House Republicans halt report criticizing gender transition bill

BOISE — A new bill seeking to require doctors and educators to out transgender minors to their parents passed out of the House without significant controversy Wednesday. A few minutes later, as a dispute between House Democrats and House Republicans unfolded, that lack of controversy went by the wayside.

After being reported out of committee last week, HB 822 was on the House Floor for debate. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, seeks to require covered entities — including schools, childcare providers and medical care providers — to notify parents or guardians about a child's “social transition.”

The bill defines social transition as including “adopting a name, pronouns, appearance, or dress that does not correspond to the individual’s sex.” 

Doctors, teachers or any other individual working under a covered entity must notify a parent or guardian when a child requests to "facilitate" or "participate" in the transition. If that doesn't happen, a school, medical institution or childcare facility could face civil penalties of up to $100,000.

The House voted 59-9 to advance the bill. While House Democrats opposed this vote, it was what followed that prompted the outcry.

Shortly after tallying the vote, Rep. Ilana Rubel, D-Boise — one of several Democratic members of the House Judiciary and Rules Committee present for the bill’s initial hearing — sought to have a minority report outlining criticisms of the bill and its hearing placed on the House record. 

Though this is traditionally admitted without debate or vote, Rep. Jason Monks, R-Meridian, motioned to suspend House Rule 27.

This rule allows committee members to submit special reports when not aligning with a committee’s decision, so long as the language within the report is “decorous in language” and “respectful to the House.” When done so, these reports “shall” be entered into the House Journal, according to House rules.

In a 57-11 vote, House Rule 27 was suspended, with three House Republicans — Dustin Manwaring, R-Pocatello; Lori McCann, R-Lewiston; and Cornel Rasor, R-Sagle — joining Democrats in opposing the motion.

Because it passed by a two-thirds majority, the required threshold for a suspension, the report was not allowed into the record, and neither party could debate the motion.

Following the House’s adjournment, Rubel, one of three Democrats who submitted the report for the record, said she anticipated being able to speak on the floor against the motion she described as an “abuse of power” wielded to “suppress the minority viewpoint.”

Prior to the debate on the bill, House Republicans caucused to determine a course of action in light of the minority report before them. During that meeting, Monks said the Republican caucus “had thought (the motion) was going to be debatable ourselves,” and said the same thinking was conveyed to House Democrats.

It was not until the motion was brought to the floor and the House’s chief clerk pointed out that it was non-debatable because the rules were suspended that it was realized this was not the case, Monks said.

Among the concerns raised in the report was the bill’s inclusion of a penalty of up to $100,000 in the event of a violation, a provision described as being both “disproportionate to the nature of the offense and likely unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause." 

The report notes that the current criminal statute in the state involving alleged harm to children, such as through entrapment or DUI with a minor, only authorizes fines between $1,000 to $5,000.

“You don't have to like the bill or dislike the bill to conclude that is grossly, grossly incomparable to every other civil endangerment, child endangerment fine that we have in code, it's not even close,” Rep. Chris Mathias, D-Boise, who also took part in the report, said. “The Supreme Court will probably just rule for this on some summary judgment … you don't even need to have a hearing on that.”

Monks said this criticism of the bill and others were “fair game.” What prompted the House Republican caucus not to enter the report into the record was that it was “a little bit unfair to the chairman on how he ran his committee,” he said.

Several points in the report address how the House Judiciary and Rules Committee conducted its hearing on the bill. The Idaho Capital Sun previously reported that Rep. Joe Alfieri, R-Coeur d’Alene, who was filling in as chair for Skaug, cut off public testimony early, allowing only a few of the dozens who sought to speak to the bill.

Mathias, referring to a criticism raised in the report, said an equal number of individuals testifying for and against was a disproportionate selection for the hearing, in which dozens had signed up to testify against. When only 14 minutes of public testimony were allowed, medical professionals, educators and those directly impacted by the legislation who had signed up to testify were left out, the report said.

“They can vote us down — but to just silence us is a step too far,” Rubel said. “And I had been told that it was going to be a debatable motion, and then they said that there was going to be no debate on the motion.”

Having received approval in the House, HB 822 will have another public hearing once it is heard by a Senate committee.