Voters widely oppose taxpayer-funded gender surgeries, revealing Democrat Party's vulnerability: poll
Taxpayer-funded gender transition surgeries remain a vulnerable issue for the Democratic Party that most voters oppose, according to a recent survey by the American Principles Project (APP) targeting likely midterm voters.
"We wanted to help educate Americans, but mostly legislators, about where Americans or how Americans feel about funding for gender identity programs, specifically in healthcare services, especially in light of Congress deliberating on spending and doing the reconciliation bills and all of that," Terry Schilling, APP executive director, told Fox News Digital in an interview. "We want to make sure that they knew just how unpopular these programs are to fund by tax dollars."
The survey, conducted in early April with 1,500 respondents, found that 43% of people who voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris in the last election are against using taxpayer money to fund gender transition procedures, including surgeries and hormone treatments.
Watch: Dems Spar With Whistleblower Who Exposed Children's Hospital For Performing Trans Surgeries On Minors
"That was a little bit higher than we typically see for Democrat voters," Schilling said. APP is a socially conservative nonprofit advocacy group.
During the last few months of President Donald Trump's presidential campaign, his administration released high-budget ads targeting transgender women in women's sports that may have helped move the needle with swing voters, with one ad famously proclaiming "Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you."
Read On The Fox News App
The ad focused on Harris' track record of ushering in sex change procedures for incarcerated people in California.
The survey found that nearly 66% of Americans don't think the federal government should be funding gender transition procedures, including puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries. The survey did not differentiate between minors and adults.
Trump Admin Warns States To Comply With Housing Prisoners By Their Biological Sex Or Face Funding Cutoff
"The higher ups, like the elected officials in the Democratic Party, are going the other way, and it's not going to work out well for them," Schilling said. "Democrats are in a really tough spot. They have to choose between 20 to 30% of the base, which supports paying for gender transitions and surgeries with tax dollars, or the swing voters, which swing voters do not want at all."
In 2021, former President Joe Biden signed an executive order directing federal agencies to expand anti-discrimination protections to include sexual orientation and gender identity, including in healthcare. He also reinterpreted Title IX to ensure those same protections applied within educational settings.
The administration supported state-level initiatives, such as Colorado's inclusion of transgender treatments in its essential health benefits, under the Affordable Care Act.
"I think that the more Donald Trump's been talking about it and bringing attention to it, the more people are going to the Republican side on the issue," Schilling said.
Colorado Dems Ram Abortion, Transgender Bills Through On Limited Sunday Session Debate: 'Unprecedented'
Another question of the survey asked respondents, "If the November 2026 general election for U.S. Congress was held today, and you knew that the Democratic candidate supports allowing federal tax dollars to pay for gender transition procedures, including puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries, would you vote for the Republican or Democratic candidate for U.S. Congress?"
Fifty-two percent of respondents said they would vote for the Republican candidate, while 39% said they would back the Democrat.
Trump has clamped down on "radical gender ideology" since taking office, cutting all federal funding for gender transition surgeries for minors and through public healthcare. He has also banned biological males from competing in women's sports and mandated that transgender individuals serve according to their biological sex in the military.Original article source: Voters widely oppose taxpayer-funded gender surgeries, revealing Democrat Party's vulnerability: poll
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
34 minutes ago
Supreme Court rejects Republican bid to bar some provisional ballots in Pennsylvania
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court has rejected a Republican appeal and left in place a Pennsylvania court decision allowing people to cast provisional ballots when their mail-in votes are rejected for not following technical procedures in state law. The court released the decision Friday, after an 'apparent software malfunction' sent out early notifications about orders that had been slated to be released Monday. A technological error also resulted in an opinion being posted early last year. The justices acted in an appeal filed by the Republican National Committee, the state GOP and the Republican-majority election board in Butler County. Pennsylvania's top court ruled last year that the county must count provisional ballots that were cast by two voters after they learned their mail-in ballots were voided because they arrived without mandatory secrecy envelopes. Pennsylvania Democrats had urged the court to stay out of the case.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. States split on whether to aid or resist Trump Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools, churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey, alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision. Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Legislation supporting immigrants takes a variety of forms Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Many new measures reinforce existing policies Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.' ___ Associated Press writers Susan Haigh, Trân Nguyễn, Jesse Bedayn, John O'Connor and Brian Witte contributed to this report.
News24
35 minutes ago
- News24
Trump says Musk has 'lost his mind' as feud fallout mounts
US President Donald Trump said Friday that Elon Musk had "lost his mind" but insisted he wanted to move on from the fiery split with his billionaire former ally. The blistering public break-up between the world's richest person and the world's most powerful is fraught with political and economic risks all round. Trump had scrapped the idea of a call with Musk and was even thinking of ditching the red Tesla he bought at the height of their bromance, White House officials told AFP. "Honestly I've been so busy working on China, working on Russia, working on Iran... I'm not thinking about Elon Musk, I just wish him well," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One en route to his New Jersey golf club late Friday. Earlier, Trump told US broadcasters that he now wanted to focus instead on passing his "big, beautiful" mega-bill before Congress - Musk's harsh criticism of which had sparked their break-up. But the 78-year-old Republican could not stop himself from taking aim at his South African-born friend-turned-enemy. "You mean the man who has lost his mind?" Trump said in a call with ABC when asked about Musk, adding that he was "not particularly" interested in talking to the tycoon. Trump later told Fox News that Musk had "lost it." Just a week ago Trump gave Musk a glowing send-off as he left his cost-cutting role at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) after four months working there. 'Very disappointed' While there had been reports of tensions, the sheer speed at which their relationship imploded stunned Washington. After Musk called Trump's spending bill an "abomination" on Tuesday, Trump hit back in an Oval Office diatribe on Thursday in which he said he was "very disappointed" by the entrepreneur. Trump's spending bill faces a difficult path through Congress as it will raise the US deficit, while critics say it will cut health care for millions of the poorest Americans. The row then went nuclear, with Musk slinging insults at Trump and accusing him without evidence of being in government files on disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump hit back with the power of the US government behind him, saying he could cancel the Space X boss's multi-billion-dollar rocket and satellite contracts. Trump struck a milder tone late Friday when asked how seriously he is considering cutting Musk's contracts. "It's a lot of money, it's a lot of subsidy, so we'll take a look - only if it's fair. Only if it's to be fair for him and the country," he said. Musk apparently also tried to de-escalate social media hostilities. The right-wing tech baron rowed back on a threat to scrap his company's Dragon spacecraft - vital for ferrying NASA astronauts to and from the International Space Station. And on Friday the usually garrulous poster kept a low social media profile on his X social network. But the White House denied reports that they would talk. "The president does not intend to speak to Musk today," a senior White House official told AFP. A second official said Musk had requested a call. Tesla giveaway? Tesla stocks tanked more than 14% on Thursday amid the row, losing some $100 billion of the company's market value, but recovering partly Friday. Trump is now considering either selling or giving away the cherry red Tesla S that he announced he had bought from Musk's firm in March. The electric vehicle was still parked on the White House grounds on Friday. "He's thinking about it, yes," a senior White House official told AFP when asked if Trump would sell or give it away. Trump and Musk had posed inside the car at a bizarre event in March, when the president turned the White House into a pop-up Tesla showroom after viral protests against Musk's DOGE role. But while Trump appeared to hold many of the cards, Musk also has some to play. His wealth allowed him to be the biggest donor to Trump's 2024 campaign, to the tune of nearly $300 million. Any further support for the 2026 midterm election now appears in doubt - while Musk could also use his money to undermine Trump's support on the right.
