[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6623034,"mediaKeyId","2777478-5168a28cfccb43f2c31d34412ab076ba","parentId",2777478,"title","Senate bill banning state funding for gender‑affirming care for some patients passes committee after tie vote","audioSeconds",3028,"startMs",3398000,"endMs",6426000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2777478-5168a28cfccb43f2c31d34412ab076ba&start=3398&end=6426","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2777478-5168a28cfccb43f2c31d34412ab076ba/thumbnail_3398000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6623034/Georgia/Senate-bill-banning-state-funding-for-genderaffirming-care-for-some-patients-passes-committee-after-tie-vote","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6623034-92bb78ccc6440896445243229d949b6d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771101145&Signature=U2QuJEkKt4F28iDt59W205ZwDwoOqDjKiqwYRYq5~mzf2v5yC23D1JxQ3Zh5hQQA3mLIDPAveZljLHO8Z6yvuzOOJHd5may9u75n1Ute7yao0ccLOGa~6wIp2ANRAjero9VXJdfOQ91h9GZMkWUVBdtYXNxQiUKuryMvtQlqP93FcHkHvgMjaX41s0MmkqbxhpKxZfpDz5IAMfmJcfByL-NNUsmE-RfQ03DKtIX7BFCd-3CO-bVPraexuy6DgbMOMPLeGLC3x7o7u5-TV4KaGhZgF9TmVomGJV~l7q5-zNUX0Sfg16MytF1vW3XD7cEzuYnTyRMkyZh~2odFII59qQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","State of Georgia ","date","2025-03-26T16:11:57.31Z","article","Senate Bill 39, which would prevent state taxpayer funds from paying for gender‑affirming surgeries and hormone treatment when that care differs from the patient’s sex assigned at birth, passed the Appropriations Committee after a tie vote broken by the chair.

Senator Burt Tillery, presenting the bill, told the committee the measure would limit State Health Benefit Plan coverage for gender‑affirming care. \"What it states is that the Georgia taxpayer funds will not be used for transgender surgeries and care,\" Tillery said, and described an amendment that reorganizes and narrows parts of the bill.

Committee members asked detailed medical and legal questions. Representative Jennifer Clark and others pressed the sponsor on definitions in the bill and on why the draft specifically referenced partial androgen insensitivity syndrome (PAIS) rather than the broader category of androgen-insensitivity conditions; Clark said many people do not learn of such conditions until later in life and asked how the bill would affect their access to care. The sponsor replied that the bill aims to allow medical care for congenital conditions when treatment aligns with sex assigned at birth but to bar state payment for care intended to change sex characteristics from that assignment.

Several legislators objected to the policy on medical and constitutional grounds. Representative Angela Davis said she opposed the bill because it \"seeks to dehumanize transgender people and restrict the rights of adult and pediatric trans transgender patients to fully assess the medical care that they need.\" Representative Jones noted the State Health Benefit Plan covers more than \"half a million state employees, teachers, retirees, and their dependents,\" and framed the vote as a choice about how state health dollars are used.

Public witnesses testified on both sides during a lengthy public-comment period. Legal counsel Amanda K. Seals, who represented plaintiffs in a settlement identified in the hearing (Rich v. Georgia), warned the committee the bill would impair contractual obligations and likely prompt litigation; she said the state had paid about $4.1 million in settlements related to similar exclusions. Local physicians and medical groups, including Dr. Jason Snyder and multiple medical-professional organizations referenced by witnesses, offered clinical evidence that gender‑affirming care improves mental‑health outcomes for some patients. Advocacy organizations including Georgia Equality and the Human Rights Campaign urged the committee to oppose the bill, citing legal risk, cost of litigation and harms to patient access.

Supporters, including Mac Parnell of the Georgia Fagan Freedom Coalition, argued the measure restores prior coverage norms and limits state spending on care they said should not be covered by the State Health Benefit Plan.

