Missouri Must Reject California’s Push to Fund Childhood Gender Transition

California lawmakers have approved a budget bill that would devote $10 million to gender-transition services for children and youth. Assembly Bill 113 is before Governor Gavin Newsom, putting him in a position to approve another taxpayer-funded commitment to these services.

That is a deeply troubling priority. Public healthcare dollars should support children’s healthy development, and lawmakers should be cautious about committing those dollars to medical interventions during childhood. California is moving in the opposite direction, setting aside money to help keep youth gender-transition services available. Missouri must reject that approach.

Millions Committed to Youth Services

AB 113 includes $9 million in local assistance and $1 million in departmental support for gender-transition services for children and youth. The measure allows grants and contracts to carry out the program, including support involving Medi-Cal providers and members.

These appropriations would commit public money to sustaining childhood medical transition. Taxpayers should not be required to subsidize these interventions for minors. The fact that a program has providers willing to deliver it does not make it an appropriate public investment.

Children’s Welfare Should Come First

A child struggling with distress deserves compassionate support and careful attention to what is causing that distress. Families seeking help should be able to trust that their child’s long-term well-being comes ahead of an institution’s commitment to a particular treatment approach.

Making childhood medical transition a state funding priority puts the continuation of these programs ahead of the caution children deserve. Decisions made during these formative years should be guided by their long-term welfare. Public policy should give children room to mature and support families seeking care that protects their development.

Taxpayers Would Be Kept at a Distance

The bill also exempts the youth program’s grants, contracts and related information from disclosure under the California Public Records Act. The exemption covers financial arrangements for a publicly funded program.

That compounds the concern. Lawmakers are asking the public to finance services for children while limiting access to information about how the money would be distributed. Families and taxpayers should be able to scrutinize those decisions. Protecting individual medical privacy should not mean shielding government spending from meaningful public accountability.

Missouri Must Refuse This Direction

Missourians should pay attention to the choices being made in Sacramento. A state budget can sustain a policy through direct grants and provider support. Preventing the same approach here requires attention to appropriations as well as the laws governing medical practice.

Missouri lawmakers should reject proposals that use public money to subsidize gender-transition interventions for minors, including funding routed through grants or other agreements. They should also insist on public accountability for healthcare spending. Calling an appropriation a youth-services program should never put it beyond scrutiny.

California’s proposal should be a warning for Missouri. State leaders must keep taxpayer dollars from becoming a means of sustaining medical gender transition for minors. Children’s long-term well-being should guide those spending decisions, and Missouri families should expect their elected officials to hold to that priority.

Link to story: California AB 113 bill text

Link to story: California AB 113 current status