Social conservatives are working to ensure that federal funding for sex change operations will be banned in the health reform bill. Conservatives shop sex ops ban

The federal government would be banned from funding sex change operations and other services for transgender individuals if social conservative activists get their way.

There’s no sponsor yet for an amendment to the health care overhaul – and it may remain in the dustbin of unrealized wedge issues – but culture warriors are shopping the proposal to Republican senators.


The language is written: “None of the funds authorized or appropriated under this act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be used to cover any part or portion of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of” any sex or gender reassignment procedure, surgery related to such a sex change, hormone therapy for a sex change or pre- and post-operation treatments for a sex change.

A senior aide to a Republican senator said that a public insurance plan could easily end up covering sex-change procedures if that’s not specifically banned in the bill.

“It's not that hard to imagine that a new federal health plan crafted and implemented by this administration would cover sex-change surgeries. Anything not explicitly prohibited in the bill is effectively on the table. Most Americans probably would prefer that their tax dollars not pay for or subsidize transgender surgery,” the aide said.

Advocates for transgender people note that it is often difficult for them to obtain insurance that covers medical needs related to their transition and say that sometimes basic medical care has been unfairly denied.

“Unfortunately, some insurance companies broadly interpret language excluding transgender-related care and services to deny coverage for non-transition-related procedures for transgender individuals. Insurers justify these exclusions by stating that your current medical problem is somehow related to your transition,” the Transgender Law Center wrote in a fact sheet posted on its Website.

The ironclad language of the funding-ban amendment suggests the type of prohibition conservatives want to see on coverage of abortion if a new health care exchange includes a government-backed insurance option.

House Democrats say they have a plan that would segregate federal funds to prevent taxpayer support for abortion services, but abortion critics say the proposed firewall would not fully shield taxpayers from footing the bill for the practice. In its first iteration, the House version of the health care bill didn’t mention the word abortion – though it carried significant implications for the availability of insurance coverage for the procedure.

Several Democratic aides – and Sen Roland Burris (D-Ill.) – declined to comment on the proposal.