Connect with us

Politics

Transgender Patients Angry Wisconsin Medicaid Doesn’t Cover Reassignment Surgery, Sue State

Published

on

antisemitism

Under Wisconsin’s current Medicaid program, reassignment surgery for transgender patients is not covered, a fact that has many in the LGBT community absolutely furious.

In response to what many feel is unfair exclusion, a lawsuit by two residents has been filed against the state health department.

The lawsuit states that excluding transgender reassignment surgery “flies in the face of the medical consensus that gender-confirming medical care is the only safe and effective medical treatment for gender dysphoria, and wholly disregards the harms of denying transgender people access to critical and often life-saving care.”

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Cody Flack and Sara Makenzie. Flack is a 30-year-old transgender man, and Makenzie is a 41-year-old transgender woman.

take our poll - story continues below

Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?

  • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Both of them rely on federal benefits for their basic needs, including health care. They both have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, meaning they have been diagnosed as having a gender identity that conflicts with their biological sex.

They have already gone through some gender transitions such as hormone therapy, and want to get gender reassignment surgery, having received recommendations from their doctors to do so in order to “alleviate their ongoing symptoms of gender dysphoria.”

Neither of them can afford the out-of-pocket cost for gender reassignment surgery, but a state regulation “expressly prohibits Wisconsin Medicaid coverage for ‘transsexual surgery’ or ‘drugs, including hormone therapy, associated with transsexual surgery or medically unnecessary alterations of sexual anatomy or characteristics.”

The two residents claim that excluding this procedure violates the comparability and availability requirements of the Medicaid program, the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, and the Affordable Care Act.

The hope is that the lawsuit will result in the exclusion of gender reassignment surgery from being covered in the Medicaid program being labeled discriminatory, leading to an injunction that will keep the state from enforcing the exclusion.

Oh, and of course, they are seeking some cash for damages related to “economic and non-economic injuries arising from being denied medically necessary health care coverage.”

Source: TheBlaze

Opinion

New Travel Restrictions Arrive Months After Biden Bashed Trump for Same Thing

It’s like they’ve forgotten all about what they said when they were trying to insult Trump.

Published

on

Oh the hypocrisy of the liberal left; does it know no bounds?

While President Joe Biden hasn’t been quite a contradictory as some of the other high-level hypocrites in his party, it appears that this is only because he really hasn’t done anything as Commander in Chief.  The border crisis remains a horrid, humanitarian stain on our nation.  Biden-flation continues to threaten the all-important consumer spending season surrounding Christmas.  Russia continues to act with impunity the world over.

It’s hard to be a hypocrite when all you do is sit idly by, right?

But now, a worrisome new strain of COVID-19 has threatened to take the world by storm, and Biden’s work to curb the spread here in the US appears to be eerily similar to actions that he once lambasted Donald Trump for taking.

take our poll - story continues below

Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?

  • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

President Joe Biden has imposed travel restrictions into the United States due to coronavirus fears despite previously slamming former President Trump as xenophobic for doing the same thing in 2020.

“We are in the midst of a crisis with the coronavirus,” Biden tweeted as a presidential candidate last year the day after Trump imposed travel restrictions from several countries including China into the United States. “We need to lead the way with science — not Donald Trump’s record of hysteria, xenophobia, and fear-mongering. He is the worst possible person to lead our country through a global health emergency.”

And he even doubled down on this sentiment:

Biden later attempted to walk back the xenophobic comment and claimed during a debate that he was making a broad point about xenophobia and not directly referring to the travel ban.

“A wall will not stop the coronavirus,” Biden tweeted in March of 2020. “Banning all travel from Europe — or any other part of the world — will not stop it. This disease could impact every nation and any person on the planet — and we need a plan to combat it.”

One has to wonder, if Joe Biden was that oblivious about the needs of the nation back when he was insulting Donald Trump’s leadership, how is he possibly going to right the nation’s wrongs while in power?

