Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for c…
The bill amends section 1128 of the Social Security Act to bar providers participating in Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP from requesting on intake forms (or related written/electronic documentation) information about the gender identity or sexual preference of individuals under 18, unless that information is essential to diagnosis, treatment, or prevention as determined by applicable clinical guidelines or medical necessity. It requires the HHS Secretary to establish a mechanism, within 180 days of enactment, for reporting instances where such prohibited requests occur.
Progressive: emphasizes harm to transgender youth and care disruption
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that establishes a specific prohibition and leverages existing enforcement authorities.
The bill amends section 1128 of the Social Security Act to bar providers participating in Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP from requesting on intake forms (or related written/electronic documentation) information about the gender identity or sexual preference of individuals under 18, unless that information is essential to diagnosis, treatment, or prevention as determined by applicable clinical guidelines or medical necessity.
It requires the HHS Secretary to establish a mechanism, within 180 days of enactment, for reporting instances where such prohibited requests occur.
The prohibition takes effect 180 days after enactment.
Targeted statutory ban but on a divisive cultural issue with enforcement implications; modest compromise features insufficient to ensure easy passage.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that establishes a specific prohibition and leverages existing enforcement authorities. It provides a timeline for effect and requires the Secretary to create a reporting mechanism, which together form a basic implementation scaffold.
Progressive: emphasizes harm to transgender youth and care disruption
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressive: emphasizes harm to transgender youth and care disruption
Likely to view the bill skeptically because it restricts collection of gender identity information for minors, which can impair transgender healthcare, research, and anti-discrimination practices.
Supporters of robust clinical care will worry vague exceptions won't prevent chilling effects on providers documenting relevant health information.
Will see both privacy-protecting intent and potential clinical/workflow problems.
Generally open to limiting unnecessary data collection if the bill includes clear definitions, medical-exception standards, and minimal administrative burden.
Likely to view the bill favorably as protecting minors' privacy and parents' rights, preventing collection of sensitive identity data by federally funded programs unless medically required.
Will appreciate a federal standard limiting such intake questions.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Targeted statutory ban but on a divisive cultural issue with enforcement implications; modest compromise features insufficient to ensure easy passage.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressive: emphasizes harm to transgender youth and care disruption
Targeted statutory ban but on a divisive cultural issue with enforcement implications; modest compromise features insufficient to ensure ea…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that establishes a specific prohibition and leverages existing enforcement authorities. It provides a timeline for effect and require…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.