Democrats invoke parents’ rights while handing decisions to institutions
Six days before Nov. 3, Democrats invoke parents’ rights as candidates point decisions on girls’ sports and child sex-change procedures to institutions.
MS NOW, as described in Julianne McShane’s Oct. 28 X post, reported: “With ballot measures in 5 states targeting trans kids, some Democrats are testing out a novel strategy for fighting back: using Republicans’ arguments about government overreach and parents’ rights against them.”
A parent’s right is the right to direct a child’s upbringing and care. A candidate who sends that decision to an athletic association or a clinic has not defended the right; the candidate has borrowed its name. Parents in Washington, Colorado and Arizona should read the slogan against what those candidates would leave to parents, six days before the election.
“Pointing out the values of conservatives — to not have government in our business making these decisions — is a very important part of our message.”
Their strategists turn rights into a message
Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a Washington Democrat, told MS NOW what the language is for: “Pointing out the values of conservatives — to not have government in our business making these decisions — is a very important part of our message.” Jayapal also said the message will reach people who may not agree with Democrats in every way on the issue: “I do think we’re going to get people who may not agree with us in every way we see the issue.” Democratic strategist Adrienne Kimmell put the playbook in one question: ‘Who do you want to make decisions around healthcare for your family? Do you want politicians or the government to make those decisions, or do you think families and doctors should be the ones who are making those calls?’1 In that script, government is the villain, and families and doctors are the answer.
The same message shapes the Washington ads: MS NOW reports that the digital ads of No Hate in Washington State never use the word1. If the case against the measure is strong, why does its campaign avoid naming the issue it is fighting over?
Washington leaves eligibility to institutions
Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, a Washington Democrat, told Oregon Public Broadcasting that “it isn’t fair for boys to compete in girls’ sports.” She will not support a rule that forces girls to prove their sex to the state every year just to play sports. Her alternative is to leave the decisions to schools, athletic associations and families. Jayapal, Gov. Bob Ferguson and Sen. Patty Murray have called the measure “invasive.”1
OPB reports that the week before its Oct. 21 story, a group of Camas high school girls “chose not to participate in a cross-country race to protest the inclusion of a transgender teammate.”2 Leaving it to the schools and associations gives those girls no rule to stand on.
Candidates point families to other decision-makers
Phil Weiser, Colorado’s Democratic nominee for governor, told The Denver Gazette’s editorial board he will be a no on both Propositions 134 and 135: “And so I’m going to be no on both.” Proposition 134 covers sports by biological sex, and Proposition 135 covers surgery for minors. Asked whether a teenager should be able to have the surgery, Weiser answered: “These are decisions that doctors can make with parents, and they are extremely unlikely to be made.”3 The doctor comes first, and the parent comes along. On sports, MS NOW reports, he believes athletic associations should determine fairness1.
In Arizona, a ballot measure could require schools and athletic associations to bar trans people from sports teams and locker rooms. Democratic House candidate JoAnna Mendoza said parents, coaches and sports associations should decide eligibility in kids’ sports. MS NOW reports that Democrats Jessica Killin, Manny Rutinel and Eileen Laubacher, in Colorado House races, have not taken public positions on the measures there, and Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs has not either1. Silence leaves the decision with someone else, and parents are not on that list.
The form dispute does not settle the rules
The strongest objection to Washington’s Initiative 638 deserves a direct answer. OPB reports that the initiative would require every student who wants to play on a girls’ sports team to provide a signed form from their healthcare provider verifying their sex assigned at birth. Dr. José Flores-Rodarte, a family physician, calls the requirement extremely invasive and unnecessary. OPB reports the measure’s language limits verification to the following: the student’s reproductive anatomy, genetic makeup, or normal endogenously produced testosterone levels2. Hallie Herzberg of Let’s Go Washington, the PAC behind the measure, told MS NOW that some supporters are asking: “We’ve got people that are with us and are saying, ‘Are we sure that we want genital exams?’”1
That is a debate about how a form should be drafted, and it belongs in the open. It does not decide whether boys should compete in girls’ sports, and Gluesenkamp Perez has already said they should not. OPB reports the measure would prohibit students it defines as biologically male from competing in certain school athletic activities intended for female students only2. A drafting problem is a reason to write the form carefully, not a reason to leave girls with no standard.
Voters can decide what parents’ rights mean
On Nov. 3, voters decide the ballot measures’ fate.
The American Principles Project’s 2024 report cites a November 2024 Napolitan News/RMG poll: 75% said biological males should not compete in women’s sports. Thirteen percent said yes; 11% were unsure. The same report says 72% backed making it illegal to give minors puberty blockers, drugs or surgery to transition. Eighteen percent opposed the measure; 10% were unsure4.
A candidate who borrows that phrase and then names an athletic association, a school or a clinic as the decider has not kept it. Ask every Democrat on your ballot one question: does the parent decide, or does the association or the clinic? Then vote on the answer.
Sources
FAMILY BRIEF The news and network for the American family.