Oh the hypocrisy of the liberal left; does it know no bounds? While President Joe Biden hasn’t been quite a contradictory as some of the other high-level hypocrites in his party, it appears that this is only because he really hasn’t done anything as Commander in Chief.  The border crisis remains a horrid, humanitarian stain on our nation.  Biden-flation continues to threaten the all-important consumer spending season surrounding Christmas.  Russia continues to act with impunity the world over. It’s hard to be a hypocrite when all you do is sit idly by, right? But now, a worrisome new strain of COVID-19 has threatened to take the world by storm, and Biden’s work to curb the spread here in the US appears to be eerily similar to actions that he once lambasted Donald Trump for taking. President Joe Biden has imposed travel restrictions into the United States due to coronavirus fears despite previously slamming former President Trump as xenophobic for doing the same thing in 2020. “We are in the midst of a crisis with the coronavirus,” Biden tweeted as a presidential candidate last year the day after Trump imposed travel restrictions from several countries including China into the United States. “We need to lead the way with science — not Donald Trump’s record of hysteria, xenophobia, and fear-mongering. He is the worst possible person to lead our country through a global health emergency.” And he even doubled down on this sentiment: Biden later attempted to walk back the xenophobic comment and claimed during a debate that he was making a broad point about xenophobia and not directly referring to the travel ban. “A wall will not stop the coronavirus,” Biden tweeted in March of 2020. “Banning all travel from Europe — or any other part of the world — will not stop it.…

Continue Reading

Opinion

California City Votes to Become ‘Constitutional Republic’, Will Not Adhere to COVID Rules

WHOA!

Published

on

There are plenty of ways in which companies and municipalities are working to push back against the government’s highly criticized COVID-19 mandates, and one town in California has just taken perhaps the largest step toward freedom that we’ve seen yet.

In a move that was born out of a need to keep the state government from becoming an authoritarian brute, the city of Oroville, California has declared itself a sovereign “constitutional republic”.

The city council in Oroville, located at the base of the Sierra Nevada foothills about 90 miles from the capital of Sacramento, adopted a resolution this week stating it would oppose state and federal orders it deems to be government overreach.

Oroville leaders said the designation was a way of affirming the city’s values and pushing back against state rules it doesn’t agree with, although a legal expert said the designation was merely a gesture and did not grant the city any new authority.

The move had its naysayers, of course.

But the city’s declaration does not shield it from following federal and state laws, said Lisa Pruitt, a rural law expert at the University of California, Davis, who said it was not clear what the designation meant.

“A municipality cannot unilaterally declare itself not subject to the laws of the state of California,” Pruitt said. “Whatever they mean by constitutional republic you can’t say hocus pocus and make it happen.”

Despite the pushback, the measure passed in a vote of 6-1, and there is little doubt that legal challenges will be coming in the not-so-distant future.

There are plenty of ways in which companies and municipalities are working to push back against the government’s highly criticized COVID-19 mandates, and one town in California has just taken perhaps the largest step toward freedom that we’ve seen yet. In a move that was born out of a need to keep the state government from becoming an authoritarian brute, the city of Oroville, California has declared itself a sovereign “constitutional republic”. The city council in Oroville, located at the base of the Sierra Nevada foothills about 90 miles from the capital of Sacramento, adopted a resolution this week stating it would oppose state and federal orders it deems to be government overreach. Oroville leaders said the designation was a way of affirming the city’s values and pushing back against state rules it doesn’t agree with, although a legal expert said the designation was merely a gesture and did not grant the city any new authority. The move had its naysayers, of course. But the city’s declaration does not shield it from following federal and state laws, said Lisa Pruitt, a rural law expert at the University of California, Davis, who said it was not clear what the designation meant. “A municipality cannot unilaterally declare itself not subject to the laws of the state of California,” Pruitt said. “Whatever they mean by constitutional republic you can’t say hocus pocus and make it happen.” Despite the pushback, the measure passed in a vote of 6-1, and there is little doubt that legal challenges will be coming in the not-so-distant future.

Continue Reading
The Schaftlein Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Week