Luckily, some people in Congress know actual patriots when they see them. As President Trump continues his efforts to ban transgender people from serving in the U.S military, at least four Democrats are bringing trans service members to No. 45’s State of the Union address tonight, Tuesday, February 5.
Related: Mike Pence and a hate group leader are behind Trump’s new trans military ban
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York invited Navy Lieutenant Commander Blake Dremann, Representative Jackie Speier of California invited Air Force Staff Sergeant Logan Ireland, Representative Donald McEachin of Virginia invited Navy Petty Officer Second Class Megan Winters, and Representative Chris Pappas of New Hampshire invited with Navy veteran Tavion Dignard, according to the Washington Blade’s Chris Johnson.Even better, Gillibrand will work to thwart the ban after the SOTU, too. “Any transgender American who meets the standards should be able to sign up to join our Armed Forces, and that’s why I’m going to introduce new legislation this week to protect current and future transgender service members,” she said in a statement. “I am proud to lead this fight and I urge all of my Senate colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.”
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York invited Navy Lieutenant Commander Blake Dremann, Representative Jackie Speier of California invited Air Force Staff Sergeant Logan Ireland, Representative Donald McEachin of Virginia invited Navy Petty Officer Second Class Megan Winters, and Representative Chris Pappas of New Hampshire invited with Navy veteran Tavion Dignard, according to the Washington Blade’s Chris Johnson.Even better, Gillibrand will work to thwart the ban after the SOTU, too. “Any transgender American who meets the standards should be able to sign up to join our Armed Forces, and that’s why I’m going to introduce new legislation this week to protect current and future transgender service members,” she said in a statement. “I am proud to lead this fight and I urge all of my Senate colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.”
Trump has been pushing to reinstate the ban since 2017, when he claimed that the military “cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail.” (Our esteemed leader seems to think “transgender” is a noun.)Statistics, however, show that the medical costs of trans-inclusive health care are hardly “tremendous” relative to the military’s yearly medical bill: A 2016 Rand Corporation review found that “active-component health care costs would increase by between $2.4 million and $8.4 million annually, representing a 0.04 to 0.13 percent increase in active-component health care expenditures.”Once again, science trumps rhetoric.
Bob LaBlah
I am really surprised that he never makes references to Chelsea Manning and what she did.
djmcgamester
I’ve said it before and I’ll continue to do so. I couldn’t join the military because of a seizure disorder. I was told outright that I might be unable to receive my medication in the field if I were away for prolonged periods of time.
I do think it should be reworked to say that the military bans people who have a medical condition that makes them unsuitable for military life. That goes around the entire trans issue and reiterates protocol that is already in place. And, let’s be honest, a group of guys having someone with a vagina around would be weird. Similarly, what women are going to be comfortable around someone with a penis in the showers? It would have to be a 100% transition for this to work at all, and even then hormones need to be taken for the rest of their lives. Sounds like a medical condition requiring meds that might not be readily available in the field.
I also happen to be one of those people who thinks trans guys shouldn’t be able to compete against women. It’s unfair and we’re beginning to see how so. This even goes back decades to the first trans man to compete as a professional women’s tennis player. The women didn’t stand a chance. It seems to be biology is more important than self-identification in these instances.
I want to make it clear that I’m not anti-trans. However, I do think medical and physical issues should fully be taken into account.