of suicide among young people who might feel misunderstood and unaccepted. Sen. Kathy Kelker, D-Billings, told fellow lawmakers that those findings are the reason why the nation’s leading health care organizations recommend gender-affirming care as an option for patients in consultation with family members and other medical providers.
Kelker stated that by simply allowing children to express their gender identity freely, rates of anxiety and depression can be reduced to average levels. She emphasized that denying young individuals and their parents access to effective medical treatments is not a neutral action. Withholding medically necessary care, as proposed in bill SB 99, would result in harm and significantly heighten health risks for transgender youth.
In addition to trading talking points, Democratic and Republican lawmakers repeatedly clashed over proper language and legislative decorum during Tuesday’s debate. Minority Leader Pat Flowers, D-Belgrade, rebuked Republican lawmakers for rhetorically comparing gender-affirming mastectomies, which rarely occur for minors in Montana, to adult amputations and lobotomies.
At another point, Fuller spoke out of turn in response to comments made by Sen. Ellie Boldman, D-Missoula, accusing her of misrepresenting his record on a separate bill considered by the Senate last week. Fuller later apologized for the outburst.
The most notable breach of procedure came after opponents attempted to sideline SB 99 through a motion to “indefinitely postpone” consideration of the bill. Flowers brought the motion after debate had finished and Fuller had made his final remarks, prompting Senate Majority Leader Steve Fitpatrick, R-Great Falls, to call the maneuver improper.
Fitzpatrick respectfully stated to the Senator, “With all due respect, you are not following the proper order. After the motion is closed, we must proceed with the vote.”
Flowers challenged that interpretation and proposed a recess for the Senate, so that lawmakers on the Rules Committee could gather in the center of the chamber floor. After approximately four minutes, the committee members dispersed. Speaking to the chamber, Flowers withdrew his motion but emphasized that the leadership of both parties had differing views on the acceptable protocol.
The bill’s opponents were optimistic that moderate Republicans would rally behind the motion to set aside SB 99. However, their hopes were dashed as only five GOP lawmakers, along with Democrats, voted against the measure. This narrow margin of seven votes enabled the bill to successfully pass this obstacle.
