|
Child Mutilation Bill One Step Closer to Becoming Law
Rep. Leigh Finke (D-St. Paul)?introduced?HF 2607?earlier this year. The bill aims to ensure health insurance coverage for gender-affirming health care, considering it as medically necessary. The bill?states?that no health plan covering physical or mental health services in Minnesota can exclude coverage for medically necessary ?gender-affirming care.? We heard the bill on Thursday in the?Health Finance Committee, and I have?concerns,?that with multiple scientific studies showing puberty blockers and surgery are not the correct procedures for children, the bill needs corrections. However, the unwillingness of?the majority?to add common sense amendments shows their inability to see that this bill has the potential to do?permanent?harm?to children.?A 15-year longitudinal scientific study of thousands of children found that a vast majority of gender-confused children grow out of it. The study was from age 11 to the mid-20s.
There are many issues with the bill including the fact that it is a government mandate, which?frequently doesn?t work?for?many if not most?Minnesotans.?Most concerning?is?the absence of a?provision?excluding treatments for children, which could lead to potentially serious physical and mental health issues for minors across the state. Multiple?studies in the UK and the European Union have shown that medications such as puberty blockers or gender reassignment surgeries lead to devastating mental and physical health problems including depression and developmental defects. Countries like the UK have begun dramatically?restricting?gender-affirming care due to the unpredictability and dangerous side effects these treatments have had on minors.
?There is also no provision guaranteeing that insurance must cover a patient?s detransition. Many, especially those who transition at an early age, regret their choice down the road. This is just another example of why an age carve-out is necessary. Those under 21 should not make decisions that they cannot know the consequences of, nor have any available means to fix their mistake. While I still disagree with the bill, adding amendments barring those under 21 from receiving treatment and ensuring that detransition procedures are also covered are both common sense ideas that ultimately protect our kids from life-altering mistakes.
?Expanding Access to Care
If you?ve ever received a flu shot or gotten a COVID-19 test, chances are you may have stopped at your local pharmacy to do so. What you may not know is that getting shots and medical testing from a pharmacist before 2020 was not how that process worked. During the pandemic, the federal government permitted pharmacists to administer vaccination and order and perform some?simple?medical tests. This was to help alleviate medical facilities overwhelmed during the pandemic. However, that provision sunsets this year. ?
HF 1197?would allow the practice to continue indefinitely under state law. Under this bill, pharmacists can administer vaccinations to those three or younger and order and perform medical testing. Pharmacists? technicians can also do this but would need to complete the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education?s training, be certified in basic CPR, and be acting under a licensed pharmacist. The bill has bipartisan support and ultimately leads to better access to care for all Minnesotans. However, I disagree in the sense that I believe the sunset clause should still exist for this bill. It?forces?us to revisit the issue, analyze the data, and make sure that?the desired outcomes?are happening, and make adjustments as needed.
Uber and Lyft Update
On Thursday, my Republican colleagues held a press conference to announce their fix to the Uber and Lyft situation caused by extreme Democrats on the Minneapolis City Council. The plan comes down to a bill, introduced by?Rep. Engen (R-White Bear TWP), that creates a preemption on ride-share law, meaning that laws related to ride-sharing must originate at the state level. That same day, Reps. Engen and?Garofalo (R-Farmington)?declared an urgency on this bill, asking that the rules be suspended so the bill can be passed, and we can avoid losing rideshare across the metro. The motion was voted down along party lines.
For additional context, the Minneapolis City Council overruled Mayor Frey?s veto, implementing a new minimum pay requirement for rideshare drivers. This ordinance was put into place before the conclusion of a state study, which aimed to determine the appropriate compensation for drivers, both in the form of wages and reimbursement for mileage on their vehicles. Uber and Lyft have declared the ordinance unreasonable, citing that the increased cost would ultimately shift the burden to riders. Both companies vowed to halt services in the metro area starting May 1st?should no action be taken by either the council or state legislature to reverse the ordinance.
Please Stay in Touch?
Please continue to stay in touch to share your thoughts or concerns. My phone number is 651-296-9236 or you can email me at [email protected].
Have a great weekend!
 Duane
|