After public testimony the committee took a voice/hand vote. A tie was recorded — eight in favor and eight opposed — and the committee chair voted to break the tie, producing a final committee outcome in favor of advancing SB 39. The transcript shows the chair casting the deciding vote; detailed roll-call names and an individual roll-call tally were not recorded in the transcript.

The bill, as presented in committee, would: (1) prohibit state funds from being expended for gender‑affirming care as defined in the text (the bill lists hormone therapy and surgical procedures among covered categories), (2) permit some treatment for congenital conditions described in the draft, and (3) restrict coverage under the State Health Benefit Plan for procedures or treatments that differ from the patient’s sex assigned at birth. The committee record includes multiple legal and constitutional arguments noting prior court rulings (including Bostock v. Clayton County and federal litigation involving state exclusion clauses) and a recorded settlement amount related to prior litigation.

Committee members and witnesses repeatedly noted that the bill does not criminalize care but would limit state payment; opponents argued limits on payment would in practice restrict access for people who rely on employer-sponsored coverage.

The committee advanced the bill; subsequent steps in the legislative process and possible litigation were identified by several witnesses and lawmakers as likely next developments.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Health 03.26.25","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Bill 39, which would bar the State Health Benefit Plan from paying for gender‑affirming care that differs from a patient’s sex assigned at birth, passed the Appropriations Committee after an 8–8 tie that the chair broke in favor of the bill.","taxTitle","Appropriations, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative, Georgia","taxId",16937,"location","Georgia","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6623039,"House resolution seeks study of noncompete clauses in health care to assess workforce impacts",579,2764000,3343000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2777478-5168a28cfccb43f2c31d34412ab076ba&start=2764&end=3343","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2777478-5168a28cfccb43f2c31d34412ab076ba/thumbnail_2764000.jpg","/articles/6623039/Georgia/House-resolution-seeks-study-of-noncompete-clauses-in-health-care-to-assess-workforce-impacts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6623039-8528916256b66afe1e1f2327e5b4269d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771101146&Signature=jtxW7IP1lIcvOZBLAIJvoWD0zIUtjV-mJjSgpArvGimHUZeuj9qPuQIpsExEFp9ElloJbbez1LaYG~k-z16BaHPm~jQWW0XKf3bEAzep01Obuvvcrc5bmxNxJ4fdNMih-0b2~A~Z5GosJnOXldV8I3iGLktFZ0tA28kdqCfo3MenlsQvPzaZ53TlX-u~Gf9uLdn0HTWmdIQkqQUPXN1esa7AkVd8CJVZ-aFSWlQjVml0QclNj1fcTm4T1-g3txXukdlob4T8saG2mrB~Y93MGLgluhYxzNmWgezcoMm649Yycs3jlRjUNKKrkBg9HkqyicXAA3tc5j7u9HhzdwNTrQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Resolution 592, sponsored by Representative Mark Newton, would create a study committee to review the use of noncompete agreements in health care and recommend policy options to balance workforce recruitment and patient continuity.

Newton described circumstances in emergency medicine when contractual changes required staff to move, sometimes long distances, and said the committee would study exemptions, lengths and geographic limits of noncompete clauses. “What is the right amount of a noncompete that can recognize the risk and the expense that a health care system or practice might take to attract somebody in?” Newton asked, noting states that have taken varied approaches.

Members asked the sponsor to consider effects on independent physicians, residents and fellows; Representative Royce Silcox urged including resident and fellowship contracts. Representative Scofield asked how noncompetes would affect independent doctors; Newton said independent practitioners typically are unrestricted but younger doctors often join health systems and can be subject to agreements that limit future practice locations. Committee members suggested focusing on primary care and mental-health specialties in light of continuity concerns.

The committee voted unanimously to advance LC 3398 17 (House Resolution 592). Representatives present framed the resolution as a fact-finding step to examine alternatives adopted in other states and to identify provisions that would protect patient access while allowing legitimate recruitment investments. The resolution does not itself change statutory law or immediately alter contracts.

Newton said the goal is to learn whether Georgia should limit noncompetes broadly or create targeted exemptions (for example for primary care or behavioral health) and to assess geographic and time limits that would balance recruitment costs and patient continuity.

The committee recorded the final action as unanimous approval in committee; the transcript did not include a roll-call tally by name.","House Resolution 592 would establish a study committee to examine noncompete agreements in hospitals and medical practices and how they affect access to care and workforce stability; the committee advanced unanimously.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6623043,"House resolution would create 12-member study on addiction and recovery",1150,1597000,2747000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2777478-5168a28cfccb43f2c31d34412ab076ba&start=1597&end=2747","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2777478-5168a28cfccb43f2c31d34412ab076ba/thumbnail_1597000.jpg","/articles/6623043/Georgia/House-resolution-would-create-12-member-study-on-addiction-and-recovery","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6623043-c1b0cfbeaf25cc583f6fa4e0ba62ae8a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771101146&Signature=g4QD-dzZEmpLR1bfKzM8a9f-c~-TaHxiHeNdXx0L8cswjjjTujABVy1lOhh9gH~6TzC90b-F1qKWrXVH21fRMeKRDNYjxSEcyQLa6s7QI~XZHS2TE7BMN1FnxpfNV9FMbsEQu8AxoN0q-eqVW58VObxQt~9AvI9HnPPyYJGPNwEqVpXxBL4zg2pMWH1u3Gz7vEsCTWBfn6jLa8KZwBR44GxGb83yHYUxf9DNj7EBPJRZKq7N3xLNmSR-yZkvkFLAxhwA~zY5~1MWIMzGk6F8RLNdoOKl2DbibFbukDAcqnve5iATKkySp3~JEUot5znKsQYLZZQrf5x50SD1cbZjAg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Resolution 512, carrying language to form a legislative study committee on addiction and recovery, was advanced unanimously by the Appropriations Committee after two committee amendments Wednesday.

The measure’s sponsor, Representative Karen Hagan, told the committee that the study would examine “where we currently stand on various addiction issues” and include recovery-focused recommendations. “We want to look at not just substance abuse, but all forms of addiction,” Hagan said, adding the committee would report back by Dec. 1 and initially be authorized to meet five days unless given additional time.

Committee members asked for and won changes before the final vote. Representative Jennifer Clark successfully moved an amendment to add a certified peer specialist as one of the civilian appointees; Clark said she wanted the committee to include “those with dual diagnoses” and to ensure the peer specialist need not be limited to recovery-organization staff. Representative Matthew Jones moved a separate amendment to add the phrase “and dual diagnosis” after references to treatment of addiction; that amendment was also adopted. Jeffrey Love, speaking for the Georgia Council for Recovery and allied groups, said the civilian appointee the resolution contemplates should be a “peer certified specialist” and called for a holistic approach.

As amended, the resolution would create a 13-member panel: 8 legislators and 5 nonlegislative members, with one civilian slot specified as a certified peer specialist. The resolution directs the panel to examine current services and gaps and to report recommendations to the House by Dec. 1 of the year the committee meets.

The committee recorded the final action as a unanimous passage. No formal vote tally with individual member names was recorded in the transcript.

The resolution does not appropriate funding itself; it establishes a study and reporting requirement. Committee members repeatedly framed the measure as intended to identify policy and program gaps before drafting funding or statutory changes.

Representative Hagan said the goal was to identify both current shortfalls and opportunities to support Georgians in recovery. The committee agreed to forward the amended resolution for further consideration.

The committee’s discussion included several requests for scope: members asked that the study include peer specialists, consider mental-health comorbidity (dual diagnosis) and examine non-substance addictions such as gambling and technology use.","The Appropriations Committee advanced House Resolution 512 to create a legislative study committee to examine addiction, recovery and related services; committee members approved two amendments to add a certified peer specialist and to explicitly include dual-diagnosis treatment.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate bill banning state funding for gender‑affirming care for some patients passes committee after tie vote

House resolution seeks study of noncompete clauses in health care to assess workforce impacts

House resolution would create 12-member study on addiction and recovery